Meeting documents

2001/766/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     30/04/01     Decide by Date:     24/06/01

Parish:     Little Missenden     Ward:     Little Missenden

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

Applicant:      MR & MRS O'LEARY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Amersham Rural District Council (Little Kingshill) Tree Preservation Order No 8 - 1971, covering 11 individual trees and an area of trees in Windsor Lane, Little Kingshill.

THE APPLICATION

Lopping and crown reduction of three beech trees, a sycamore and an oak.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve, subject to the approval of the Forestry Officer.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Reason for application is removal of dead branches for safety reasons and reduction of unbalanced boughs and top.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Three large old beech trees in line in field – mature trees about 25m high - beginning to decline in health – deadwood present – long side branches – some branches broken off – one tree with extensive damage at based – may have been caused by horses on site many years ago – proposed crown reduction would reduce risk of further branch breakage.

Large sycamore and oak in strip of trees at edge of site – both mature and at risk of losing limbs – proposed reduction considered reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The five trees are set back from Windsor Lane and would only be visible in distant views across the valley.

2.     The trees are all large mature trees at risk of losing branches and the proposed crown reduction 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 and re-shaping by 30%.

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                                                 

2001/767/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     03/05/01     Decide by Date:     27/06/01

Parish:     Little Missenden     Ward:     Little Missenden

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

Applicant:      N J HARWOOD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB5

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Bucks County Council (Amersham Rural District) Tree Preservation Order No 4 - 1957 covering an area of trees between Nags Head Lane and New Road, Little Kingshill.

87/3464/CH     Demolition of Newlyn and Pecalan, construction of new access drive and erection of five detached dwellings an garages. Conditional permission.

01/0107/CH     Side/rear extension. Conditional permission.

Nearby properties:

94/1569/CH     Felling of two Scots pines. (3 Deermead). Conditional permission.

95/0049/CH     Felling of three pine trees. (2 Deermead). Conditional permission.

96/0174/CH     Crown lifting of two Scots pines. (4 Deermead). Conditional permission.

99/1847/CH     Felling of three pines and lopping of a pine. (2 Deermead). Conditional permission.

00/1101/CH     Two detached dwellings each with detached double garage and new access from Pines Close. (Land adjacent to 5 Pines Close). Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Felling of two ash trees and a cherry tree.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve subject to the approval of the Arboricultural Officer.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Reason for application is to give house more light and allow pine trees room – note pines are the largest and most shapely trees in the preserved area – propose replacing one ash with Robinia pseudoacacia, replacing one ash with Acer brilliantissimum and replacing cherry with Prunus ‘Kanzan’.

One letter of objection from property in Nags Head Lane disturbed that developers must have been aware of TPO at time of building application but now suddenly feel application may stand a chance after erection of properties is nearing completion. [NB letter appears to assume that application is by developer rather than adjacent property].

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Strip of trees along rear boundary of rear gardens of new houses – understand land recently purchased by owners of new houses – land at top of sloping gardens – contains variety of species but mainly Scots pines.

Owner of No 5 proposes to remove other species to favour pines – pines fairly tall and generally in reasonable condition – both ashes smaller and suppressed – one twin-stemmed, the other leaning and poorly shaped – cherry better tree but smaller with one-sided crown growth on edge of strip – little visibility from public viewpoints – proposed replacement trees are smaller ornamental trees appropriate for garden.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The trees are situated in the rear garden with limited visibility from public viewpoints.

2.     The two ashes are poor suppressed trees and while the cherry is slightly better it is still not considered to be an important tree. The proposal to remove and replace the trees 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) An acacia (Robinia pseudoacacia), a variegated sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus 'brilliantissimum') and a Japanese cherry (Prunus serrulata 'Kanzan') of at least standard size shall be planted in the rear garden of the property not later than the end of the first planting season following the date of implementation this consent and shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the provisions of the existing Tree Preservation Order unless any variation to this requirement has previously been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to maintain the special character of the area, which was the reason for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE - I213 Quality of Tree Work                                                        

2001/768/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     03/05/01     Decide by Date:     27/06/01

Parish:     Seer Green     Ward:     Seer Green & Jordans

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

Applicant:      MR & MRS A J WOODGER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Amenity Open Space - Not Public

Unclassified road

B.B.O.N.T. Nature Reserve

Biological Notification site

Tree Preservation Order

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Bucks County Council (Amersham Rural District) Tree Preservation Order No 7 - 1961 covering a woodland at the rear of Long Grove, Seer Green.

98/0283/CH     Crown reduction of an oak tree. Conditional permission.

