Meeting documents

CDC Delegated Planning Application Reports
Friday, 1st June, 2001

2001.05.01 to 2002.04.30 - Delegated Planning Application Reports, Delegated Applications Determined Week Ending 06.01.01

REPORT OF THE

HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

Draft List of Applications Determined Week Ending

01/06/2001

2001/490/CH

Case Officer: James Chatfield

Date Received: 26/03/01 Decide by Date: 20/05/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

DORMER WINDOW IN REAR ELEVATION, SINGLE STOREY SIDE/FRONT EXTENSION INCORPORATING DOUBLE GARAGE AND NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS (AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 00/1129/CH)

Location:

11 COPPERKINS LANE AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR AND MRS E MALDEN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Class C Road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/1204/CH Two storey side/ front/ rear extension incorporating rear balcony and new vehicular access. Refused and subsequent appeal dismissed – adverse effect on street scene.

00/1129/CH Dormer window in rear elevation, single storey side/ front extension incorporating double garage. Approved but not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

Scheme is an amendment to planning permission 0/1129/CH. The extension is to have a depth of 17m (16.3m previously), is to be 5.6m high, (4.6m previously) and is to b 6.2m wide (5.8m previously). The dormer window in the rear elevation is to be as previously approved. Amended plans have been received omitting the front cycle store.

PARISH COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

CONSULTATIONS

District Engineer (Highways); No objection subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H16, TR2, TR11, and TR16.

ISSUES

1 Whilst the proposed extension is to be 1m higher than that previously proposed it is also to be situated 0.5m further from the side boundary, (1.5m as opposed to 1m). it is not considered that the proposed amendments will have any further effect on the street scene or on the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring residents.

2 No objection is raised to the proposed new access.

3 The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174A No additional windows in first floor of E elevation of extension.

(4) C505 Access Layout - Adopted Road : New Access Only

(5) C532 Visibility splays of 1.5m x 1.5m to highway; gates set back 5m.

(6) C561 Surface Water

(7) C571 Turning Space as on Plan Approved

(8) C138 Selected plans amended by more than one unnumbered plan recd on 24/5/01

(1) INFORMATIVE - I253 Need to obtain licence from Local Highway Authority to carry out work

2001/562/CH

Case Officer: Mike Evans

Date Received: 05/04/01 Decide by Date: 30/05/01

Parish: Chesham Bois Ward: Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION (AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 00/0612/CH)

Location:

MANOR FARM COTTAGE NORTH ROAD CHESHAM BOIS

Applicant: MR AND MRS A DEL TUFO

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chesham Bois Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

adjoining Public Amenity Open Space

adjoining Common land

Unclassified road

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

2000/0613/CH Demolition of two storey and single storey side extensions and single storey rear extension, alterations to front bay windows, internal alterations, replacement of existing windows and erection of single storey rear extension and two storey side/rear extension. Granted conditional Listed Building Consent – 12 May 2000. Implemented, but not completed in accordance with the Listed Building Consent.

2000/612CH Single storey rear extension and two storey side/rear extension. Conditional permission – 12 May 2000. Implemented, but not completed in accordance with the planning permission.

THE APPLICATION

The retrospective application relates to the retention of amendments to planning permission 2000/0613/CH. The amendments to the approved scheme relate to the increase in overall height of the two storey front gable element from 6.1 metres approx. 6.6 metres approx. and a corresponding increase in the overall height of the twin gable rear extension. The existing planning permission granted consent for the a part two storey and single storey extension with pitched roofs over, further to the demolition of a two storey and single storey flat roofed 20 century addition to the 17 and 18 century dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of representation from the neighbouring property to the east of the application site raising the following grounds of objection.

1. Unable to object to the original applications as at the time The Cottage was unoccupied and subject to probate. This situation undoubtedly provided a ‘window of opportunity’ for the owners of Manor Farm Cottage to obtain planning consent without neighbour objections. We have noted from your records that the original planning consent was granted with some reservations, particularly with regard to the overall scale of development, but was allowed to proceed because there were no objections raised by other parties.

2. The overall design of the extension. This is a huge extension that by virtue of its bulk, scale, materials and design is not sympathetic or subordinate to the existing part of Manor Farm Cottage. It would therefore appear to contravene policies GC1 and CA1 of the Local Plan. These factors are particularly relevant to this revised plan where the size and height of the development exceeds that drawn on the original plans.

3. Loss of amenity (policies H13, H14, GC2, GC3). This development is significantly detrimental to the amenity of the Cottage. It is visually intrusive, intimidating and overbearing from our property. Letter refers to the enclosed photographs graphically illustrate its visual impact. The extension is clearly visible from all our rear windows and is overbearing from the garden. It shadows large areas of the rear garden resulting in a significant loss of sunlight.

4. Non-conformity of the Plans. The extension has been built without conforming to the original plans. The new plans are still not a true representation of the building that has been constructed. We were informed that the height of Manor Farm Cottage was incorrect on the original plans thus misrepresenting the relative size of the extension. Since this height is unaltered, we question the accuracy of the new plans. The comparative sizes were a significant factor when estimating the impact of the extension prior to our purchase of The Cottage. The revised plan is more detrimental than anticipated.

5. The Town and Country Planning Order Certificate A that accompanies this application is incompatible with the plans. The new plans show the eastern wall of the extension built up to the boundary line and the foundations on our property.

6. The building that has already been constructed is again inconsistent with these latest plans.

1.	The construction of the boundary wall and the garage roof differs from the plan.

2.	The plan does not show the guttering that has been constructed overhanging the boundary line for part of its length.

Listed Building Consent. In our opinion the design of this extension does not complement the historic part of the house or blend with it. The oversized up and over garage door, and Velux roof lights are not compatible with the character of this period building. The use of synthetic materials for these and the window frames and guttering contravene both conservation area and listed building criteria.

One letter of representation from the residents of Homefield, North Road stating

1. I have no objection to this building extension. Though large, it has been designed to suit the local environment, and in my view is not obtrusive.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer has been consulted (see 2001/563/CH) - no objection to the design from the listed building aspect.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H4, H13, H14, H15, LB1. CA1 and CA2.

ISSUES

1. The main issues are considered to be impact on amenities of nearby residential properties, and impact on the character and appearance of the listed building in the Conservation Area.

2. With regard to the impact of the application on amenities of nearby residential properties, it is considered that account should be taken of the fact that the amendment to the original approved scheme only relates to the increase in height of the full two storey elements of the design. The principle of the extension and its design and materials have already been considered in the determination and approval of planning permission 2000/612/CH and Listed Building Consent 2000/613/CH.

3. Manor Farm Cottage is situated some 28metres to the north of the adjacent dwelling known as The Cottage, and the rear garden of the Cottage extends for approximately for 76 metres. Having regard to the orientation and relationship of the part of the extension to Manor Farm Cottage which is the subject of this application and the length of the rear garden of The Cottage, it is considered that the increased height of part of the extension will not significantly be detrimental to the residential amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of The Cottage. It is considered that the revised scheme will not have an overbearing impact and will not result in a significant loss of sunlight or daylight to The Cottage and its rear garden.

4. Whilst the full two storey element of the design is higher than indicated on the original planning permission, it is still significantly lower than the ridge height of the main dwellinghouse. Accordingly, the revised scheme is considered to be in scale and sub-ordinate to the overall appearance of Manor Farm Cottage.

The revised scheme is not therefore considered to be contrary to Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13 and H14 of the Local Plan.

5. With regard to the impact of the application on the character and appearance of the listed building in the Conservation Area, the comments of the District Historic Buildings Officer are noted. Mindful of the increase in height of the full two storey element which is the subject of this application, the appearance of the extensions to Manor Farm Cottage are still considered to be in scale and sub-ordinate to the main dwelling. It is considered that the character and appearance of the listed building and its integrity are not compromised by the increase in height of the full two storey element. The application would not be of detriment to the Conservation Area or the Established Area of Special Residential Character. No objection under policies H4, LB1, CA1 and CA2.

6. The objector raised a number of other concerns regarding non-conformity of the plans. The plans now submitted appear to be show the true relationship of the size of the extension in relation to Manor Farm Cottage.

7. The original application indicated the construction of a parapet wall and concealed gutter to prevent any overhanging above neighbours’ property. Whereas the plans indicate that the eastern wall of the extension is built up to the boundary line, the extension has been set back slightly on site and traditional rainwater gutters constructed so that the building and gutters do not overhang the neighbour’s land. The applicant has confirmed this in writing. It is considered that this deviation from the approved plans could be treated as an acceptable minor amendment and in terms of the overall appearance of the extensions to Manor Farm Cottage is ‘de minimis’ in planning terms.

8. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C174A No additional habitable windows in first floor of east elevation of extension.

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C435 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Exterior

2001/563/CH

Case Officer: Mike Evans

Date Received: 05/04/01 Decide by Date: 30/05/01

Parish: Chesham Bois Ward: Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type: Application for Listed Building Consent

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION (AMENDMENT TO LISTED BUILDING CONSENT 00/0613/CH)

Location:

MANOR FARM COTTAGE NORTH ROAD CHESHAM BOIS

Applicant: MR AND MRS A DEL TOFU

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chesham Bois Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

adjoining Public Amenity Open Space

adjoining Common land

Unclassified road

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

2000/612CH Single storey rear extension and two storey side/rear extension. Conditional permission – 12 May 2000. Implemented, but not completed in accordance with the planning permission.

THE APPLICATION

The retrospective application relates to the retention of amendments to Listed Building Consent 2000/0613/CH. The amendments to the approved scheme relate to the increase in overall height of the two storey front gable element from 6.1 metres approx. 6.6 metres approx. and a corresponding increase in the overall height of the twin gable rear extension. The original Listed Building Consent related to the demolition of a 20 century two storey and single storey flat roofed extension to the 17 and 18 century dwelling and the addition of a part two storey and single storey extension with pitched roofs over

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of representation from the neighbouring property to the east of the application site raising the following grounds of objection.

