AN application for a two-storey family house on land behind a cottage on Midhurst Road has been refused by East Hampshire District Council.

The cottage owners – Sydney and Valerie Lague – have been plagued by floods for many years.

In July 2007, the ground floor of their house was under water and the family had to move out for six months to get it dried out and re-plastered.

Part of the land behind the cottage was purchased by the applicant – Liphook resident Mr John Grove – from Mr and Mrs Lague to construct a self-built detached house, including a shared shingle drive further along Midhurst Road, with space for four cars and room to manoeuvre.

Mr and Mrs Lague have to park by the side of their cottage and back out into a busy road on a dangerous bend at present. They were hoping to get the benefit of a drive improvement, which would also have prevented their property from being flooded.

Included in the application were plans to deal with the recurring flood issues, by installing soak aways, water butts and shingles.

The new house was to be built on land behind the cottage after the demolition of a garage and an existing shed.

Attending Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council’s planning meeting, Mr Lague said: “We have lived in the cottage for 40 years and have been flooded six times including twice this July.

“The house has been re-plastered three times and we have sandbags stacked around it. We have now built a wall by the entrance, the front door is blocked off and this proposal would have helped and made us feel much safer, especially with the new access.

“The water comes down the Midhurst Road like a river and ends up outside our cottage – as well as the one next door.

“The water then floods the drive and the garden. The new access would have restricted where the water would go, with a shingle drive, soak aways and water butts helping to prevent flooding.

“Flooding has been going on for the last 20 years and it has got worse.

“Our single driveway from the road gets flooded regularly – pushing the water further up towards the entrance to the house.”

EHDC planners felt the proposed development comprised an unacceptable form of infill development, which would be detrimental to the special character of the H9 area (next to the Berg Estate) and the design of the new dwelling would “constitute a visually discordant feature within the street scene, due to its height and scale”.

They also questioned if all cars could be parked and manoeuvred on the site as well as the provision of the proposed new entry and exit into the Midhurst Road.

Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council had no objections to the application, provided it did not set a precedent, and pointed out that it would lead to considerable improvements to both drainage problems and highway safety for the existing dwellings on this stretch of the Midhurst Road.

Mr and Mrs Lague currently have permission to extend the property – however, the new rejected application would have improved and simplified matters they believe.