98/0284/CH     Lopping of an oak tree. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Felling of two oaks, an ash and a beech.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     The trunks are leaning towards our house and the garden with branches overhanging well over the fence and dead branches littering our garden representing a hazard for human – no replanting discussed with BBONT but young trees growing under.

One letter of support from adjacent property commenting that trees directly affect property especially as one hangs over garage and insurance company will not pay for any repairs.

One letter from a neighbour objecting as the trees were there when the property was purchased and if the buyers objected they should not have moved in.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Trees along edge of woodland adjacent to property boundary – woodland is nature reserve consisting largely of coppiced beech and classified as amenity open space.

Oak – previous reduction under 98/0283/CH – small tree growing at angle towards house.

Oak – previously lopped under 98/0284/CH – fairly poor tree.

Ash – large multi-stemmed tree of coppice origin – one stem previously removed.

Beech – large multi-stemmed tree – possibly developed from laid hedge.

Oaks closer to dwelling but ash and beech causing more shading – trees on southern side of fairly small garden – removal of trees would have limited visual impact as other trees behind in woodland – would have effect of moving tree canopy slightly further back and allowing development of more natural lower woodland edge – would allow development of hazel coppice and other growth currently under canopy of trees – woodland has been traditionally managed by coppicing and coppicing of these trees would be an appropriate continuation of this process.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The trees are partially visible from the surrounding roads and also from within the woodland, which is open to the public.

2.     The felling of these trees would result in some loss of amenity but would have a limited visual impact as there are other trees behind in the woodland. It would also allow the development of a more natural woodland edge and if the trees were coppiced would be a continuation of the traditional form of management in 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 two oaks, the ash and the beech, whose felling has been hereby approved, shall be cut so as to leave coppice stools that shall be allowed to re-grow as coppice.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the special character of the area, which was the reason for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE - You are reminded that this consent relates only to the planning aspects of your application and that the separate permission of the owners of the trees would be required for any work beyond your boundary.

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

2001/772/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     01/05/01     Decide by Date:     25/06/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

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

Applicant:      MR RONALD COPPLEMAN

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

Mineral Consultation Area

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Chiltern District Council (Land at Hillcrest, Misbourne Avenue, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1998 (No 28 of 1998) covering five individual trees.

99/1960/CH     Detached house and detached double garage served by driveway from existing access and single storey side/rear extension to Madselin. Conditional permission.

00/1508/CH     Trimming of branch of oak tree overhanging 49 Foxdell Way, Chalfont St Peter. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Crown lifting of oak tree by removing at source primary and secondary branches as necessary to give a clear stem height of approximately 4m.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s advice.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     I wish to maximise the amount of light into the garden by creating an area of open sky, which will thus enable me to do this. Copy of tree surgeon’s estimate attached.

Letter of objection from 55 Foxdell Way making the following points:

a) Did not object to new house as tree offered limited protection

b) Developers aware of restrictions when built house and unreasonable to expect change.

c) New house looks directly into several rooms of house.

d) Removal of branches would make house even more exposed.

e) Deciduous tree so only gives dappled cover and cannot make new dwelling any darker in winter.

f) Few trees in area and further loss of trees or parts of trees must be detrimental to environment.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Oak tree in corner of plot of recently completed house – overhangs garden of 7 Ridgemount End – rear garden fairly small and heavily shaded – some small lower branches below 4m – removal would have little effect on appearance of tree – unlikely to effect 55 Foxdell Way as over 40m between houses and other branches would provide screening with change in levels.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The oak tree is situated in the rear corner of plot in which the new house has been built and is partially visible from surrounding public viewpoints.

2.     The proposed crown lifting is fairly minor in nature and would not have a significant effect on the appearance of the tree.

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 lifting, by the removal of lower branches, to a height of four metres.

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 - You are reminded that this consent relates only to the planning aspects of your application and that the separate permission of the relevant landowners would be required for any work beyond your boundary.

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

(3) INFORMATIVE - I211 Tree Work - Branch Removal                                                  

(4) INFORMATIVE - You are advised that the oak tree in the middle of your rear garden and the oak tree just beyond the northern corner of your rear garden are not protected by a Tree Preservation Order and are not subject to any other form of protection so the permission of the Local Planning Authority would not be required for work to these trees.