6. The building that has already been constructed is again inconsistent with these latest plans.

3.	The construction of the boundary wall and the garage roof differs from the plan.

4.	The plan does not show the guttering that has been constructed overhanging the boundary line for part of its length.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer has been consulted - no objection to the amended design from the listed building aspect.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies LB1.

ISSUES

1. It is considered that account should be taken of the fact that the amendment to the original approved scheme only relates to the increase in height of the full two storey elements of the design. The principle of the extension and its design and materials have already been considered in the determination and approval of planning permission 2000/612/CH and Listed Building Consent 2000/613/CH.

2. With regard to the impact of the application on the character and appearance of the listed building in the Conservation Area, the comments of the District Historic Buildings Officer are noted. Mindful of the increase in height of the full two storey element which is the subject of this application, the appearance of the extensions to Manor Farm Cottage are still considered to be in scale and sub-ordinate to the main dwelling. It is considered that the character and appearance of the listed building and its integrity are not compromised by the increase in height of the full two storey element. No features of historic interest or architectural interest have been affected by the revisions to the original scheme. The alterations which are the subject of this application would not detract from the character and appearance of the of the Listed Building and as such no objection is raised under Policy LB1

3. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional consent

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C142 Listed Building Consent - List of Works

(2) C435 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Exterior

(3) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/575/CH

Case Officer: Thomas Gabriel

Date Received: 05-Apr-01 Decide by Date: 30-May-01

Parish: Little Missenden Ward: Little Missenden

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

DETACHED BUILDING TO PROVIDE TRIPLE GARAGE

Location:

MISSENDEN HOUSE LITTLE MISSENDEN

Applicant: MR MINOGUE

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Little Missenden Conservation Area

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

River Chess & River Misbourne - area liable to flood

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Tree Preservation Order

Within curtilage of Listed Building - affects setting

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

95/0209/CH Install basement window in east elevation (LBC). Conditional consent.

98/1307/CH Internal alterations and roofing over part of courtyard (LBC). Conditional consent.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a detached building to provide a triple garage. It is to measure 10.7m long by 5m deep and 4m high to the top of the pitched roof. It is to be sited 2m from the east boundary of the site.

CONSULTATIONS

Historic Buildings Officer – The proposed new garage building, of traditional design and screened by planting, would be acceptable from the listed building aspect in my opinion. The clay tiles specified for the roof should be handmade plain tile, new or reclaimed.

Environment Agency – No comments.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB15, LSQ1, H14, H15, LB2, CA1, CA2, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application site is located within the curtilage of a listed building in the Little Missenden Conservation Area where development should not adversely affect the setting of the listed building and should preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. The site is also located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty where development should preserve the landscape beauty of the area. The other relevant local plan policies should also be complied with.

2. Though it is to be 4m high, the detached garage is to be set 2 metres below the house entry level and 2 metres from the boundary with the neighbouring dwelling, Toad Hall. The boundary treatment at this point comprises a 1.5m wall and a hedge up to 1.8m in height. The proposed detached garage will project above this boundary treatment by up to one metre and pitches away from the boundary (it is also to be sited adjacent to the garage of Toad Hall, though it will project to the rear of this garage by approximately 7m). Furthermore, the proposed evergreen screening hedge, will further reduce the visual impact of the garage. It is not considered that the detached garage, though quite bulky, will have an adverse impact upon the neighbouring dwelling, Toad Hall, or be visually intrusive. It will not detract from the street scene. No objections are raised in terms of Policies GC3, H14 or H15.

3. Though fairly bulky, the detached garage is to be small and subordinate in scale to the original dwelling. It is considered to be acceptable in terms of its siting, design, external appearance, location in relation to the existing dwelling and its surroundings and the impact on the landscape (it will be well screened by vegetation). It will conserve the natural beauty of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. No objections are raised in terms of Policies GB15 or LSQ1.

4. The Historic Buildings Officer, subject to the use of handmade plain roof- tiles in its construction, considers the garage to be acceptable from the listed building aspect. It will preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and will preserve the views looking into the Conservation Area. No objections are raised in terms of Policies LB2, CA1 and CA2.

5. The proposed garage has no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards. No objections are raised in terms of Policies TR11 or TR16.

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) The garage hereby permitted shall only be constructed in new or reclaimed handmade plain tiles.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the development is not detrimental to the character of the locality or to the setting of the listed building.

(3) C196 Ancillary residential buildings at Missenden House - garage

(4) C414 Landscaping - No Felling Except Specified Trees and Hedges

(5) The proposed evergreen screening hedge, as indicated on plan no.2031.4 received by the Local Planning Authority on 5 April 2001, shall be planted in the first planting and seeding season following the completion of development. It shall be maintained at a height of 3 metres. Should it die, be removed or become seriously damaged or diseased within a period of 5 years from the date of completion of development, it shall be replaced with a hedge of similar size and species.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling.

(6) No development shall be commenced on site until detailed plans showing the existing and proposed slab levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such levels shall be shown in relation to a fixed and known datum point. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the development is not detrimental to the residential amenity of the adjoining property or the street scene.

2001/577/CH

Case Officer: Keith Musgrave

Date Received: 06-Apr-01 Decide by Date: 31-May-01

Parish: Chesham Ward: Townsend

App Type: Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Proposal:

CROWN REDUCTION AND CROWN THINNING OF AN OAK TREE PROTECTED BY A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER

Location:

4 TWEENWAYS CHESHAM

Applicant: MRS M TOPLIN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Bucks County Council (Chesham Urban District) Tree Preservation Order No 3 - 1960 covering 7 individual trees between Lye Green Road and Botley Road, Chesham including oak at 4 Tweenways.

CH/1253/77 Raising of crown on tree No T2. Conditional permission.

94/0453/CH Crown reduction and crown thinning of an oak tree. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Crown reduction of oak tree by 25% and crown thinning by 20%.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant: This tree was crown reduced and crown thinned by approximately 25% and 20% respectively in 1994. This was also done approx. eight years before that. We wish to have the same work done again which will improve the amount of light to the house and garden and also improve balance.

One letter from a neighbour having no objections.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser: Large oak tree in corner of rear garden – previous reduction work – proposed work similar to 94/0453/CH – considered reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2

ISSUES

1. The oak tree is situated in the rear garden of the property but on account of its size it is partially visible from several surrounding public viewpoints.

2. The proposed work is similar to that approved in 1994 and is considered to be reasonable management.

3. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed crown reduction by 25% and crown thinning by 20%.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the tree and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE - I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction

2001/593/CH

Case Officer: Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received: 10/04/01 Decide by Date: 04/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION INCORPORATING GARAGE

Location:

52 FIELDWAY CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: PETER FISKE

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

87/3606/CH Dormer window, two-storey and single storey extensions, refused.

88/1163/CH

Dormer window and two storey and single storey extensions, approved and implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The proposed side extension would project 3.4m away from the existing flank elevation and would be approximately 10.2m deep. The garage would be set 0.45m behind the adjoining front elevation and level with the existing rear. The eaves height varies due to the change in ground levels, being approximately 1.8m at the rear and 2.2m at the front. The pitched roof over would be at the same pitch as the main dwelling’s roofslope, in effect the roofslope would be extended down beyond the existing eaves level at two-storey level and down to the eaves of the proposed garage. It is proposed to install three rooflights into the roof above the garage.

It should be noted that the applicant owns both Nos.52 and 50 Fieldway, to enable this development to take place the boundary between the properties has been altered (moved closer to No.50).

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections

REPRESENTATIONS

Letter from the agent confirming that the strip of land where the garage is to be located, together with the adjacent property, No.50, is owned by Mr. Fiske, the owner of No.52.

Letter from April Cottage, Boundary Road –

1. The application referred to as a single storey side extension incorporating a garage. The plans however show that the roof construction is not flat but sloping which means that in-part the construction is two-storey high.

2. Prior to the redefining of boundaries between 52 Fieldway and the neighbouring property on Fieldway this construction would not have been possible. This was the case when we constructed a conservatory at our property which directly overlooks the proposed site.

3. The proposal will eliminate light and remove part of our view from our kitchen window which overlooks the proposed construction.

4. The proposed construction will reduce significantly the light currently enjoined by our conservatory, which is directly on the boundary with the extended site at No.52. This is largely due to the proposed proximity to the boundary of the proposed construction. Our conservatory has glass only on two sides, one of which overlooks the proposed extension.

5. Our conservatory is used as an additional room. This room will now directly overlook the proposed construction and will be subjected to shadows when the sun rises.

CONSULTATIONS

District Highways Engineer –

(i) The visibility to the left for vehicles exiting the site is sub-standard due to the presence of the high hedge along the corner frontage.

(ii) Proposed vehicular access is close to the 90o bend on the road.

(iii) However, I am unable to object to the proposal because I understand that the construction of a crossover is permitted development, no objections subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The proposal is not considered to have any adverse impact upon the street scene and it is not felt to be out of keeping with the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling. Consequently no objections are raised under Policies GC1, H13, H15 and H17.

2. The comments of the neighbouring property have been noted and have been duly considered. This dwelling has had a two-storey rear extension and a rear conservatory added to the property, the conservatory being in between the two-storey rear extension and the boundary with No.52, the result being that the conservatory is glazed on only two sides. The boundary between the two properties is made up of a trellis fence to approximately the same height as the eaves of the conservatory, with vegetation (mainly ivy) growing among the trellising. It should also be noted that the application site is set at a lower ground level than the neighbouring property. It is accepted that there will be some loss of sunlight to the conservatory during the early part of the day, however, for the remainder of the day it is not considered that the proposal would result in a significant loss of sunlight, bearing in mind the orientation of the properties and the screening on the boundary. The garage would not increase levels of overlooking to the neighbouring properties and should not appear excessively overbearing. As such it is not considered that a refusal on the grounds of loss of light or loss of amenity could be sustained. The neighbours also object on the grounds of loss of view, while this is noted, the planning system is not able to refuse an application on these grounds.

