Return of ‘Grand Designs’ home site plan in Gosport sparks anger

Thieves smash into vehicles parked at leisure centres

0
Have your say

RESIDENTS are furious that a developer has put in a fresh application on a controversial site that has already seen plans turned down twice by planners.

Alan Dawes tried to turn one building on the former cordite magazine in Britannia Way, Gosport, into a modern, Grand Designs-style home.

This plan did not found favour, and he has now submitted an application to Gosport Borough Council to turn the second building on the site, off Britannia Way, into a three-bedroom home.

The plan is for the smaller of the two buildings after the council refused two applications for the first building.

Resident John Hudson said people were angry about the new application.

‘Neighbours and I are incensed he has made this application,’ he said.

‘In the Management Plan for the area, which he agreed to continue when his company bought the site, this building was to be left for the benefit of the badgers in the sett which is to the immediate south. Once again he is wasting a lot of council time and taxpayers’ money.’

In the application, Mr Dawes said there were only two options for the site.

They were to leave the munitions stores alone to decay or give the buildings a good use and have someone maintain the site.

The report said: ‘To ask an individual or organisation to maintain a building that has no good use would be difficult to do or enforce, as this will only require funds beyond the foreseeable future.

‘Give the building a good use, a benefit to the individual or organisation, then finance can be justified for the continued maintenance and care of the building.’

But members of the public have submitted letters of objection for the application.

One resident, from St Thomas’s Road, in Hardway, said: ‘Surely if these plans got turned down once, twice or more, surely that should be it? Or will it be a case of try enough times and he will get what he wants and to hell with what local people want?’

Another person added: ‘This proposal has unacceptable environmental and amenity implications.’