2001/791/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     08-May-01     Decide by Date:     02-Jul-01

Parish:     Little Missenden - Holmer Green     Ward:     Holmer Green

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR & MRS S BESANT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Adjoining Green Belt

Unclassified road

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a replacement front porch and erection of a single storey side/ rear extension. The replacement front porch is to measure 1.2m by 2.65m and 4m high to the top of the pitched roof. The side/ rear extension is to comprise two elements. The first, immediately to the rear of the existing garage adjacent to the boundary with no.40 Hogg Lane, is to measure 5.1m wide and 6.5m deep. The second element is to be sited 1.85m from the boundary with no.40 Hogg Lane. It is to measure 4.4m wide and 5.1m deep. The pitched roof above both elements is to be level and is to be up to 5.1m above ground level (the ground slopes slightly to the rear).

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

1 facsimile transmission received from the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling, no.40 Hogg Lane, objecting on the following grounds:

The proposed works represent a major reconstruction of the property, nearly doubling its size, and not just an extension.

The extension will block out much light to the neighbouring property.

It will result in the loss of view from the kitchen window, which will cause great distress.

The extension comes too close to the neighbouring property, and raises issues of loss of privacy.

The front extension breaks the front building line, would be unsightly and would restrict light to the entrance of the garage.

The extension would result in the diminution of the value of the neighbouring property.

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

2.     The replacement front porch will not impact upon the neighbouring dwellings, will not detract from the street scene and will relate to the dwelling in a satisfactory manner. No objections are to it.

3.     The element of the rear extension adjacent to the boundary with no.40 is to be 6.5m deep, adjacent to a garage and small lounge area in no.40. The roof of the extension is to pitch away from no.40. It is not considered that it will be detrimental to the residential amenities of, or appear overbearing when viewed from, that dwelling. The rear element of the rear extension is to be set off the boundary with no.40 by 1.85m and is to be sunk into the ground by approximately 900mm. The roof of this element is also to pitch away from no.40. It is not considered that this element of the extension will impact upon no.40 in an adverse manner, either. The rear extension will not impact upon no.36 Hogg Lane in an adverse manner. It will not represent overdevelopment of the site and will respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling. No objections are raised to it.

4.     It is not considered that there will be a significant loss of privacy for the occupiers of no.40 by virtue of the boundary treatment. Overlooking to the rear conservatory and private amenity space of no.36 from the flank window of the rear extension will be possible. However, raising the height of the fence on the boundary between the two properties to 2.2m will be sufficient to prevent this overlooking. A condition can be used to ensure this.  

5.     Three parking spaces exist 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) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) Before the development hereby permitted is begun, a means of enclosure 2m high and 2.3m long shall be constructed on the boundary between nos. 36 and 38 Hogg Lane, adjacent to the decking area, as shown on plan no.1262/03 received by the Local Planning Authority on 8 May 2001. Furthermore, a means of enclosure 2m high and 1.7m long shall also be constructed on the boundary between nos. 36 and 38 Hogg Lane, at the lower ground level as shown on plan no.1262/03, such that the means of enclosure shall have a total overall length of 4m. Details of the proposed means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development on the site.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the adjacent property.

2001/801/CH

Case Officer:      Ray Martin

Date Received:     10/05/01     Decide by Date:     04/07/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham Town

App Type:     Application under Advertisement Regulations

Applicant:      TESCO STORES LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Adjoining Green Belt

Shopping area - not Principal Shopping Frontage

River Chess & River Misbourne - area liable to flood

Traffic calming scheme for Amersham Old Town

Class A Road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

89/2364/CH  Five internally illuminated signs affixed to building and one free standing internally illuminated sign at site entrance.  Conditional consent, implemented.

92/1174/CH  Two internally illuminated 5m high goal post signs, two internally illuminated 'Tesco' signs on petrol station kiosk and front south elevation of main store.  Conditional consent, implemented.

96/0178/CH  Two replacement internally illuminated 5 metre high gantry signs and replacement internally illuminated fascia signs at petrol station.  Four replacement internally illuminated signs on superstore.  Conditional consent, replacing signage approved under 92/1174/CH, implemented.

98/1229/CH  Internally illuminated signs comprising three free standing signs, two wall mounted signs and three flagpoles each with sign attached to pole.  Withdrawn.

98/1444/CH  Retention of one and erection of three non-illuminated signs.  Conditional Consent.

98/1600/CH  Three internally illuminated 4m high pole mounted signs in car park.  Refused, signs by reason of height and internal illumination considered excessive and unnecessarily intrusive within the street scene and surrounding area to detriment of visual amenity of area.

98/1601/CH  Three internally illuminated freestanding signs and two internally illuminated mounted signs.  Conditional consent, implemented.

01/0502/CH  Three six metre high internally illuminated double sided gantry signs and 40 non-illuminated parking/filling station/pedestrian crossing signs.  Withdrawn.