3. No adverse car parking issues arise as there is provision on site to comply with Policy. The District Engineer has expressed concern over the positioning of the new access, however, as Fieldway is not either a classified or trunk road the access does not require planning permission by virtue of the General Permitted Development Order.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174A No additional windows in W & S elevations of extension.

(4) C196 Ancillary residential buildings at 52 Fieldway - garage

2001/596/CH

Case Officer: Neil Higson

Date Received: 10/04/01 Decide by Date: 04/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS, SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION ON WEST ELEVATION, ALTERATIONS TO VEHICULAR ACCESS AND RELOCATION OF FOOTBRIDGE FROM PUB GARDEN

Location:

GREYHOUND INN HIGH STREET CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: G KOFTEROS/THE BRAVO GROUP LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Shopping area - not Principal Shopping Frontage

Shopping Area-not PSF-Proposed Alterations S1(delete Prestwood East)

River Chess & River Misbourne - area liable to flood

Class A Road

Class C Road

Road Improvement - Improvement Line

Within 8 m. of NRA-designated 'main river'

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

Grade 2 Listed Building

Floor Space

Codes: SC

Proposed (m2): 15

Displaced (m2): 0

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/255/61 Alterations. Permission granted.

AM/1512/61 Illuminated sign. Consent granted.

AM/487/72 Illuminated pole sign. Consent granted.

AM/6/74 Fire Escape. Permission granted.

CH/0964/83 Paved forecourt patio. Permission granted.

CH/0965/83 Paved forecourt patio. Listed Building Consent.

87/2300/CH Alterations and demolition of outbuilding and infill gable wall at grand floor level. Listed Building Consent granted.

92/1280/CH Formation of door in southern elevation and new roof and doors to existing store. Permission granted.

92/1288/CH Formation of door in southern elevation and new roof and doors to existing store. Listed Building Consent.

THE APPLICATION

The Greyhound Inn (Grade II Listed Building) has recently suffered from extensive ground floor flood damage and it is proposed to take this opportunity to refurbish the establishment to provide a restaurant and bar area at ground floor with bed rooms at first floor.

The refurbishment involves the reconfiguring of the main ground floor together with the demolition of a modern porch and bay window in the area of the original coach arch. A modern stairway extension at the rear of the premises would be reduced in height and two small single storey in fill extensions would be added to the rear elevation. The new floor area would be approximately 15 sqm. Various modern features will be removed from the interior and much of the more original layout and characteristics re-instated. As part of this application and not requiring listed building consent it is proposed to demolish the existing foot bridge, leading from the western foot path running along side the public car park, across the River Misbourne to the car park of The Greyhound. A replacement footbridge would then be constructed leading from the newly opened entrance in the northern end of the building across the river into the beer garden.

It is also proposed to amend the vehicular access to the car park at its junction with the High Street.

The alterations proposed are also the subject of an application for Listed Building Consent 01/0597/CH being considered concurrently.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

Supporting letter from the Agent;

- In the course of the proposed refurbishment and flood damage repair it is intended to take the opportunity to improve and modernise facilities as far as possible without compromising the historic fabric of the building and indeed where possible enhance and compliment the existing features;

- One of the key features it is hoped to revitalise is the carriage arch which is currently almost invisible having been filled in the 1950’s, by removing both the bay window and “Tudor-Bethan” porch structures. Replacing them with a subtle metal framed glazing system in order to visually demonstrate the historical open route through this area;

- Within the restaurant area intend the removal of modern internal partioning and the accommodation stair adjacent to the central fireplace. The chimney (which is the historic core of the building) will thus define the boundary between the bar and restaurant areas as well as the break between the Mediaeval and the Georgian parts of the structure;

- On the first floor it is intended to improve the standard of accommodation by the provision of en-suite bathrooms to each bedroom which has been achieved with the minimum of impact on the historic fabric of the building;

- On the western side of the building proposing the extension of the kitchen into the existing outhouse areas and building a small infill extension to form a unified linear mono-pitch structure improving the composition of the elevation of this side of the building;

- Also propose realignment of the carpark footbridge to open up a direct route between the main bar and the Riverside Garden. By this means patrons will be able to carry drinks direct from the pub to the garden without the necessity of the detour through the pub car park as at present. Additionally kitchen servicing and delivery could potentially take place from the rear of the building with goods carried directly into the kitchen thus reducing vehicular conflicts in the car park and thereby increasing parking available for patrons.

Letters of objection from local resident;

- The Greyhound is a Listed Building and as such it would not be possible to return it to its original state without knocking an archway through the lounge bar as this was an old coaching inn;

- A single storey extension on the western elevation would do nothing to restore the pub;

- The removal of the footbridge (over which there is a right of way) will not solve the flooding problems.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer:

The Greyhound is a complex and unusually interesting building of several periods, the earliest being of 16th, possibly 15th century, with 17th century additions, all timber framed, and an 18th century Georgian brick front elevation. Later alterations and additions, mainly 20th century, are generally of poor quality and little interest. There is an unsightly west elevation to the River Misbourne and the public carpark on its other bank, The coaching arch, one of the best and most characteristic features has been enclosed and obscured, on the front by a large bow window which is crude and out of scale, and at the back by a porch.

The building is generally in need of repair, refurbishment and some careful modernisation. Matters have been made worse, and the need for repair more urgent, by the recent flooding which has affected the building, so that it has now been closed for some months. No features or fabric of special interest would be removed, but some of the more recent changes would be reversed or improved upon, including the bow window and porch referred to above, revealing the historic coaching arch more clearly while retaining it within the building with glazed screens set into the openings front and back. The modern staircase adjoining the central chimney would be removed, and the escape stair added on the rear elevation in the 1950s would be adapted and improved to serve the hotel rooms. The rear elevation to the river would be improved and this side of the building opened up both to give better access and to exploit the river frontage.

The other internal alterations are designed to provide modern facilities, such as en-suite bathrooms, without damaging or masking the features of architectural or historic interest. Where partitions are to be removed to open up the bar area and restaurant they are of recent date.

In my opinion these proposals are welcome from the listed building aspect.

Conditions should be included in any consent to ensure that all materials and details of the alterations and additions match existing. If during the course of the work any hidden features of possible interest are uncovered the work shall stop and the Local Planning Authority shall be consulted to ensure the retention or proper recording of the feature.

I also consider that it would be appropriate to make it a condition of consent that the applicant arranges a suitable programme of recording of the building, especially the parts affected by the proposed alterations. This would be in addition to an archaeological condition, which in view of the early date of the building and its location would also be advisable here.

County Archaeological Officer – having consulted the sites and monuments record and conclude that, on present evidence, this scheme is too small-scale to have significant archaeological implications in this location.

Thames Water – no objection on sewerage grounds.

County Highway Engineer – There are difficulties in reconciling the requirements for safe visibility for those vehicles moving along the carriageway and for those attempting to exit from the site. There is no ideal solution, the applicant is willing to compromise and therefore recommend permission subject to suitable conditions and informative.

Environment Agency- No objection subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, and LB1.

ISSUES

1. It is proposed to refurbish The Greyhound Inn and improve the appearance of the building and the facilities serving the restaurant, public bar and guestrooms. As part of this proposal it is intended to remove some modern additions to the building and replace them with a more sympathetic design and appropriate traditional materials. The proposed alterations and extension are considered to be sympathetic to the historic character and appearance of this Grade II Listed Building and would bring back into use a building currently suffering from flood damage. The comments of the Historic Buildings Officer are noted. No objections are raised in terms of Policies GC1, GC3, or LB1.

2. The new floor area of the extensions is only 15-sq. m and considering the internal alterations would not result in an increase in pubic floor space to require additional parking to be provided. The layout of the parking area would remain fundamentally the same as existing. The County Highway Engineer has no objection to the altered access provided its width meets the minimum required standard an adequate visibility splays are provide and maintained.

3. The alterations to the footbridge involve merely its relocation from one part of the riverbank to another and there are no objections on planning grounds.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

(3) A visibility splay of 2.4m x 25m shall be provided to the right on exit, from the new access hereby approved before this access is first brought into use. This splay shall be free of any obstruction exceeding 0.6 metre in height above the nearside channel level of the carriageway and shall be so maintained thereafter.

Reason: To provide inter-visibility between the access and the existing public highway for the safety and convenience of users of the highway and of the access.

(4) Before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use, the means of access shall be altered in accordance with a plan to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which provides for a minimum access width of 4.10 m and constructed in accordance with Buckinghamshire County Council's guide note "Private Vehicular Access Within Highway Limits" 2001.

Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the private road and of the development.

(5) Detailed drawings of the construction of the replacement footbridge shall be submitted to and approved by he Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development, and the footbridge shall not be constructed other than in accordance with such approved drawings.

Reason: In order to ensure that the footbridge does not adversely affect the flow or capacity of the river Misbourne, and that the bridge does not detract from the character of appearance of this riverside locality.

(6) A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To protect/ conserve the natural features and character of the area.

(7) The removal of the redundant bridge structures, which should include the removal of abutments and the naturalisation of the immediate bank shall be carried out in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority before the development is commenced.

Reason: To ensure that the removal of the redundant bridge structures does not have a detrimental impact on the river environment.

(8) C138 Selected plans amended by more than one unnumbered plan recd on 1/6/01

(1) INFORMATIVE- You are advised that Land Drainage Consent should be obtained from the Environment Agency for the construction of the footbridge and any other structures within 8 metres of the bank of the River Misbourne.

(2) INFORMATIVE - I253 Need to obtain licence from Local Highway Authority to carry out work

2001/597/CH

Case Officer: Neil Higson

Date Received: 10/04/01 Decide by Date: 04/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type: Application for Listed Building Consent

Proposal:

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS, DEMOLITION OF PORCH TO EXISTING MAIN ENTRANCE AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION ON WEST ELEVATION

Location:

GREYHOUND INN HIGH STREET CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: GEORGE KOFTEROS / BRAVO

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Shopping area - not Principal Shopping Frontage

Shopping Area-not PSF-Proposed Alterations S1(delete Prestwood East)

River Chess & River Misbourne - area liable to flood

Class A Road

Class C Road

Road Improvement - Improvement Line

Within 8 m. of NRA-designated 'main river'

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/255/61 Alterations. Permission granted.

