Housing given the go-ahead for woodland 'gem' in Hythe

HOTLY contested plans for housing on a semi-wooded plot of land have been given the go-ahead despite the site being described as a “gem” that needed protection.

The application by The Turnbull Group for four detached chalet bungalows on land off Mountfield in Hythe went before the latest New Forest District Council planning committee, and despite being contrary to policy was recommended for permission by officers.

A proposal for 11 homes on the site was rejected at appeal in 2014 on the grounds they would harm the character of the area and impact protected species.

Residents near the site attended the committee meeting to speak out against these fresh plans, telling councillors grounds for refusal still stood.

John Turner said: “It is regrettable that this is the last vestige of the old Hythe and Dibden; it is part of a strategic gap between the top of Mountfield and Noadswood School.

“It is deemed an amenity area, people keep their horses there, and this is further urban creep which will absorb over a number of years.”

Another resident neighbouring the plot, Tim Giles, told members: “This was previously rejected because the benefit of additional housing did not outweigh the adverse effects – these new proposals are for less housing, so as far as I can see this changes nothing and should still be rejected.

“This is a countryside location that is not allocated for housing, and it is highly likely there will be a pressure to fell more trees in the future if this goes ahead. With concerns over health and safety because of proximity to housing, this will be irresistible.”

He added: “The ecology survey fails to recognise a number of important species – the area is used by breeding tawny owls; I’ve witnessed the young learning to fly.”

Councillors also raised their own concerns about the application, describing the site as an important buffer to the countryside.

Cllr Allan Glass said: “I’m not aware of anyone who is in favour of these plans. This is an incredibly quiet area which has the character of countryside; it’s completely black at night with lots of badgers, owls and other nocturnal wildlife.

“For years it has been protected by the parish council as a buffer to the countryside.”

Cllr David Harrison said while this was a much better scheme, the area should not be built on at all.

“If it were built I’d love to live there,” he said. “But it should be left – it’s a real gem of biodiversity with all sorts of wildlife that benefits from the fact there is no housing.

“I feel strongly that, as a councillor, I want to keep the best elements of the Forest.

“This is a nicely designed scheme but I would like the applicants to design a scheme of this quality in an area that is far less sensitive, that will not involve chopping down trees and displacing tawny owls.”

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, James Caldwell argued the application was designed to respect the area and neighbouring properties.

“These units will take a low key and low density, traditional form,” he said. “We have taken an eco-sensitive approach and created dark bat corridors.”

He also pointed out the fact that the inspector ruling on the 2014 appeal had stated he did not take issue with the principle of residential development on the site. “These homes will make an important contribution to the council’s housing supply and overcome all previous concerns,” Mr Caldwell concluded.

A report presented to the committee by officers noted the proposal had been revised to ensure development would only take place in the least sensitive areas.

“The dense woodland to the west has been omitted from the site,” it said. “With the significant reduction in built form, the proposal has less of an impact on the ecology of the area.”

The report also indicated the plans would provide informal public open space, a children’s play area and a wild meadow.

In conclusion, it stated: “Since the previous refusal, much work has been done in order to address the overall impact of the proposal on the character of the area and the protected trees [of which six will be removed].

“This relatively modest scheme would allow the important landscape character of the site to be maintained for the future.”

Cllr Maureen Holding said while her instinct was to refuse the plan, she feared a worse application would come before them if this were thrown out, and urged a more even-handed approach.

“I look at the trouble that has been gone to with this application,” she said. “This is sympathetic, and it does have some form of public open space.

“Looking at it from a practical sense, we could have something much worse come along later down the line.”

Members voted 10 to seven in favour of the plans. Because they are a departure from planning policy, there is a small chance they could be called in by the government for a final decision, but the meeting heard this happened “once in a blue moon”.