THE APPLICATION

Proposal comprises various advertisements relating to the Tesco store and petrol filling station.  The only completely new sign is that proposed over the main entrance to the store on the roof slope about 5 metres above ground level.  This would be a non-illumination name sign 3.3 metres wide and 1 metre high.  The only illuminated sign proposed is a gantry sign in relation to the petrol filling station adjacent to the entrance to the site from the roundabout.  This sign would be 5 metres high and 2.2 metres wide and is internally illuminated.  It would replace an existing internally illuminated gantry sign of the same height in the same location.  All the following signs are non-illuminated.  Three replacement car park signs are proposed that would be 1.4 metres wide, 1 metre high affixed to posts making their overall height 2.5 metres.  Three signs of similar dimensions are also proposed in relation to both disabled parking facilities and baby club parking facilities.  A further 42 smaller signs measuring 0.4 by 0.4 metres is located by these parking spaces mounted on poles making their overall height 1.5 metres.  All of these signs are replacements for existing signs.  Further signage is proposed in relation to pedestrian crossings and directional signs for traffic accessing the petrol filling station, together with signs on the pump islands.  These too are replacements for existing signs.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.  However, note that provision for pedestrian shoppers totally ignored.  Pedestrians accessing site from Station Road, London Road and Gore Hill are obliged to negotiate site traffic.  Members would like to see pedestrian crossing across main entrance and footways between parking lanes

CONSULTATIONS

County Highway Engineer: No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies A1, A2, GC3.

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 comprises a commercial premises within the built-up area of Amersham where there is already some illuminated and non-illuminated signage.  Therefore, there is no objection in principle to signs at this premises provided they are not visually intrusive or prejudicial to safety considerations.

2.     The only proposed illuminated sign is the gantry sign relating to the petrol filling station.  This is located in a prominent position at the entrance to the site, but in that it replaces an existing sign, also illuminated, of the same height and in the same location, it is not considered that this would be intrusive or detrimental to safety considerations.

3.     The only completely new sign is the name sign above the main entrance to the store.  This is of a scale, proportions and detail in keeping with the building to which it relates.  It would not be unduly prominent and therefore is not objectionable.

4.     All other signs are modest in dimensions and replace existing authorised signage.  Thus, no objections are raised in respect of these elements of the proposal.

5.     The site is well clear of neighbouring residential properties and accordingly, it is not considered that the proposals would adversely affect the amenities of the occupiers of these properties.

6.     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) C118 5 Year Limited Period - Adverts

(2) C261 Standard Advert Conditions

(3) C985 Luminance Of gantry Sign Not To Exceed 400 cd/sq.m.

2001/806/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     11/05/01     Decide by Date:     05/07/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Application for Listed Building Consent

Applicant:      MRS BARBARA COOPER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Penn & Tylers Green Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Class B Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Archaeological site

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

2000/1223/CH  LBC – single storey rear extension.  Granted.  Not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for an amendment to Listed Building Consent (00/1223/CH) for a proposed extension to a Grade II Listed Building.  The proposed extension measures 3m wide x 3.9m deep, with a pitched roof 3.3m high; as oppose to the previous application which had a slightly smaller footprint.  There has also been an alteration to the windows in the front elevation, with three windows and a door proposed, as oppose to five full length windows.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comment.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer: No objection.

POLICIES

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

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

ISSUES

1.     The application concerns Grade II Listed Building.  The principle of a single storey rear extension in this location has been established by the grant of Listed Building Consent under 00/1223/CH.  The only issue for consideration is whether the increase in size of the extension would be detrimental to the character of the listed building.

2.     The proposed extension will not have an adverse impact on the character of the Listed Building.  No objections are raised in terms of Policy HE1 of the Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan, 1991, or Policy LB1 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan, 1997.

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) C141 Listed Building Consent - Time Limit

(2) C142 Listed Building Consent - List of Works

(3) The materials to be used in the external construction of the development hereby permitted shall match the size, colour and texture of those of the existing building.  This shall include the use of handmade plain clay roofing tiles.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the enlarged building is not detrimental to the character of the locality.

2001/818/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     14/05/01     Decide by Date:     08/07/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Coleshill & Penn Street

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS WATSON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Penn Street Conservation Area

Green Belt settlement GB4

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the enlargement of the existing vehicular access where the splay would be widened.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comments.