AM/1512/61 Illuminated sign. Consent granted.

AM/487/72 Illuminated pole sign. Consent granted.

AM/6/74 Fire Escape. Permission granted.

CH/0964/83 Paved forecourt patio. Permission granted.

CH/0965/83 Paved forecourt patio. Listed Building Consent.

87/2300/CH Alterations and demolition of outbuilding and infill gable wall at grand floor level. Listed Building Consent granted.

92/1280/CH Formation of door in southern elevation and new roof and doors to existing store. Permission granted.

92/1288/CH Formation of door in southern elevation and new roof and doors to existing store. Listed Building Consent.

THE APPLICATION

The alterations proposed are also the subject of an application for planning permission 01/0596/CH being considered concurrently.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

Supporting letter from the Agent;

1 letter of objection from local resident;

- The Greyhound is a Listed Building and as such it would not be possible to return it to its original state without knocking an archway through the lounge bar as this was an old coaching inn;

- A single storey extension on the western elevation would do nothing to restore the pub;

- The removal of the footbridge (over which there is a right of way) will not solve the flooding problems.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer:

In my opinion these proposals are welcome from the listed building aspect.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, and LB1.

ISSUES

1 It is proposed to refurbish The Greyhound Inn and improve the appearance of the building and the facilities serving the restaurant, public bar and guest rooms. As part of this proposal it is intended to remove some modern additions to the building and replace them with a more sympathetic design and appropriate traditional materials. The proposed alterations and extension are considered to be sympathetic to the historic character and appearance of this Grade II Listed Building and would bring back into use a building currently suffering from flood damage. The comments of the Historic Buildings Officer are noted. No objections are raised in terms of Policies GC1, GC3, or LB1.

2 The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional consent

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C141 Listed Building Consent - Time Limit

(2) C142 Listed Building Consent - List of Works

(3) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

(4) Notification of the start date and estimated duration of the works on site authorised by this consent shall be given to the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before the commencement of such works. If during the course of the work any hidden features of possible interest are uncovered the work shall stop and the Local Planning Authority shall be consulted to ensure the retention or proper recording of the feature by the County Field Archaeologist or other competent archaeological organisation approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that remains of archaeological importance likely to be disturbed in the course of the development are adequately recorded.

2001/599/CH

Case Officer: Keith Musgrave

Date Received: 09/04/01 Decide by Date: 03/06/01

Parish: Chesham Ward: St Marys

App Type: Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Proposal:

TOPPING OF TWO CYPRESSES AND A LINE OF CYPRESSES - ALL PROTECTED BY A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER

Location:

THE LODGE AMERSHAM ROAD CHESHAM

Applicant: KAREN CANKALIS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class A Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Urban District of Chesham Interim Preservation Order No 1 - (No 77 of 1948) covering 24 woodlands and 13 groups of trees in Chesham including W20, belts of mixed woodland at Chesham Bois Manor.

85/101/CH Felling of two beech trees. Conditional permission.

97/1397/CH Crown reduction of two beech trees, removal of a lower limb from a beech tree, topping of two cypresses and topping of a row of cypresses. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Approx. 60 cypresses in hedge topped to approx. 20ft.

Two ornamental cypresses topped to 20ft.

TOWN COUNCIL

The Committee would endorse the Tree Warden’s comments, which are as follows:

(a) This is a repeat application. Leylandii grows so quickly that another application can be expected every two or three years. I would not opose felling of Leylandii and its replacement with an indigenous species. A reduction to 20 feet is a very modest reduction of the Leylandii. I would be happy to see a reduction of 12-15 feet.

(b) The ornamental Cypress trees are very close to the house and a reduction to 20 feet is reasonable.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant: Reason for work is general maintenance – questions whether possible for restriction to be lifted in respect of the 60 leylandi trees and two ornamental cypress, as they in effect form a hedge which requires regular maintenance.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser: Line of Leyland cypresses forming hedge on boundary of property with Amersham Road – reduced to about 6m under 97/1397/CH – now about a metre growth – work could be regarded as regular hedge maintenance work.

Two ornamental cypresses within garden – also reduced to about 6m under 97/1397/CH – only minor trimming proposed.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2

ISSUES

1. The line of Leyland cypresses is on the road boundary of the property and prominent in public views. The two other cypresses are within the garden with limited public visibility.

2. The proposal only involves minor trimming and is considered to be sensible management.

3. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed reduction to a height of 6 metres and minor re-shaping of the trees.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the trees and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE - I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction

2001/607/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Giles Ward: Chalfont St Giles

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE

Location:

THE VACHE VACHE LANE CHALFONT ST. GILES

Applicant: MR AND MRS MAKHARINSKY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Within curtilage of Listed Building - affects setting

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/0127/CH Re-surfacing of parking and turning area in red tarmac. Withdrawn.

99/0437/CH Change of use of land to residential and erect triple garage. Withdrawn.

99/1176/CH Change of use to residential garden. Unconditional permission.

99/1556/CH double garage and store. Conditional permission.

00/0306/CH Single storey extension on east elevation. Conditional permission.

00/0641/CH Detached double garage and detached swimming pool building. Conditional permission.

01/0443/CH Detached swimming pool building (amendment to planning permission 00/0641/CH).

THE APPLICATION

A detached double garage 7.45m wide and 6.85m deep with a hipped pitched roof at 4.05m. The application is an amendment to planning permission 00/0641/CH under which the garage used the wall of the old kitchen garden in which it is to stand as its rear elevation. The revised scheme locates the garage into the garden by 1.2m.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter from residents of the Vache raising the following comments,

1. No objections provided that to avoid accidents, some attention will be given to ensuring that cars leaving the new gates and vehicles departing the existing car park have clear view of each other;

2. That the red edge is amended so as not to include the Mews car park.

CONSULATIONS

There need be no objection from the Listed Building setting aspect in my opinion.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GB15, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, H17, LB2, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application is on the estate of a Grade II* Listed manor house in the London Metropolitan Green Belt above the village of Chalfont St. Giles. The principal of a detached garage building on this approximate position was determined acceptable under application 00/0641/CH. As such in accordance with Local Plan Policy GB15 this outbuilding is considered as an appropriate development in the Green Belt.

2. As the structure is located in the old walled kitchen gardens it will be obscured from the Chiltern AONB and therefore is in compliance with LSQ1.

3. The properties in the Vache Mews will be able to marginally see the structure but will not be detrimental to their amenity in view of Policies GC3, H13 and H14.

4. The swimming pool building granted permission under 01/0443/CH will screen the structure from the formal gardens and vista between the manor and the Cook Memorial and therefore no objections are raised by the Historic Buildings Officer under Local Plan Policy LB2.

5. The extensive forecourt to the Vache along with this garage provides more than ample parking under Policy TR11 and TR16.

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C197 Ancillary residential buildings at The Vache - building other than garage

(4) C135 Single plan amended by plans titled O.S. (site layout) received on 2 May 2001.

2001/608/CH

Case Officer: Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Giles-Little Chalfont Ward: Chalfont St Giles

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

REAR CONSERVATORY (AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 00/1044/CH)

Location:

FOUR WINDS LONG WALK LITTLE CHALFONT

Applicant: MR AND MRS MAIDEN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB4

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/203/49 Additions granted conditional permission.

CH/2290/80

Conversion of garage and erect double garage, conditional permission granted.

87/0874/CH

Alterations, side extension including domestic double garage, garden store and domestic storage area over. Conditional permission granted.

89/2732/CH

Retention of single storey rear extension with balcony above, conditional permission granted.

00/1044/CH Rear conservatory, approved.

THE APPLICATION

The proposed conservatory would be 5.66m deep and 4.3m in width and a maximum of 3.4m in height.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The principle of a conservatory in this location was established under the previous application (00/1044/CH). The change being in the design of the conservatory, as such, no objections are raised under policies relating to the design, impact upon the street scene and neighbouring properties.

2. No adverse car parking issues arise.

3. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/609/CH

Case Officer: Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont Common

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION INCLUDING CONSERVATORY AND REPLACEMENT DETACHED GARAGE

Location:

20 DEANCROFT ROAD CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: MR AND MRS CARTER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/757/62 Garage constructed under permitted development.

94/0492/CH

Alterations, single storey front extension and dormer window in north side and rear elevations, refused.

94/1187/CH

Alterations, front extension including roof extension, approved and implemented.

00/1951/CH

Single storey side / rear extension with pitched roof over, refused – detrimental impact upon No.18 Deancroft.

THE APPLICATION

1. The proposed single storey rear extension to from an extension to the kitchen would be 3m deep and 3.5m in width. The adjoining conservatory would be 3.6m deep at a right angle to the main dwelling, further to the rear the conservatory angles in and therefore extends a further 1.15m. Above the kitchen extension a hipped and pitched roof is proposed with an eaves height to match the existing and a ridge height of approximately 4.2m. The conservatory would have a pitched roof to a maximum height of 3.8m. To the rear of the conservatory’s roof it is proposed to alter the roof to create a gable.

2. The proposal also involves the replacement of the existing garage. The proposed garage would be set further to the rear than the existing, its front elevation would be 1m to the rear of the proposed rear elevation of the kitchen extension. The garage would be 5m deep, 2.8m in width with an eaves height at 2.2m with a ridge of the pitched roof at 3.3m.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letter with the application from the agent describing the application and noting that all new walls would be rendered externally to match the existing house, with a tiled pitched roof to the kitchen and garage buildings.

