Council 'attacked' theatre in planning row

The new theatre was built behind the existing Titchfield Festival Theatre in St Margaret's Lane

A council has "attacked" a "well loved" charity-run theatre, a planning inquiry has heard.

The 450-seat Arden Theatre was created behind the existing Titchfield Festival Theatre in the Hampshire village.

Fareham Borough Council said it was built without planning permission and was causing parking, noise and safety issues.

Titchfield Festival Theatre's lawyer told a planning inquiry the new venue served a "local need" and was "part of the cultural infrastructure".

The council issued a Planning Enforcement Notice after it emerged the new theatre building had only been given permission for use as storage.

A week-long inquiry was held to determine the future of the venue in St Margaret's Lane.

The inquiry had heard the council's position that the theatre was in conflict with planning policies and could not be considered a small-scale rural development.

The council argued a lack of car parking spaces was among the reasons it should be shut down, as it could attract a potential 33,000 visitors to 102 performances.

In her closing statement, Emma Dring, representing the council, said: "Given the stakes for the appellant, the evidence they have gathered and presented to support their case has been surprisingly thin."

Earlier in the hearing Megan Thomas KC, representing Titchfield Festival Theatre, said the theatre was "a community and leisure facility".

As such, she said planning laws allowed countryside expansion if there was a local need.

She told the inquiry: "It is with some bemusement that the council has got itself into a position whereby it's attacking a well-loved, independent, successful, not-for-profit, community-based charity on the basis of an eight-year-old written ministerial statement, which was clearly aimed at protecting the green belt and discouraging Gypsies and travellers to set up on green belt land."

The appeal hearing included a site visit and discussions over highways concerns, alleged conflicts with planning policy and noise disturbance.

The planning inspector is due to consider the evidence before reaching her decision, which is expected in the coming weeks.