CONTROVERSIAL plans to replace a former Hampshire police station with 32 retirement flats have been thrown out.

District councillors have gone against the advice of planning officers and rejected an application to redevelop the redundant Hampshire Constabulary site in Southampton Road, Lymington.

Several speakers said Lymington already had a massive number of retirement flats - many of which remained unsold - and needed affordable homes for young people.

Cllr Malcolm Wade said: "We can't turn the New Forest into a giant care home."

Other members criticised the design of the proposed development. They included Cllr Maureen Holding, a former chairman of the council, who said: "This has gone from being a police station to looking like a prison."

The application sparked almost 80 letters of objection and a protest petition signed by more than 1,400 people.

It was debated by the authority in October but was deferred pending talks between council officers and the applicant, Churchill Retirement Living.

Churchill agreed to pay £970,000 towards the cost of providing social housing in the district and councillors were recommended to approve the scheme at yesterday's meeting of the planning committee.

But the proposal came under fire from objectors addressing the committee.

Don Mackenzie, representing the Lymington Society, described the proposed development as a "monolithic block". He added that 12 parking spaces for 32 flats was "simply laughable".

Andy Ash-Vie, representing Lymington and Pennington Town Council, added: "It's ugly, overbearing and out of character."

Cllr Ash-Vie claimed the district council would "debase local democracy" if it approved the application, adding: "Please, I beg you, no more retirement homes."

Stuart Goodwill, representing Churchill, said the scheme would free up larger, under-occupied homes, which in turn would release smaller properties as people moved up the property ladder. He added that the pandemic had "artificially constrained" sales of retirement properties.

But Lymington councillor Anne Corbridge said the scheme should be rejected and saw her proposal approved by an overwhelming majority.

Describing the flats as unnecessary Cllr Corbridge said: "We have a massive over-supply of this sort of accommodation. We need affordable homes."

However, Churchill has repeatedly defended the scheme and could decide to lodge an appeal against the council's decision.

Speaking earlier this year Gary Day, the company's land, design & planning director, said: “The number of Lymington residents aged 75 and over is projected to increase by 65% by 2030.

“Lymington and the local area already has the fourth highest percentage of over-65s in the country.

“We need to do much more to meet the future needs of our older generation and recognise the many benefits of retirement housing, rather than adopting a negative and frankly ageist attitude towards new development of this kind.”

But critics of the proposal left the meeting delighted at the council's decision.

Dr Mackenzie said: “The refusal of this highly-contentious application, despite strong support for the scheme from council officers, is a final recognition by councillors that the Local Plan, which has driven recent decisions in favour of retirement schemes, is totally unsuited to the needs of the area and needs a complete rethink.

"The responsibility of the council is to provide a mix of housing suitable for all groups in the district.

"With the critical shortage of affordable homes in the district the council needs to put in real effort and resources to take on developers at appeal and make the case that 'enough is enough' and that more affordable homes must be the priority from now on."