CONSULTATIONS

District Highways Engineer: No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GB2, GB4, GB12, LSQ1, TR2, CA1 and CA2.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within a GB4 area as defined by the proposals map of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 and within a designated Conservation Area where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     As there is an existing vehicular access already present and that it is not going to be significantly widened, it is not considered that it be would visually intrusive or detrimental to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.   No objections raised in terms of Policies CA1 and CA2.

3.     The District Highways Engineer raises no objection to the proposal. No objections in terms of Policy TR2.

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) C514 Access Layout - Private Road : altered access,max width NOT stated

2001/821/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     15/05/01     Decide by Date:     09/07/01

Parish:     Great Missenden - Prestwood     Ward:     Prestwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS T LEWIS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/911/84   Four bungalows and garages. Conditional permission – implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for single storey side and rear extensions. The side extension is to measure 3.3m by 6.2m and 4m high to the pitch. The rear extension is to measure 2.4m by 2.55m and 3.8m to the pitch.

PA\RISH COUNCIL

No objections.

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.     Neither the side nor rear extensions will impact upon the neighbouring dwellings in a detrimental manner. They will respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling, will not detract from the street scene and will not result in the loss of privacy for the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings. No objections are raised to them.

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

4.     The floorspace of the dwelling will not exceed 120sq. m as a result of the proposed extension. There are therefore no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards.

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) C136 Plans amended by letter dated 6 June 2001, received on 7 June 2001

2001/822/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     14/05/01     Decide by Date:     08/07/01

Parish:     Little Missenden     Ward:     Little Missenden

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR R D MITCHELL

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

94/0634/CH   Conservatory on south east elevation. Conditional permission – implemented.

99/1135/CH   Replacement detached garage. Conditional permission.

01/0431/CH   Two storey front extension and first floor front and rear extensions. Conditional permission – not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for two storey and first floor front and rear extensions (amendment to planning permission 01/0431/CH). The ground floor element of the front extension is to be ‘L shaped’ and is to measure 5.4m wide and 6.4m deep, with a front projection measuring 450mm by 4.5m. The first floor extension is to measure 5.4m wide and is to extend to the rear of the dwelling and is to be 14.85 deep, incorporating a front projection of 450mm by 4.5m, above that at ground floor level. The extension will form a front gable end with a pitched roof 6.6m high. The other element of the first floor rear extension is to measure 11.9m wide by part 1.9m/ part 3.6m/ part 4.85m deep. The extension at first floor level is to incorporate an element at the front of the dwelling, 2.05m deep by 3.05m wide. The extension at first floor level is to create two rear gable ends, 6.95m and 6.6m high. A pitched roof dormer window is proposed in both the front and rear elevations, both measuring 3.1m wide and 6.25m high to the pitch. Three pitched roof dormer windows are proposed in the north east elevation of the dwelling, measuring 1.1m, 2m and 1.1m wide and 5.4m, 5.85m and 5.4m high to the pitch, respectively. Two replacement pitched roof dormer windows are proposed in the south west elevation of the dwelling, both 1.4m wide and 5.6m high to the pitch. A pitched roof dormer is also proposed on the return side of the north east elevation, 1.1m wide and 5.4m high to the pitch.

This application differs from the previous one (ref. 01/0431/CH) in the following ways:

The floorspace of the original dwelling was 257.6sq. m. The conservatory (ref. 94/0634/CH) added 18sq. m, 7% of the original floorspace (this is to be replaced to the new extensions). The current application proposes to add a net 127.4sq. m, 49.5% of the original floorspace of the dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

2 letters received from the occupiers of the neighbouring property, Maradin, objecting that the proposed south west elevation, extended by a further 17%, would resemble a block of flats and would be inconsistent with an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It does not improve the appearance of the south west elevation of the dwelling, and replaces the current attractive conservatory with a brick wall, twice as high, with a tiled roof above.

1 letter received from the applicant in support of the application:

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB13, LSQ1, H14, H15, H18, TR11 and TR18.

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 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. The site is also located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The relevant local plan policies should be complied with.

2.     The dwelling has previously been extended by 18sq. m, an increase in the floorspace of 7%. However, this extension is to be demolished. The effect of the current proposal would be to increase the net floorspace by 127.4sq. m, a total increase of 49.5% over and above the original floorspace. Although there is a substantial increase in floorspace, when taking into consideration the demolition of the conservatory and the two storey side extension, the increase in the overall footprint of the building is 12.5sq. m, as most of the extension is contained at first floor level. Of the increase at ground floor level, nearly 9sq. m. ‘squares off’ the southern corner of the dwelling, and is not significantly more intrusive than the current permission. The extension to the front of the dwelling at ground floor level is only 450mm deep and is also not significantly more intrusive than the current permission. The impact upon the Green Belt of these elements is considered to be acceptable.

