Churchill Retirement Living given go-ahead for 31 flats on site of old Lymington police station on Southampton Road

A CONTROVERSIAL plan to build retirement flats on the site of Lymington’s old police station has been given the go-ahead.

But it was a decision – made this morning (Wednesday) by New Forest District Council’s planning committee – which several district councillors said they were being forced to support due to NFDC’s planning policies being “not fit for purpose”.

The long-running planning saga, which centred around Churchill Retirement Living’s proposal for 32 apartments on Southampton Road, was finally concluded with the committee’s 9-3 vote to approve planning permission.

It came after warnings from NFDC’s legal advisor Nigel Hewitson that, if refused, the authority would risk receiving no payment towards offsite affordable housing rather than the £300,000 agreed.

As reported in the A&T, campaigners strongly opposed Churchill Retirement Living’s proposal which had been submitted three times in two years.

However, although an appeal against NFDC’s rejection of the first application was dismissed, the planning authority’s claims that it would add too many homes for older people and hike pressure on local services were not upheld

Instead, the government inspector gave nitrate pollution concerns as the sole reason for upholding the refusal.

Two further applications – the first withdrawn by Churchill weeks later – were for the same development but with mitigations in place.

These involve buying up agricultural land on the Isle of Wight – a planning practice branded “a national scandal” by Lymington Society chair Don Mackenzie.

The amount of retirement accommodation already in Lymington and a lack of affordable housing for younger people were the main points of contention for residents, as well as a reduction in amount of affordable housing contribution that would be paid – down from £759,000 to £300,000.

During the debate, several district councillors said they were being forced to support an overwhelmingly unpopular application.

Cllr Malcolm Wade claimed NFDC’s planning policies were “not fit for purpose” declaring: “We are faced with a situation we should not be faced with. This authority will have to support this scheme or lose at appeal.”

He continued: “It is the wrong decision because it is unpopular locally, and it is totally against what we should be doing, which is building property for young people.”

Cllr David Hawkins said he was “very disappointed” by the debate and a direction from the planning chair Cllr Christine Ward not to discuss certain elements of the plan.

“This is getting hold of democracy and tearing it up and throwing it away,” he declared. “We are here to represent the people of the New Forest, and we are not doing a very good job.”

Opposing the application, Lymington mayor Cllr Jack Davis said the people of Lymington and Pennington were “firmly against the scheme”, and questioned how the contribution towards affordable housing could be reduced to £300,000.

Urging NFDC to accept no less that £390,000 towards affordable housing Cllr Davis said: “I worry about the precedent it sets not just for Lymington and Pennington but for other towns and villages in the New Forest when a developer can dictate to a council how much they will provide.”

However, NFDC legal advisor Mr Hewitson said the authority should accept Churchill’s £300,000 offer towards affordable housing, as many thousands could be spent arguing the point at a planning inquiry.

Planning permission was granted by nine votes to three.

Branding the decision a disgrace, Cllr Jack Davis said: ”We fought until the end, but the people of Lymington and Pennington have been let down by the district council’s weak planning policy and top-down government planning policy which favours developers.

“For a developer to be able to dictate the money they provide for affordable housing and the council to meekly accept it despite the council consultants justifying a higher figure is a policy failure. The council needs a stronger planning policy to stop this happening again and again.”

Lymington Society chair Don Mackenzie said the group was “extremely disappointed” by the decision to allow more retirement flats when so many were unsold in the town.

Calling for NFDC to “urgently” update its local plan so affordable housing was prioritised, Dr Mackenzie said: “It is a scandal that a local plan policy that imposes a notional requirement for 50% of affordable units on such developments, can be overturned by the use of so-called “viability calculations” that allow landowners and developers to make significant profits but leave councils powerless to enforce their affordable quotas.

“The society is now calling for the NFDC to urgently review their planning policies and the Local Plan to try and ensure that fewer retirement developments are built and that more desperately needed affordable homes are built.”

Welcoming the decision, a Churchill spokesperson claimed the development would support local jobs, boost the high street, and free up housing for young families by enabling older people to downsize.

The spokesperson continued: “This is a brownfield site close to the town centre that will provide attractive housing for older people in an area that has one of the highest numbers of over-65s anywhere in the country.

“That it is has taken this long, and this much expense, to get approval for this is a damning indictment of the planning system and, frankly, a failure on the part of some councillors to look after the interests of older people in Lymington.”

He added: “Councillors have only themselves to blame for the reduced affordable housing contribution, which is mainly due to rising inflation and financing costs over the last 12-18 months.

“If our plans had been approved at the first time of asking this contribution would have been significantly higher.”