PLANS to turn a number of agricultural buildings at Woolmer Farm. in Bramshott, into a business park have attracted strong objections from the parish council and directors of the Ludshott Manor Management Company.

Woolmer Farm owners Mr and Mrs Mellstrom have submitted a retrospective application for the site, which is located between Ludshott Manor and a housing development, and which is already providing business premises for a Porsche garage, Liphook Tree Surgeons and Greystokes Chimneys.

Access to the 1.168 hectares site is from Tunbridge Lane, one of the village’s sunken lanes, and along a farm track, since Woolmer Lane is privately owned Ludshott Manor residents.

Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council raised a number of concerns and has objected to the application for the following reasons:

Firstly. the proposal would lead to over-intensification of use in a rural area, detrimental to the tranquil character and to the amenities of nearby residents and also to users and inhabitants of nearby Ludshott Common.

Secondly, the applicant has no control or jurisdiction over vehicles once they leave the site.

A large proportion of traffic generated on the site would still travel through historic sunken lanes – either through Tunbridge Lane or Church Lane, Rectory Lane and Woolmer Lane as a result of either the need to access the junction with the A3 off Church Road, or because sat navs direct traffic along the lanes.

While the applicant proposes locking the gate from Woolmer Lane which accesses the site, there is no means of enforcing or monitoring it.

Thirdly, part of the existing unauthorised development is generating unacceptable levels of noise which has been having a detrimental effect on the amenity of residents.

It also occurs outside of normal working hours and during weekends, it was claimed.

Changing the use from agricultural to industrial would increase noise, light and air pollution to levels which would be unacceptable to residents in close proximity to the development and detrimental to the tranquil character of the area councillors claimed.

Fourthly, changing the permssion to industrial use was likely to increase the volume of HGVs and large vehicles along the narrow lanes with extremely limited passing places.

Where passing has been attempted it has led to damage to the structure of the old roads. The majority leading into Bramshott are signed as being unsuitable for HGVs and there are three narrow and weak bridges crossing the River Wey (within the conservation area) with weight restrictions.

The bridges would likely to be used by traffic entering and leaving the proposed development.

The council is also concerned the increase in vehicle movements will increase danger and impact on the safety and convenience of all users, particularly pedestrians, cyclists and horse-riders along narrow lanes.

Finally, with limited off-road parking there is increased residential parking in Tunbridge Lane, considerably restricting safe traffic movement.

There have already been a number of incidents where HGVs have been unable to pass or turn along the lanes.

Previous plans, which were submitted in 2009 attracted considerable opposition as well as 120 comments by the local community.

They were rejected by East Hampshire District Council, which will be making a decision on this retrospective application in the next few months.