Agenda and minutes

Regulatory Board
Wednesday, 2nd December, 2020 6.00 pm

Venue: Virtual

Contact: Lisa Young  Email: lisa.young@gosport.gov.uk

Link: Click here to access live meeting

Items
No. Item

24.

Apologies for non-attendance

Minutes:

Apologies for non attendance were received from Councillors Bateman and Farr.

25.

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

Councillor Hammond declared a personal interest in the grey sheets, item 1 Stoke Lake.

 

26.

Minutes of the meeting held on 14 October 2020. pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 14th October 2020 be signed as a true and correct record.

27.

Deputations - Standing Order 3.4

(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 30 November 2020.  The total time for deputations in favour and against a proposal shall not exceed 10 minutes).

 

Minutes:

Deputations were received on the grey pages

·        Item 1 – Stoke Lake

·        Item 4  - 81-82 Marine Parade East

·        Item 6  - Brockhurst Gate

·        Item 7 – 27 Dorrien Way

28.

Public Questions - Standing Order 3.5

(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, 30 November 2020).

 

Minutes:

There were none.

29.

Licensing Policy pdf icon PDF 65 KB

Report to Follow

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report to of the Head of Environmental Health detailing the results of the public consultation on the Licensing Policy.

 

The Board was advised that a late consultation response had been received from Public Health and that there was an update based on the response received.

 

The Board was advised that the publication date of the policy was March 2021.

 

It was noted that census figures were most recent, but 10 years old. 

 

Members considered the suggestions of the Head of Environmental Health, it was recommended that section 1 of the policy not be amended, nor section 2 on the profile of the Borough as compliance in the Borough was good.

 

It was felt that the proposal at section 3.1and 3.2  could be amended to include the graphs provided which were alcohol based admissions to hospital and the number of licensed premises per square metre in comparison with the national average.

 

It was felt slightly unfair that Gosport such a dense area with 191 premises, it was difficult to compare to areas such as the New Forest, as a National Park with much greater area. It was seen unfair that Gosport be seen as over populated with premises, as it was so dense.

 

It was suggested therefore that the graph detailing the data in comparison to neighbouring districts be removed.

 

In answer to a Member’s question the Board was advised that  the data provided was that of Public Health so it could not be advised as to why there was no data for Basingstoke and Deane or Winchester.

 

In answer to a subsequent question, the Board was advised that the wards missing were part of Hampshire’s consultation response, any omission would be their error.

 

It was requested that a statement highlighting the danger of alcohol dependency and the Public Health response was acknowledged. It was recognised that this was the overall objective of the policy.

 

It was confirmed that the proposed change was to address typographic details and to include graph 3.1.

 

It was reiterated that the small area and peninsular location made it incomparable to other districts.

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Licensing Policy be recommended to Full Council, subject to the amendments identified. 

30.

Fareham Local Plan 2037: Publication Plan (Regulation 19) pdf icon PDF 1 MB

To consider and approve a response to the Fareham Local Plan 2037: Publication Plan (Regulation 19) (FLP2037) consultation which has been produced by Fareham Borough Council (FBC).

 

Minutes:

 

Members thanked the officers for an excellent report, and also acknowledged that the previously identified HA2 allocation and  the strategic growth areas were no longer included in the latest Local Plan and that the entire area between Stubbington and Gosport was identified as a strategic gap.

 

It was confirmed that Fareham Borough Council were going to be using the housing figures derived from the latest consultation version of the Government’s standard method (2020) which uses the latest population projections, rather than the current official standard method which uses the 2014 derived projections. This approach would reduce their housing requirement and potentially reduce the threat to the strategic gap.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That this Council makes the following representations (as expanded upon within sections 3-7 of this Report)  to Fareham Borough Council (FBC):

 

·        That this Council supports the extent of the Strategic Gap as shown on the latest Policies Map  which now includes the land east of Newgate Lane East;

·        That this Council supports that the land east of Newgate Lane East (formerly known as HA2) is no longer identified as a housing allocation in the FLP2037;

·        That this Council supports that the FLP2037 does not include the formerly identified Strategic Growth Area in the Fareham, Gosport, Lee-on-the-Solent and Stubbington Strategic Gap;

·        That this Council whilst supporting the overall intention of Policy DS1: Development in the Countryside it considers that amendments are required for reasons set out in the Report (paragraphs 3.9-3.27).