3.     The proposed amendments to the approved scheme at first floor level, however, are more substantial. Raising the height of the roof ridge adjacent to the garage by 400mm will have an impact upon the bulk of the dwelling. However, the increase in bulk will not be substantial and the ridge will remain subordinate to the main ridge of the dwelling. On balance, this is considered acceptable in terms of its impact upon the Green Belt.

4.     Similarly, the pitched roofs to be constructed over the front and rear dormer windows and the alterations in height to the pitches over the dormer windows in the south west elevation of the dwelling, though adding bulk to the dwelling, will remain subordinate to the corresponding ridges of the dwelling. These amendments are also considered acceptable in terms of their impact upon the Green Belt. The dormer windows will respect the scale and proportions of the roofslopes into which they are to be inserted. No objections are raised to them in this respect.

5.     The bulk of the current proposal is not significantly greater than that of the previously granted permission. It will not be detrimental to the surrounding Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. No objections are raised in terms of Policy LSQ1.

6.     The extension to the dwelling will not impact upon the neighbouring dwellings in an adverse manner and will not result in a significant loss of privacy for the occupiers of those dwellings. No objections are raised in this respect.

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) This permission shall relate to the submitted application form and plan nos. 2791/13 Rev.B and 2791/14 Rev.A  as subsequently amended by Plan nos. 2791/13 Rev.C and 2791/14 Rev.B received by the Local Planning Authority on 25 May 2001.

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

2001/823/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     14/05/01     Decide by Date:     08/07/01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Lowndes

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      S WARROW

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

00/0207/CH   First floor side/ rear extension. Refused – by reason of its depth and bulk, the extension would appear overbearing and visually intrusive when viewed from the rear first floor windows of no.28 Aylward Gardens and the rear windows and the rear garden of no.24 Aylward Gardens. Contrary to Policies GC3, H13 and H14 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan.

00/0810/CH   First floor side extension. Conditional permission – under construction.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a pitched roof over the existing single storey front projection. It is to measure 4.8m by 2.8m and 3.1m high where it joins the front of the dwelling.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, 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 proposed pitched roof will relate to the existing dwelling in a satisfactory manner, will not detract from the street scene and will not impact upon the neighbouring dwellings. No objections are raised to it.

3.     The proposed extension has no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards. No objections are raised in terms of 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

2001/824/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     15/05/01     Decide by Date:     09/07/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      GUY HOLDEN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a single storey extension to the northern elevation measuring 4m deep, 1.8m wide (beyond the existing northern elevation) and to a pitched roof height of 4.7m. The proposal also includes constructing a porch flush with the existing front elevation of the dwelling. All external materials would match those of the existing dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comments.

REPRESENTATIONS

Two letters of representation have been received objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

The construction vehicles would impede the cars of the owners of Gomms Wood in coming in and out due to the narrowness of the lane.

Lorries turn around in the forecourt of Gomms Wood.

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 Forty Green where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     Due to the width of the proposed extension and that it would be set back from the existing front elevation by 4.8m, no impact would be had upon the street scene. No objections raised in terms of Policy H13(ii).

3.     Having regard to the level of screening at the site and to the distance of the proposal site from surrounding properties, the extension would have no adverse impact upon their amenities. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and  H14.  

4.     The height, scale and design of the proposed extension would be in keeping with the existing dwelling. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     Sufficient parking space is provided within the site, therefore complying with 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

2001/831/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     15/05/01     Decide by Date:     09/07/01

Parish:     Chartridge     Ward:     Chartridge

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS C DAVIES

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB4

adjoining Heritage Woodland

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

adjoining a SINC - NC1

adj Biological Notification site

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

89/1000/CH   Replacement garage for ‘Brockholme’ and part single storey/ part two storey rear extension and front porch for ‘Tregarland’. Conditional permission – part implemented (the garage at Brockholme and the two storey element of the rear extension adjacent to the boundary with Brockholme and the front porch at Tregarland have been constructed).

00/1215/CH   Part two storey/ part single front extension. Refused – the proposed two storey front extension would by virtue of its height, depth and bulk, would result in an additional loss of light for a side- facing window of the neighbouring dwelling, Brockholme. Furthermore, the extension would be overbearing, visually intrusive and detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of that dwelling.

00/2010/CH   Part single storey/ part first floor/ part two storey front extension. Conditional permission – not implemented.  