Letter from neighbour at No.18 Deancroft Road stating no objections to the proposal.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3

ISSUES

1. As with the previously refused application the main issue is considered to be the impact upon the neighbouring properties. Taking firstly No.18, it is considered that the extensions to the dwelling would not have an adverse impact upon the occupier’s amenity, not appearing excessively overbearing and not resulting in any significant loss of light. The proposed garage would be located on the boundary with No.18, however, as much of the proposed garage would be screened by the existing garage in No.18’s garden it is not considered that this part of the proposal would result in any loss of amenity for this property. The current proposal’s would have a greater impact upon No.22 than the previous scheme. Although the impact would be greater than the previous, it is not considered that the conservatory element of the proposals would lead to an unacceptable loss of amenity for this property. Consequently no objections are raised to the proposal’s impact upon the neighbouring properties.

2. No objections are raised to the design of the extensions which would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene and have been designed to respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling and its plot.

3. No objections are raised under Policies TR11 and TR16, provision is available within the site to park.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) The high level windows in the south-eastern elevation of the conservatory hereby approved shall not be glazed other than with obscured glass at any time.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining property.

(4) C134 Single plan amended by plan (no 844/2A) received on 24/5/01

2001/610/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Chesham Bois Ward: Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

REPLACEMENT GARAGE

Location:

38 WOODSIDE AVENUE AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR AND MRS ADKINS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

THE APPLICATION

A replacement detached garage 3.75m wide and 5m long with a gabled roof that is pitched at 3m above ground level.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Advisor:

Likely loss of a birch tree to rear of garage; small tree with poor shape.

Apple tree near corner of site; some amenity value but not of special importance, reasonable clearance from garage, removal does not appear to be necessary, could be retained with replacement garage.

No objection but would hope apple would be retained.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application is in the built up are of Chesham Bois where it will provide a replacement garage, of the same dimensions and position as the existing structure. In terms of its appearance the structure is to be a pre-cast concrete structure, not indifferent to that in existence, as such the appearance of the garden will not be materially different and will be acceptable under Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15. The existing garage in a poor state of repair and as it faces on The Farthings with properties opposite facing it, it will contribute positively towards the street scene, and this proposal will improve the physical appearance of the neighbourhood.

2. The large apple tree to the south east corner of the garden and birch tree to the rear of the garage are not stated in the application to be removed although the intention to do so was made clear during the site visit. The roots of these trees have caused substantial damage to the current structure, and their removal will take place according to the applicant to prevent the same scenario repeating. In the opinion of the District Forestry Officer no great loss would be endured by removal of the birch, while it is felt that no reason is apparent for the removal of the apple tree. As such the rebuilding of the garage is not dependent on the trees remaining.

3. Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16 state that a property in excess of 120sq.m. such as this requires 3 car parking spaces. The property only has one off street car parking space to date, to which this development will replace. Furthermore the garage will not be able to provide the necessary 5.5m by 2.5m forecourt space that the same policy requires. As the development is replacing like for like it would be unreasonable to refuse planning permission on grounds of deficient parking spaces, when the application is not exacerbating the existing deficiency.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C433 Materials - General Details

(3) C137 Selected plans amended by one unnumbered plan received on 25/04/01

2001/611/CH

Case Officer: Thomas Gabriel

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham Town

App Type: Application for Listed Building Consent

Proposal:

INTERNAL ALTERATIONS

Location:

LITTLE SUMMARIES 45 WHIELDEN STREET AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR MARK NICHOLSON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Amersham Old Town Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Traffic calming scheme for Amersham Old Town

Class C Road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Grade 2 Listed Building

THE APPLICATION

The application is for some internal alterations to this listed building. They involve the removal of some partitions in the rear wing of the building, which are not part of the original fabric of the building, and the creation of a partition for a water closet and a sink.

CONSULTATIONS

Historic Buildings Officer – Little Summaries is an attractive building of 18th century date probably incorporating earlier fabric. The proposed internal alterations affect the rear wing. There are some exposed timbers in the walls in which it is proposed to form openings, but they do not appear to be part of the earlier building. In my opinion, the proposals are acceptable from the listed building aspect.

TOWN COUNCIL

Approve, subject to the Historic Buildings Officer inspection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan 1991 – 2011: Policy HE1.

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policy LB1.

ISSUES

1. The proposed alterations to the rear wing do not appear to affect the fabric of the original building. The alterations are therefore acceptable from the Listed Building aspect. No objections are raised in terms of Policy HE1 of the Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan 1991 – 2011 or Policy LB1 or the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.

2. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional consent

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C141 Listed Building Consent - Time Limit

(2) C142 Listed Building Consent - List of Works

(3) C436 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Interior

2001/613/CH

Case Officer: Keith Musgrave

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type: Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Proposal:

CROWN REDUCTION OF A BIRCH AND CROWN THINNING OF A SYCAMORE - BOTH PROTECTED BY A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER

Location:

3 BUTLERS CLOSE AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR PETER RICHARDSON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Tree Preservation Order

Biological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Amersham Rural District Council (Windmill Plantation, Amersham) Tree Preservation Order No 9 - 1972, covering an area of trees at Windmill Plantation and Second Charsleys Wood.

97/1676/CH Crown reduction of an oak and a sycamore and crown thinning of a sycamore. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Birch – reduce height by around 10feet to best laterals.

Sycamore – crown thin 15% - deadwood.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant: Reason for work is to improve access of light to house and garden and remove deadwood.

One letter from a neighbour raising no objection to the proposal.

One letter from a neighbour supporting the proposal.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser: Rear two-thirds of rear garden is wooded – birch and sycamore on edge of wooded area closest to house.

Birch – tall tree grown in woodland setting – some height reduction and shaping would improve safety and increase light.

Sycamore – slightly shorter tree with broader crown – some deadwood present – crown thinning reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2

ISSUES

1. The two trees are situated in the rear garden of the property on the edge of the wooded area and are partially visible above the houses set against a backdrop of trees.

2. The proposed work is considered to be reasonable management that would not have a significant effect on views of the woodland.

3. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed

a) height reduction of the birch by 3m to best laterals and re-shaping of the crown

b) crown thinning of the sycamore by 15%

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the trees and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE - I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction

2001/615/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Gold Hill

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY SIDE AND FRONT EXTENSIONS INCLUDING ROOF ALTERATIONS AND DORMER WINDOW IN FRONT ELEVATION

Location:

17 GROVE LANE CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: MR AND MRS A KAY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Class C Road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

96/0495/CH Two storey side, single storey front and side extension incorporating garage. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

A single storey side and front extension including roof alterations and dormer window in front elevation. The existing property has an open porch to the front that continued the front roof slope down to first floor level. The porch is extended forwards by 1m (2.2m wide) with a forwards facing gable at 3.2m. To the left of this will be a wrap-a-round single storey front/side extension 1.8m deep with a hipped-pitched roof to 3.5m. The new front elevation will be 4.4m long and the side 6.6m long. Above the porch a dormer window is proposed 1.1m wide and 2m to the pitch of the gable.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter from neighbouring residents raising no objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H11, H13, H14, H15, H17, H18, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application is a wrap-a-round extension to a corner property in the built up area of Chalfont St. Peter. The extension will face on all sides onto the street, but by virtue of being single storey and screened by 2m boundary hedging it will not be adverse to the appearance of the street scene. Furthermore the design is not out of character with the property and is acceptable under Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15.

2. The only neighbour who will directly overlook the extension will be 165 Leachcroft (the sister semi to the rear side). This neighbour will only have a small ground floor window adjacent to the development, which will not be subject to loss of light or overbearing impact. As such the project raises no concerns in relation to detriment to neighbouring amenity under Local Plan Policy.

3. The gravel driveway can stand at least three cars and therefore satisfies local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/617/CH

Case Officer: James Chatfield

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Latimer Ward: Ashley Green & Latimer

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

RECLADDING OF EXTERNAL ELEVATIONS

Location:

YARD AND BUILDING OFF BLACKWELL HALL LANE (PREVIOUSLY FORMING PART OF ROWAN FARM, FORMER COWCROFT BRICKWORKS) LEY HILL

Applicant: PETER COLLINS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Biological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

96/483/CH Alterations to existing agricultural building and change of use from agriculture to a mixed agricultural and ground maintenance contractors and retention of field shelters and provision of vehicle passing bay. Approved and implemented.

98/481/CH Retention of fodder store. Approved.

99/687/CH Change of use of building from agricultural and ground maintenance contractor to storage and distribution (Use Class B8). Refused.

THE APPLICATION

The scheme involves the cladding of the flanks of the existing building with coloured profile sheeting which is to be coloured ‘juniper green’ and the roof with grey coloured sheeting.

PARISH COUNCIL

Expresses concern that;

1 The inclusion of the offices in the building were carried out without planning permission by the original owner,

2 Inclusion of WC is not shown on the plan and connection to adjoining soakaway septic tank not with benefit of planning consent,

3 The parking of inhabited caravan on land to the east of the building. (these matters are currently being investigated).

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, and LSQ1.

ISSUES

1 The exiting building is unattractive with the existing flanks clad with rusted corrugated sheeting with cement sheeting roof. The proposed scheme, which seeks to re-clad the whole building with green coloured sheeting would have an improved impact on the appearance of the building and would not therefore have an adverse effect on the character of this part of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2 The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

2001/619/CH

Case Officer: Neil Higson

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Amersham - Little Chalfont Ward: Little Chalfont

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY, FIRST FLOOR AND TWO STOREY SIDE/FRONT/REAR EXTENSIONS

Location:

LOW MANESTY 39 BEECHWOOD AVENUE LITTLE CHALFONT

Applicant: MR AND MRS D INGRAM

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Adjoining Green Belt

adjoining Historic Park or Garden

adjoining Ancient Woodland

Unclassified road

adj Archaeological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/983/76 Single storey rear extension. Permitted.

CH/305/77 Single storey front extension. Permitted.

85/724/CH Pitched roof over existing single storey extension. Permitted.

00/2107/CH Single storey, first floor and two storey side/front/rear extensions. Permission Refused.