·        That this Council objects to the detailed wording  of the following policies  or parts of policies as detailed in paragraphs 3.9-3.27  of this report:

-        Policy HP4

-        Policy HP6

·        That this Council supports the employment allocations at Daedalus (Policies E1, E2 and E3).

·        That this Council supports the following policies:

-        Policy E5 which protects employment sites including a number on the Gosport Peninsula;

-        Policy E6 on boatyards which aims to protect important marine sites for employment purposes; and

-        Policy E7 which aims to safeguard the Solent Airport at Daedalus

-        Policy TIN2 which aims to ensure development does not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety and the residual cumulative impact on the road network is not severe

-        Policy TIN3 which safeguards land to support the delivery of the South East Hampshire Rapid Transit scheme

That Policy NE9 includes specific reference to the potential for green infrastructure improvements in the Fareham, Gosport, Lee-on-the-Solent and Stubbington Strategic Gap

31.

Report of the Development Manager pdf icon PDF 552 KB

Schedule of planning applications with recommendations.

(grey sheets pages 1-73/1)

 

Minutes:

 

 

20/00298/FULL - FLOOD AND COASTAL EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT SCHEME COMPRISING:  ERECTION OF NEW SETBACK FLOOD WALL, L-SHAPED FLOOD WALL ON TOP OF THE EXISTING MASONRY WALL,  MAINTENANCE REPAIRS TO THE EXISTING WALL AND EXISTING FORESHORE ACCESS,  INSTALLATION OF AN OPEN/CLOSE FLOODGATE ACROSS LITTLE ANGLESEY ROAD,  FELLING OF 2NO. TPO TREES, ASSOCIATED SOFT/HARD LANDSCAPING AND SALTMARSH HABITAT CREATION (ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENT) IN STOKE LAKE, AND, ERECTION OF TEMPORARY STORAGE COMPOUND IN PEBBLE BEACH CAR PARK (Conservation Areas) (description amended 27.10.2020)

Footpath Between Little Anglesey Road And Clayhall Road And Compound At Pebble Beach Car Park  Gosport  Hampshire  PO12 2JA   

 

Consideration was given to a report of the Development Manager requesting that consideration be given to application 20/00298/FULL.

 

The Borough Solicitor read out a deputation from Mr Theodosiou as follows.

 

I am writing in connection with the above application. It is my view that this application should not be approved by the Regulatory Board. I make this statement for the following reasons.

 

  1. A number of recommendations given to the Board in support of the approval in the planning brief are untrue. An example a statement on page 13 …. ‘existing weir structure would need to be demolished’ (this, in the event of a new flood scheme at Jackie Spencer Bridge) is not the case. Another statement that the listed buildings at 1-6 Little Anglesey Road would not be affected by a rise of tide estimated to increase by 0.5 metre and possibly 1 metre is again simply untrue. The Members of the Board are being deliberately misled.
  2. The proposal recommended for approval acknowledges that properties 1-6 Little Anglesey Road will be subject to additional flooding as a result of the new flood wall. Additionally some 10 properties in Clayhall Road will be subject to flooding of .5 metre (page 17, clause 31) in the future. Whilst it is accepted that a flood wall may give protection to properties in Alverstoke Village i.e. to the west of the flood wall, properties to the east of the wall will suffer from more flooding as a direct results of works carried out by GBC. This in itself creates a liability for GBC not only now, but for all time in the future. The creation of such a liability should not even be considered, let alone approved by the Regulatory Board.
  3. The proposal of such a scheme as this, which necessarily will cause future flooding and thus damage to be caused by GBC to properties of the Borough, is not within GBC’s remit to approve. It is an item that is ‘ultra vires’. Thus in layman’s terms GBC does not have the authority to approve such as scheme as this which causes actual damage
  4. Flood damage will be caused to six properties in Little Anglesey Road and possibly 10 more in Clayhall Road. Salt water flood damage to foundations and repairs such as underpinning could cost upwards of £500,000 per property, thus perhaps £8,000,000 in total. The Board Members should be aware of the right of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

32.

Any Other Items