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a part two storey/ part single storey rear extension incorporating a conservatory and a rear balcony (amendment to planning permission 89/1000/CH). The ground floor element of the extension adjacent to the neighbouring dwelling to the north, Brockholme, already constructed, measures 4.8m by 4.7m. The conservatory is to measure 3.3m by 2.9m with a pitched roof 3.1m high to the pitch. The ground floor element of the proposed extension adjacent to the other neighbouring dwelling, Greensleeves, is to measure 3.1m by a maximum 3.9m with a pitched roof 3.4m high to the pitch. The first floor element of the extension adjacent to the boundary with  Brockholme measures 3.2m by 2m and 6.85m high to the top of the half pitched roof. The first floor element adjacent to the boundary with Greensleeves is to measure 3.2m by 2m and 7m high to the pitch. There is to be a balcony between the two first floor extensions, measuring 3.85m by 1m.

CONSULTATIONS

Thames Water – no objections.

Environment Agency – no comments.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB4, GB12, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, 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 the proposed extension has been established by the grant of the previous permission for a part two storey/ part single storey rear extension under reference 1989/1000/CH. This application differs from that one in that the first floor bay window of the two storey element of the extension adjacent to the neighbouring dwelling, Greensleeves, has been omitted, the roof over the conservatory has been altered to form a small gable in place of a monopitch, and the roof pitch above the ground floor element of the two storey element of the extension adjacent to Greensleeves has been altered with glazing in place of roof tiles.

2.     The proposed amendments represent fairly minor changes to the approved scheme. Omitting the bay window will reduce the impact of the extension upon the neighbouring dwelling, Greensleeves. The other alterations will have no greater impact on this dwelling than the approved scheme (the other neighbouring dwelling, Brockholme, will not be affected by the amendments as they will be screened from this dwelling by the already constructed two storey element of the extension granted under 89/1000/CH). The new scheme will respect the scale and proportions of the existing dwelling, will not represent overdevelopment of the site and will not result in the significant loss of privacy for the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings. No objections are raised to the proposed amendments.

3.     The floorspace of the existing dwelling already exceeds 120sq. m (permission 00/2010/CH is extant on the site, but not implemented). There are therefore no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards.

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 staining to be used in the treatment of the shiplap timber cladding to be used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall match that of the existing building.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the enlarged building is not detrimental to the character of the locality.

(4) C174A No additional windows in first floor of south elevation of extension.

2001/839/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     17/05/01     Decide by Date:     11/07/01

Parish:     Little Missenden - Holmer Green     Ward:     Holmer Green

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR & MRS FITRZYK

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Class C Road

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a conservatory to the rear elevation and a single storey extension to the eastern side elevation. The conservatory would measure 6.3m wide, 4m deep and to a lean-to roof height of 3.8m. The side extension would measure 3.2m deep, 0.9m wide and to a height of 3.3m. It would also incorporate a chimney to a height of 7.1m. All external materials would match existing.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter received raising no objections.

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 Holmer Green where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     The application would not have an impact upon the street scene. As such no objections are raised in terms of Policy H13(ii).

3.     The neighbouring property to the east is set forward of the application site whilst the neighbouring property to the west has no windows at ground floor level on its flank elevation. Having regard to the fact that the extensions would only be single storey, it is considered that no adverse impact would result to the amenities of these properties. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The scale, height and design of the extensions would relate well to the existing dwelling and would be in keeping with it. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     The application raises no implication in terms of parking. No objections raised in terms of 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

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

2001/842/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     17/05/01     Decide by Date:     11/07/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham the Hill

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS HUMPHRIES (CO AGENT)

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Public Footpath/Bridleway

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

86/0712/CH     Two-storey side extension and chimney, approved and implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The single storey side extension’s width is defined by the footpath that runs alongside the dwelling, as this path is not parallel the extension’s width varies from 4.8m at the front elevation to 2m at the rear.  The flank elevation would be on the boundary of the dwelling with the footpath.  The extension would be flat roofed to a height of 3.3m.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve.

CONSULTATIONS

The Chiltern Society – Providing the footpath A45 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.

Open Spaces Society – Footpath 45 is a fairly gloomy path between high fences and, as such, has very little amenity value other than offering a route for the public to travel between the houses.  The proposed extension would not make much difference to the path, although I think it would be better if the side of the extension near the path could be made to slope down towards the path with the same slope as the garage roof in the front elevation.  This would allow more light to reach the path.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H4, 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.     Policy H15 states that ‘a flat roofed single storey extension will be acceptable unless it is prominent in the street scene or other public place, in which case a hipped or pitched roof should be used’.  Due to the positioning of the extension and the extent of the screening on the front boundary adjacent to the footpath, the proposal would not be readily visible when north.  However, when viewed from the properties opposite and when approaching from the south the extension would be visible, although it is not considered to be excessively prominent nor intrusive in the street scene, being partially hidden by the existing garage.  Where the extension would be prominent is from the footpath that runs alongside.  Given the comments of consultees noted above (and also referred to in the paragraph below) it is not considered that the impact of the extension upon the character of the area is sufficient to warrant a refusal in this instance.