THE APPLICATION

It is proposed to construct a first floor side extension above an existing single storey flat roofed element at the western end of the dwelling. It would measure 4.5m wide by 10m deep and continuing the roof line of the existing dwelling with a ridged roof gable with hip detail to the rear elevation. A single storey extension would be constructed across the rear between the two rear projections with a hipped roof dormer window constructed above. The dormer would measure 2.8m wide by 2.4m in height. At the eastern end of the dwelling it is proposed to construct a first floor rear extension measuring 4.8m wide by 3.5m deep with a height to the eaves of 4.6m, 6.8m to the apex of the ridge. It would present a hipped gable to the rear elevation to match the extension at the western end of the dwelling.

An existing single storey side projection at the eastern end would be demolished and replaced by a new single storey side extension measuring 5.2m deep by 1.8m wide with a mono pitch roof hipped to front and rear.

A front extension projecting 3.5m forward of the main front elevation and measuring 5.9m wide would be constructed to provide a double garage. The main roof plane would continue down over this extension and incorporate two pitched roof dormers each one measuring 2m wide by 1.5m in height to the eaves.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approve.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, GC4, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

The application site is located within a residential area where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle, subject to compliance with the relevant local policies. The application has been submitted following a previous refusal.

The street scene in this part of Beechwood Avenue is characterised by a variety of different styles of property, which are fairly well spaced out. Local Plan Polices GC1 and H15 indicate that extensions to dwellings should be in keeping both with existing buildings and their surroundings. Policy H16 (through reference to Policy H11) states that in an area characterised by spacious layouts the distance between the flank elevations of the dwelling at or above first floor level and the boundary of the dwelling’s curtilage should be significantly more than one metre.

The previous proposal was considered unacceptable in terms of relating to the existing dwelling and neighbouring properties. The revised application shows that the dwelling as extended will not be any closer at first floor level to the eastern boundary than is currently the situation and would be much more in keeping with the street scene.

The style and design of the proposed extension is now considered acceptable in terms of relating to the existing dwelling and there will be no material adverse visual impact upon neighbouring dwellings. It is considered that the proposed extensions would not appear cramped or incongruous in the street scene. The proposal therefore meets the requirements of GC1, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16 and H17.

The extensions would respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling in relation to neighbouring properties and would not be out of character with the surrounding area, maintaining a sufficient distance between the flank elevation of the dwelling and the boundaries of its curtilage.

Three parking spaces could be provided within the curtilage of the property in compliance with the requirements of Policy TR16.

The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C177 Obscure glass in multiple windows in the eastern and western elevations - 1st floor only

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows other than those expressly authorised by this permission, or as subsequently agreed in writing by the local planning authority, shall be inserted or constructed at any time at first floor level or above in the eastern and western elevations of the resulting dwelling as hereby permitted.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining property.

(4) C305 Garages Not to be Converted to be Part of Dwelling

(5) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/620/CH

Case Officer: Iwan Jones

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham the Hill

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

REPLACEMENT SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION AND MONO PITCH ROOF OVER EXISTING SINGLE STOREY FRONT PROJECTION

Location:

15 HIGHFIELD CLOSE AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR AND MRS G W COPSEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Amersham - Weller Estate Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/1280/53: Bay window. Permitted development.

AM/344/67: Extensions to lounge and kitchen. Conditional permission. Implemented.

CH/1765/80: Extensions and alterations. Conditional permission. Implemented.

91/0649/CH: Retention of kitchen extension. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a replacement single storey side extension to the south eastern elevation. The width and depth of the proposed extension would remain the same. The extension would have a flat roof to a height of 3.15m rather than a lean-to roof. The application also entails the construction of a mono-pitch roof to replace the existing flat roof over the single storey front projection. All external materials proposed would match those of the existing dwelling.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approval.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H4, H13, H14, H15, H17, CA1, CA2, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3

ISSUES

1. The application site is located within a Conservation Area and an Established Residential Area of Special Character where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2. The construction of a mono-pitch roof to replace the existing flat roof over the single storey front projection would be more in keeping with the existing dwelling. It is considered also that it would improve its visual appearance in the street scene and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Due to the screening on the south eastern boundary, the single storey side extension would not visible from the front. It is therefore considered that despite its proposed flat roof, it would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of the street scene and Conservation Area. No objection raised in terms of Policies GC1, H13(ii), H15, CA1 and CA2.

3. It is considered that the proposal would not be any more detrimental to the amenities of neighbours than as existing. No objection raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4. The application has no implications in terms of parking. No objection raised in terms of Policies TR11 and TR16.

5. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/622/CH

Case Officer: James Chatfield

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham the Hill

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION ON NORTH WEST ELEVATION, REDUCTION IN HEIGHT OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WALL AND INSTALLATION OF RAILINGS AND NEW BOUNDARY WALL AND RAILINGS (AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 00/2162/CH)

Location:

FLINT HOUSE 197-199 WOODSIDE ROAD AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR COLIN BRADSHAW - FINELINE DEVELOPMENTS LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Class A Road

Grade 2 Listed Building

Floor Space

Codes: BU

Proposed (m2): 28

Displaced (m2): 4

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

87/2500/CH Change of use from offices and builders yard to offices with ancillary car park. Approved.

00/2162/CH Single storey extension on north west elevation and reduction in height of northern boundary wall and installation of railings. Approved.

00/2163/CH Listed building consent for 00/2162/CH. Approved.

THE APPLICATION

Scheme is an amendment to planning permission 00/2162/CH. The amendments relate to the provision of a 1m high wall with 0.7m high railings on the north eastern site boundary. The roof of the proposed extension is to be amended resulting in a reduction in the ridge height from 4.6m to 3.7m.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approve.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Building Officer: No objection to the amendments.

County Engineer: No objection subject to condition as in previous application.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, LB1, E4, TR11, and TR16.

ISSUES

1 The proposed alterations to the extensions are of a minor nature and would have no adverse impact on the character of the area or the listed building. The proposed wall would match the element of wall approved under planning permission 00/2162/CH and would not appear visually intrusive or dominant in the street scene. The proposed wall would respect the character of the listed building.

2 Neighbouring residents would not be affected in any way.

3 The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) The entrance gates hereby permitted shall be kept permanently open between the hours of 8 am and 9.30 am Mondays to Fridays.

Reason: In order not to interfere wit the safety and free flow of traffic on the adjoining highway network.

2001/623/CH

Case Officer: James Chatfield

Date Received: 11/04/01 Decide by Date: 05/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham the Hill

App Type: Application for Listed Building Consent

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION ON NORTH WEST ELEVATION AND INTERNAL ALTERATIONS, REDUCTION IN HEIGHT OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WALL AND INTALLATION OF RAILINGS, AND NEW BOUNDARY WALL AND RAILINGS (AMENDMENT TO LISTED BUILDING CONSENT 00/2163/CH)

Location:

FLINT HOUSE 197-199 WOODSIDE ROAD AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR C BRADSHAW - FINELINE DEVELOPMENTS LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Class A Road

Grade 2 Listed Building

For details of the Application, Relevant Planing History and Consultations see report for application 01/622/CH, the concurrent planning application.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approval.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policy: LB1

ISSUES

1 The proposed scheme will not have an adverse effect on the historic character of this listed building.

2 The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C141 Listed Building Consent - Time Limit

(2) C142 Listed Building Consent - List of Works

(3) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(4) C437 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Interior and Exterior

2001/624/CH

Case Officer: Neil Higson

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Amersham - Little Chalfont Ward: Little Chalfont

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

Location:

160 AMERSHAM WAY LITTLE CHALFONT

Applicant: MR & MRS HOFFMEISTER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/876/53 Erection of a Bungalow. Permission granted.

90/1397/CH Alterations and two-storey rear extension. Permission granted.

96/0904/CH Dormer window in front and rear elevations and first floor rear extension.

THE APPLICATION

It is proposed to construct a single storey rear extension filling in the gap between two existing rear projections. It would measure 2.8m wide by 0.9m and have a mono-pitch roof.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approve.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR2, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1) The application site is located within a built up residential area whereby the proposal is acceptable in principle subject to compliance with the relevant policies of the local plan.

2) The style and design of the proposed extension is considered acceptable in terms of relating to the existing dwelling and there will be no material adverse visual impact upon neighbouring dwellings. It is considered that the proposed extensions would not appear cramped or incongruous in the street scene being on the rear of the property. It is considered that the proposal therefore meets the requirements of GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, and H17.

3) The extensions would respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling in relation to neighbouring properties and would not be out of character with the surrounding area.

4) The site currently enjoys parking for three vehicles. No objection under Policies TR11 and TR16.

5) The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/626/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont Common

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SIDE/REAR CONSERVATORY

Location:

MISTRAL MISBOURNE AVENUE CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: MR & MRS M MOSLEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

93/1046/CH Demolish existing house and erect six detached houses and double garages, four served by access from Ridgemount End and two served by access from Misbourne Avenue. Conditional Permission.

THE APPLICATION

A side rear conservatory that is 7.2m long and 3m wide. 2.3m of the side of the structure will be attached to the existing single storey side portion of the property. The roof will be fully glazed to a hipped pitch at 3.5m, while only the front and garden facing flank will have windows.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:

Proposal would involve loss of several trees;

Two Prunus about 8m high; in fairly poor condition with deadwood present’

Some holly an privet,

Large dead spruce just outside fence’

Several cypresses in poor condition.

All trees involved of poor quality, however removal would open up views of property from Ridgemount End. No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The conservatory will form a rear side projection to a large modern detached house in the built up area of Chalfont St. Peter, where its proportions will be subordinate to the existing mass of the property.

2. The trees to the rear side of the property will need to be removed to make way for the development. The District Forestry and Landscape Officer feels these are not of any particular quality worth preserving and as such only provides landscaping to the corner of Ridgemount End. As such it is felt that the loss of the trees would not be to the detriment of the appearance of the neighbourhood and their replacement by a 2.5m brick wall capped by a glazed roof would be an acceptable development in this location.

3. The conservatory could not be seen to enclose this open planned corner of Ridgemount End, and the expanse of lawn left remaining to the side will satisfy Local Plan policy H17, preserving the spacious detached character of the area. The structure does however project beyond the side of the house and the front of the rear detached side-facing garage, but in doing so follows the stepped massing of the footprints of structures along the north east side of Ridgemount End. Furthermore the street facing flank wall will be approximately in line with where the current 1.8m close board fence currently stands.

4. The double garage unit and ample driveway leading to it fully comply with Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

5. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/629/CH

Case Officer: Neil Higson

Date Received: 12/04/01 Decide by Date: 06/06/01

Parish: Amersham - Little Chalfont Ward: Little Chalfont

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AT FRONT OF PROPERTY

Location:

THE PURSEYS KENWAY DRIVE LITTLE CHALFONT

Applicant: P EVANS ESQ

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/1925/CH Roof extension to provide two-storey dwelling, two-storey side extension and detached double garage and alterations to access. Refused.

00/0347/CH Roof extension to provide two storey dwelling, two storey side extension, detached double garage and alterations to access. Refused.

00/1133/CH Detached double garage, single storey side extension and first floor extension to provide two-storey dwelling. Refused, subsequent Appeal split decision. Dismissed with regard to the garage only.

THE APPLICATION

It is proposed to construct a new detached double garage measuring 5.6m wide by 5.6m deep with a ridge height of 4m which is intended to be sited in the far north-east corner of the front garden. The existing access point is to be slightly re-sited. Re-submission following appeal.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approval.

CONSULTATIONS

London Underground – no objection subject to the building being the required 3m form the boundary.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H20, TR2, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

The previous application for extensions and alterations to the dwelling along with the erection of a double garage was refused and subsequently considered on appeal. The Inspector concluded that the extensions and alterations where acceptable but that the garage being sited only 1m from the boundary with London Underground had implications for safety and dismissed that part of the appeal relating to the garage. This application now seeks permission for the solely the garage which has been re-sited a minimum of 3m from the boundary as requested by London Underground.

The revised siting of the double garage would not adversely affect the street scene or the amenities of neighbouring residents and is considered satisfactory. Three vehicles can be parked within the curtilage of the property no objection under Policies H20, TR11 or TR16.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C196 Ancillary residential buildings at The Purseys - garage

(3) C306 Garage Not to be Converted to be Part of Dwelling

(4) C433 Materials - General Details

2001/634/CH

Case Officer: Iwan Jones

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham Town

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

Location:

4 QUEENS HEAD COTTAGES WHIELDEN GATE WINCHMORE HILL

Applicant: MR E F GARRICKS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class A Road

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/1563/70: Additions to 4 cottages and 4 garages. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a rear extension, infilling the south western corner of the property. It would measure 2.8m wide, 3.7m deep and to a hipped roof height of 3.3m. A glazed frame measuring 0.8m wide, 1.7m deep and 0.9m high would be built on top of the extension abuting with the existing dwelling. The extension would not project beyond the existing rear elevation or the existing south western flank elevation. All external materials would match those of the existing dwelling. From planning records, it appears that the floorspace of the original house measured 77.6sq m with an extension measuring 35.8sq m subsequently built. This represents a 46% increase over the original gross floor area. The net increase in floorspace of the proposed extension is 9.4sq m, which would represent an increase of 58%, including the previous extension, over and above the floorspace of the original dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, GB13, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application site is located in the open Green Belt where domestic extensions may be permissible providing that they are subordinate in size and scale to the original dwelling, are not intrusive in the landscape and maintain the openness of the Green Belt location. It is also located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2. The application site is located within the open Green Belt. The main issue for consideration therefore, is whether the proposed extension is acceptable in relation to Policy GB13 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan. The floorspace of the original dwelling measured 77sq m. This figure was increased by about 36sq m through the construction of a two storey rear extension, constituting a floorspace increase of 46% over and above the original. This current proposal represents a floorspace increase of 9sq m, an increase of 58% over and above the original gross floor area. The proposal would infill the south western corner of the dwelling and having regard to the small additional floor area that is proposed the extension is not considered objectionable in relation to Policy GB13(a). Having regard to the siting of the extension it would not be intrusive in the landscape. No objections are raised in relation to Policies GB13(b) and LSQ1.

3. As the site is an end of terrace property, and as the extension would not extend beyond the existing rear elevation, the proposal would not have impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties. No objections in terms of Policies GC3, H13 and H14.

4. No objections are raised in terms of the design of the proposal in relation to the existing dwelling. The external materials would also match the existing. No objections in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5. Ample parking space exists within the curtilage of the dwelling, and no objections are raised in relation to Policies TR11 and TR16.

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/638/CH

Case Officer: Iwan Jones

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Peter Ward: Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SIDE CONSERVATORY AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION WITH BALCONY OVER

Location:

PINEWOOD SANDY RISE CHALFONT ST. PETER

Applicant: RICHARD KINSEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

86/1168/CH: Single storey rear extension over raised patio area. Conditional permission.

94/1385/CH: Erection of chimney on western elevation. Conditional permission.

00/1478/CH: First floor rear extension and detached garage with covered link to dwelling. Conditional permission. Not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a conservatory to the western side flank elevation and a single storey rear extension. The conservatory would measure 3.3m wide and 6.9m deep, being flush with the existing rear elevation. It would have a lean-to roof height of 3.1m. The single storey rear extension would infill the north eastern part of the dwelling and would not extend the built form of the existing dwelling. It would measure 4.5m wide, 5.8m deep and to a flat roof height of 2.4m. A balcony is proposed on top of the flat roof. The proposed external materials have not been indicated on the submitted plan.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of concern has been received, submitting the following comments:

1. The house keeps getting bigger and bigger in an area of supposedly low density housing with reasonable sized gardens.

2. The development involves cutting away some of the bank surrounding the house which proves that there is not enough room for the extra extension.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application site is located within the built up area of Chalfont St Peter where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2. The single storey extension would infill the rear north eastern part of the property. The conservatory would be setback 5.5m from the front elevation and would not project beyond the existing rear elevation. Although the construction of the rear extension would involve cutting away some of the bank, the built from of the property would not be extended and the size of the garden would not significantly reduced in relation to the amount of garden area that would remain. It is considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the appearance of the street scene. No objections raised in terms of Policy H13(ii).

3. The site is well screened by dense tall trees to the rear and to the east of the site. Consequently, the single storey rear extension would not be visible from any neighbouring property. Although the conservatory would be built up to 0.5m of the western boundary and would have windows all along its western flank elevation, the boundary is well screened by a solid row of 4m high conifers. Consequently, it is considered that no overlooking would occur into the neighbouring property’s (The Bluff) rear garden. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4. The scale, height and design of the proposed conservatory is considered to be acceptable in relation to the existing dwelling. Although the flat roof of the proposed single storey is not considered to be ideal, it would not be visible from any direction due its siting and screening. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed balcony on top of the flat roof would soften its prominence. No objection raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5. Sufficient parking space is provided at the site, therefore compliance with Policies TR11 and TR16 is achieved.

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/639/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Chalfont St Giles Ward: Chalfont St Giles

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION

Location:

THE FINCHES MILL LANE CHALFONT ST. GILES

Applicant: DR AND MRS M W FOXTON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Adjoining Green Belt

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

92/1285/CH Rear conservatory. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

A single storey rear side extension projecting 4.6m from the rear right-hand side of the property (which it overlaps by 1m). This part is 3.45m wide with a gabled roof at 4m high. The extension continues down the side of the property for 3.3m before stepping in by 0.25m terminating flush with the front elevation (total length 11.5m).

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Two letters from neighbouring residents both raising no objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application seeks approval for a single storey side extension in the built up area of Chalfont St. Giles, where it is stepped along the southern boundary, catering for the splayed formation of the land. The project complies with Local Plan Policy H17 abutting a 1.5 to 1.8m boundary fence, with only an obscured glazed window on the flank of ‘Westways’ 2.5 to 3m away overlooking it. The single storey rear extension of this neighbour, although not to the same depth as that proposed, will brings ground floor windows back further so as to be less affected by this extension, As such the proposal satisfies Policies GC3, H13 and H14 of the Local Plan.

2. The existing conservatory towards the northern rear boundary obscures neighbours at the ‘Dell House’ from gaining view of the structure from their immediate rear private amenity space. A 1.5m rear hedge and select trees to the garden will ensure no part of the structure will appear prominent in the greenbelt beyond.

3. The extension appears very small scale and subordinate on the front elevation of the property, and is landscaped by 1.5 to 2m mixed hedging round the front boundary. In accordance with Policy GC1 and H15, the application is an acceptable addition to the property and street scene.

4. The existing single integral garage and driveway leading to it cater for the required off street car parking spaces under Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

5. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174 No additional windows in south elevation of extension

2001/640/CH

Case Officer: Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham Town

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

REPLACEMENT DETACHED GARAGE AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

Location:

31 HIGHMOOR AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR AND MRS WILLIAMS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/253/57 Garage – permitted development.

CH/39/79

Single storey kitchen and breakfast area, double garage, approved but not implemented.

CH/1590/79

Single storey front extension to lounge and kitchen, approved.

93/1134/CH

Alterations, part two-storey, part single storey side extension incorporating garage, approved but not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

1. The replacement detached garage would have a floor area of 2.925m by 6.125m, an eaves height of 2.4m with a pitched roof over to a height of 3.9m.

2. The single storey side extension would be 5.025m deep and would project to the side of the existing dwelling by 2.4m. This would have an eaves height of 2.5m with a pitched roof over meeting the main dwelling at a height of approximately 1m below eaves height when viewed from the front elevation.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

Three letters from neighbours –

1. No objections to the works proposed, we would welcome any improvements on that site.

2. The existing garage and porch have become very decrepit and this work will improve the appearance of the immediate neighbourhood.