2.     The extension would have an impact upon the users of the footpath.  At present the path is bordered by a 1.8m high wooden fence, as the proposal would reach a height of 3.3m and would therefore be relatively intrusive for the users.  However, taking into account the representations made by both the Open Spaces Society and the Chiltern Society, neither of whom raise objections and consider the path to be of little amenity value, it is not considered that any objections are made in this respect.  The proposal is not considered to have an adverse impact upon the amenities of the adjacent properties.

3.     No adverse car parking issues arise, sufficient car parking is provided on site for three vehicles in compliance 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

(1) INFORMATIVE - This permission does not authorise the obstruction of the Public Right of Way adjacent to the extension during the carrying out of the development, nor any subsequent diversion or extinguishment of it.

2001/843/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     18/05/01     Decide by Date:     12/07/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham the Hill

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS R FLETCHER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a conservatory to the rear south eastern elevation. It would measure 3m wide, 1.85m deep and to a lean-to roof height of 2.5m. The external materials have not been indicated on the submitted plans.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approval.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of no objection.

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 Amersham where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     Being sited to the rear of the property the conservatory would not be visible in the street scene. No objection raised in terms of Policy H13(ii).

3.     Due to the siting of the conservatory and the solid conifer screening at a height of 2.5m on the south eastern boundary, the conservatory would not be visible from any surrounding property. Consequently they’re amenities would not be affected. No objection raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The scale, height and design of the proposed conservatory would be in keeping with the existing dwelling. No objection raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     The proposal has no implications in terms of parking. No objection raised in terms of 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

2001/844/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     18/05/01     Decide by Date:     12/07/01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Newtown

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR J NAMAN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB5

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a two storey side, front and rear extension to the eastern side elevation. It would measure 13m deep, 3.3m wide and to a hipped roof height as the existing dwelling. It would replace an existing flat roof extension that measures 12.3m deep and 2.8m wide. It would be built up to 0.5m of the eastern boundary. All external materials would match those of the existing dwelling.  

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB2, GB5, H13, H14, H15, H16, 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 a Green Belt settlement where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     Due to the width of the proposed extension and its subsequent close proximity to the eastern boundary and the neighbouring, it is considered that it would have a detrimental effect upon the street scene, creating a terracing effect. Objections raised in term of Policy GC1, H11, and H16.

3.     The rear elevation of the proposed extension would have windows on both ground and first floors and would project up to within 8m of the neighbouring property Applegates which has a window on its flank elevation at first floor level. It is considered that this distance is unacceptable and would create an unreasonable relationship between the two properties. The length of the rear extension is also considered unacceptable in relation to the neighbouring property Ambleside which has two windows at ground floor and one at first floor on its rear elevation. It is therefore considered that the close proximity, height and depth of the proposed extension would result in it having an overbearing appearance upon this property which is a chalet bungalow. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.  

4.     The proposed extension would project to within 0.5m of the eastern boundary at two storey level. Where an extension is proposed at two storey level there should be a minimum distance of 1m between first floor level and the boundary. The length of the proposed extension is considered to be unacceptable, especially at two storey level as it would project beyond the existing front elevation by 1.7m and beyond the existing rear elevation by 4m. It is considered that the height, width and depth of the extension would not be in keeping with the scale and depth of the existing dwelling and would be excessively large in relation to it and the neighbouring properties. Objections raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     The proposal would satisfy the Council’s parking requirements. No objections raised in terms of 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: Refuse permission

For the following reasons

(1) The depth, height and resulting bulk of the two storey side extension, which is shown on the submitted plan to be 0.5m from the common boundary with the neighbouring property Ambleside, would result in a prominent cramped appearance, detrimental to and out of keeping with the street scene. As such the proposed development is contrary to Policies GC1, H13(ii), H15(v) and H16 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.

(2) The rear and front projections, height and overall scale and  bulk of the proposed two storey side extension, would result in  an overbearing and visually intrusive impact on the neighbouring property Ambleside and on the property to the rear of the site, Applegates. As such the proposed extension is  contrary to Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.