3. I would like to draw your attention to the uncertainty over the exact location of the boundary between 31 Highmoor and the public footpath at the side of the plot. I believe that a previous owner moved the fence approximately 1m sideways onto the public footpath. This needs to be clarified and suggest that the proposed garage be positioned in such a way that it does not encroach on to land that may be a public footpath.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, H20, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The design of the garage and the extension are not considered to be out of keeping with the existing dwelling and should not be intrusive in the street scene. No objections under Policies GC1, H13, H15, H17 and H20.

2. It is not considered that any adverse impact upon the neighbouring properties would occur. The comments of the neighbour regarding the boundary are noted, although the applicant has signed ‘Certificate A’ stating that they own all the land to which the application relates, an informative on the decision notice shall bring this matter to their attention. No objections under Policies GC2, GC3, H13 and H14.

3. The proposed garage together with the driveway are sufficient to comply with Policies TR11 and TR16.

4. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C196 Ancillary residential buildings at 31 Highmoor - garage

(1) INFORMATIVE - It has been brought to the attention of the Council that the exact location of the boundary between the footpath and the curtilage of your property, as shown on the submitted plans, may not be accurate. The applicant should be aware that this permission does not permit any development to take place on land outside the ownership of the applicant and outside the curtilage of 31 Highmoor, Amersham.

2001/641/CH

Case Officer: Thomas Gabriel

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Great Missenden - Prestwood Ward: Prestwood

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

PART TWO STOREY, PART FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSION AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION INCORPORATING GARAGE

Location:

15 CHEQUERS LANE PRESTWOOD

Applicant: MR AND MRS R MARRIOTT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

ELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/58/81 Single storey extensions at side and rear. Conditional permission – implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a part two storey/ part first floor rear extension and a single storey side extension incorporating a garage. The ground floor element of the rear extension is to measure 1.45m by 2m. The first floor element is to measure 3.5m by 4.9m with a pitched roof equalling the height of the existing roof of 6.4m. The first floor element is to incorporate side extensions, either end, to the existing rear dormer window, measuring approximately 400mm by 2.1m, incorporating it into the new roof. The side extension to the dwelling, incorporating the garage, is to measure between 2.1m and 4m wide and 3m high to the top of the dummy pitch roof.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application site is located within the built up area of Prestwood where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2. The ground floor element of the rear extension raises no issues. No objections are raised to it.

3. The first floor element of the rear extension is to be sited approximately 3m from the boundary with the neighbouring dwelling, no.17 Chequers Lane. The corresponding flank elevation of no.17 has no windows in it at first floor level (the two at ground floor level are secondary windows: there is to be a window, serving a landing area, in the first floor flank elevation of an extension currently under construction at no.17, which will be approximately 9m from the flank elevation of the proposed extension at no.15). It is not considered that the first floor extension will have an adverse impact upon no.17 Chequers Lane, nor is it considered that the proposed bathroom window in the flank elevation at first floor level will result in a significant loss of privacy for that dwelling. The extension will not have an overbearing impact for the other neighbouring or nearby properties, either. The degree of overlooking to the rear garden of no.33 The Glebe will alter slightly as a result of the proposed extension, though there will not be a significant loss of privacy for the occupiers of that dwelling. The extension will relate to the existing dwelling in a satisfactory manner. No objections are raised to the first floor extension.

4. The single storey extension, incorporating the garage, will not impact upon the adjacent properties. It will not detract from the appearance of the dwelling or that of the street scene. It will not be visually intrusive. No objections are raised to it.

5. Located within the built up area of Prestwood, the proposed extensions will not detract from the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. No objections are raised in terms of Policy LSQ1.

6. The floorspace of the dwelling already exceeds 120sq. m. No objections are raised in terms of Policies TR11 or TR16.

7. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174A No additional windows in first floor of north elevation of extension.

(4) This permission shall relate to the submitted application form and plan as subsequently part amended by Plan Nos. RM1A and RM1B received by the Local Planning Authority on 4 May 2001.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what is permitted and because you have so agreed in writing.

2001/642/CH

Case Officer: Thomas Gabriel

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Chesham Ward: Lowndes

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION INCORPORATING GARAGE, TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION AND REAR CONSERVATORY

Location:

70 BERKELEY AVENUE CHESHAM

Applicant: MR A AND MRS A M ALEXANDER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

00/1292/CH Part two storey/ part single storey side/ rear extensions incorporating replacement garage and conservatory. Refused – by virtue of the height, depth and resultant bulk, the proposed extension would appear overbearing and visually intrusive when viewed from the neighbouring dwelling, no.68 Berkeley Avenue. Detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of that dwelling.

00/2029/CH Part single storey/ part two storey side/ rear extensions incorporating a replacement garage and conservatory. Conditional permission – not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a single storey side extension incorporating a garage, a two storey side/ rear extension and a rear conservatory. The single storey element of the side extension is to measure 3.1m wide and 5.55m deep and 3.75m high to the top of the pitched roof. The two storey element of the side extension is to measure 2.4m by 2m. The two storey element of the rear extension is to measure 3.97m by 4.55m and 6.6m high to the top of the pitched roof. The rear conservatory is to measure 2.3m by 3.4m and 3m high with a gently sloping roof. The side/ rear extension is to incorporate a side dormer window 1.3m wide with a pitched roof, 2m high.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17, H18, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policy GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application site is located within the built up area of Chesham where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle, subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2. The principle of this extension has been established by the granting of the previous application, ref. 00/2029/CH. The point to consider is whether the proposed alterations to the scheme raise new issues.

3. The current application differs from the previous one in that the roof over the garage is to have a pitched roof, 3.75m high, in place of a sloping roof, 4.4m high, where it joins the side of the existing dwelling. The dimensions of the extension have also been slightly altered. The single storey side element is to be approximately 200mm wider at 3.1m wide and approximately 100mm shorter at 5.55m deep. The two storey element of the extension is to be approximately 200mm wider at 4.55m wide and the same depth at 4m. The dormer window in the current application is to be approximately 150mm wider at 1.3m wide and approximately 200mm higher to the top of the pitched roof. There is also to be an additional window in the south east elevation of the dwelling, measuring 600mm x 1.2m, serving a landing.

4. It is not considered that the alterations to the proposed development will have any greater impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling, no.68 Berkeley Avenue. The new proposal will not appear any more overbearing or visually intrusive, or will result in any additional loss of light than the previous application on the site. The impact of the extension upon the other neighbouring dwelling, no.72 Berkeley Avenue will not alter from the previous approval. Subject to the use of a condition requiring the use of obscure glazing in the first floor window in the north west elevation and the dormer window and first floor window in the south east elevation, no objections are raised in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy. The dormer window is considered to of an appropriate size and scale for the roofslope into which it is to be inserted. The proposed extension will relate to the existing dwelling in a satisfactory manner. No objections are raised in terms of Policies GC2, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17 or H18.

5. Once the extension has been constructed, it will be possible to park three cars within the curtilage of the dwelling. No objections are raised in terms of Policies TR11 or TR16.

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

(3) Before any construction work commences, named types or samples of the roofing materials to be used in the construction of the rear roof of the garage of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the development is not detrimental to the charcter of the locality.

(4) C174A No additional windows in first floor of north west or south east elevation of extension.

(5) C178 Obscure glass in first floor window in NW elevation and dormer and window in SE elevation

(6) The dormer window in the south east elevation of the development hereby permitted shall be fixed shut except for the top opening light.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining property.

(7) C134 Single plan amended by plan (no REC. J. L A 1/2) received on 21 May 2001

2001/647/CH

Case Officer: Andrew Fuller

Date Received: 17/04/01 Decide by Date: 11/06/01

Parish: Amersham Ward: Amersham Common

App Type: Full application

Proposal:

SINGLE STOREY FRONT/SIDE/REAR EXTENSION

Location:

79 HUNDRED ACRES LANE AMERSHAM

Applicant: MR AND MRS P OWENS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Public Footpath/Bridleway

THE APPLICATION

A single storey front/side/rear extension with 3.5m high fake hipped pitched roof all round. The structure is 3m wide and 9.9m long of which 1.5m projects to the rear (overlapping the property by 0.3m) while 1m projects to the front (overlapping the property by 2.2m).

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

CONSULTATIONS

Open Spaces Society:

I have not been able to get to see the full plans of this proposal but have been able to view the site and I have come to the conclusion that, given the present surroundings of the path FP65, a single storey extension would not greatly affect the amenity. However, I do feel that the house density would be considerably increased by this extension.

The Chiltern society:

I visited the site today on behalf of the Rights of Way Group of the Chiltern Society. Providing the footpath A65 is kept clear of building materials and equipment, at all times whilst the building work is in progress, I have no objections to this planning application.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1. The application seeks approval for an extension to the side of a property in Amersham Common, following the style of development along this section of Hundred Acres Lane, which has been set by precedents at No. 75, 77 and several other properties in the vicinity. Single storey side extensions to these semi-detached properties are often to the boundary, but do not appear to overdevelop or cramp the appearance of the street scene. As such the extension under determination is in compliance with Local Plan Policy GC1, H15 and H17.

2. Although hedging to the south west boundary will be lost, it will not be to the detriment of the area.

3. To the south west boundary of the property is public footpath No. 65 to which the flank will run adjacent but not affect. This provides adequate distance to space the proposal from neighbours at No. 81, who only have first floor obscured windows overlooking the development site. As such the proposal is not contrary to Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14.

4. The loss of the garage and the parking space to the side of the property will leave the property with three car parking spaces on the gravel forecourt, which is necessary as the property is expanding its habitable floorspace from under to over 120sq.m.

5. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C402 Landscaping - removal of part of hedge on south west boundary

(4) C454 Parking as specified on plan no. 010409 received on 17/04/01

2001/651/CH

Could not find officer report N:\apps\Fast_Plan\Application Report\20010651CH.doc

End of Report

Meeting documents

CDC Delegated Planning Application ReportsFriday, 1st June, 2001

CDC Delegated Planning Application Reports
Friday, 1st June, 2001