Meeting documents

2001/1003/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     14/06/01     Decide by Date:     08/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Giles     Ward:     Seer Green & Jordans

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR A SONNEX AND MRS J SUMMER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Jordans Conservation Area

Green Belt settlement GB5

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/2055/72: Rear extension. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a first floor rear extension, a rear conservatory and a canopy over the front door. The first floor rear extension would be built on top of the existing flat roof extension to the rear and would measure 2.3m deep, 8.5m wide and to a hipped roof height of 8.5m. The conservatory would infill the area to the rear between the proposed two storey extension and the existing eastern elevation. It would measure 3.7m wide, 5.6m deep and to a hipped roof height of 3.6m. All materials would match those of the existing.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, GB12, H13, H14, H15, H16, TR11, TR16, CA1 and CA2.

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 Green Belt settlement of Jordans 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.     The application site enjoys a large curtilage as well as the surrounding properties which signifies that there is a good relationship in terms of distance between the site and its neighbouring properties. There is also a dense level of screening along the north eastern, north western and western boundaries as well as mature trees within the rear garden itself. Having regard therefore to the above factors, to the orientation of the site in relation to the neighbouring properties and that the depth of the first floor extension would only be 2.3m, it is considered that the extension and conservatory would not be detrimental to the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The first floor extension would not have an impact upon the neighbouring property Dormers as it would consist of a hipped roof as opposed to continuing the existing gable end. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.    

3.     As there is an existing single storey flat roof extension to the rear of the property adding a first floor extension with a hipped roof that would be subordinate in height to the existing roof would improve the aesthetic appearance of the property, therefore enhancing the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Furthermore, all external materials would match those of the existing dwelling. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC1, GB12, H13(ii), H15, CA1 and CA2.  

4.     The gross floor area of the dwelling already exceeds 120sq m. Two parking spaces are provided within the curtilage. No objections 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

2001/1006/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     14/06/01     Decide by Date:     08/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MRS L HYAM AND MR P 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

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

2001/0593/CH: Single storey side extension incorporating garage. Conditional permission. Not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a two storey side extension to No.52 incorporating a dormer window to the front elevation. It would be set back from the existing front elevation by 0.5m and would be built flush with the rear elevation. It would measure 2m wide and consist of a cat slide roof to the front rising to the same roof height as existing. A porch is proposed to be erected to the front of both No.48 and No.50. The porches would be attached to each other creating a pitched roof height of 3.9m and would reflect a mirror image of each other. Each would measure 1.5m wide and 1.2m deep. All external materials would match those of the existing.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of objection on grounds of further loss of light and overlloking.

CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency: Unable to comment on application.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, 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 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 properties represent a pair of semi-detached dwellings. As with all the other properties on this side of Fieldway the properties have quite long front gardens and are set away 18m from the road. Having regard to this and that the existing dwelling is narrow on a quite a wide plot, it is not considered that the proposed works would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the street scene. No objections raised in terms of Policy H13(ii).

3.     The neighbouring property No.52 has no windows on its southern elevation. Whilst the neighbouring property April Cottage has a conservatory on its rear elevation there is a 3.5m evergreen hedge on the western boundary. As the two storey side extension would not project beyond the existing rear elevation it is therefore not considered that the two storey side extension would reduce the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. Furthermore, the window on the rear elevation at first floor level would be high level. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The scale, height and design of the extension would relate well to the existing property. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     The proposed extension would not increase the gross floor area of the dwelling to beyond 120sq m. 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) The extension hereby permitted shall not be occupied or brought into use until two parking spaces have been provided within the curtilage of the site in accordance with a plan that shall previously be submitted to and approved in writing by the local plannong authority

Reason: To ensure that adequate and satisfactory provision is made for the parking of vehicles clear of the highway.

(4) The window at first floor level in the rear elevation of the extension hereby approved shall be constructed as a high level window with a sill level of 1.6m as amended by the applicant on 6th August 2001 on drawing number 01B05/01.

Reason: To maintain the amenities and privacy of the neighbouring property April Cottage.

2001/1013/CH

Case Officer:      Neil Higson

Date Received:     18/06/01     Decide by Date:     12/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS N BEAUMONT

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

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/1569/CH     Retention of front boundary wall. Permitted.

THE APPLICATION

It is proposed to construct a single storey pitched roof front extension to provide a garage. The extension would measure 6m long by 5.5m in width with an apex height of 3.6m. The existing integral garage would be converted to family room. It is also proposed to construct a single-storey side extension to the eastern elevation measuring 2.7m wide by 7.2m deep with a mono pitch roof.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

2 Letters from neighbouring properties expressing no objection in principle but raising concerns regarding effect on retaining wall under the Party Wall Act, problems with water pipes causing flooding and the general level of on-street parking at the lower end of Misbourne Avenue;

CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency – No comment.

POLICIES

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

ISSUES

1.     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.

2.     The style and design of the proposed extensions is considered acceptable in terms of relating to the existing dwelling and there will be no adverse visual impact upon neighbouring dwellings. The proposal would appear no obtrusive or overbearing when viewed from any nearby dwellings. There should be no loss of day and sunlight to neighbouring properties.

3.     Notwithstanding the difference in levels the proposed front extension would not appear over-bearing from the neighbouring property to the west there being a substantial distance between the two properties. The flank wall would be approximately 2.0m from this common side boundary, which is demarcated by an existing close-boarded fence.  

4.     The houses are set back approximately 20m from the highway boundary beyond extensive front amenity areas, the extension would not be incongruous in the street scene. There would be no demonstrable harm caused to the amenities of the adjacent dwellings. The proposal therefore meets the requirements of Policies GC1, GC3, H14 and H15.

5.     In relation to the neighbours comments these are not pertinent or controllable through this application.

6.     Three vehicles could be parked within the curtilage of the property. No objection under Policy 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) C413 Landscaping - No Felling

2001/1014/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     18/06/01     Decide by Date:     12/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Giles     Ward:     Chalfont St Giles

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS H SMITH

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/316/62     Additions, permitted development.

AM/69/68     Garage, conditional permission granted.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a single storey rear extension and a front dormer window.  The single storey rear extension would have a flat roof (extending an existing extension with a flat roof), would be 8.4m in width and for the majority of its width it would be 3.1m deep and for a width of 2.3m would be 4.2m deep.  The overall affect would be to square off the rear of the dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

A letter received from No.43 The Lagger referring to the letter received in connection with the previous application (00/1964/CH), that letter noted the following points –

1.     I note that the existing ground floor single storey extension will be increased in length by approximately 14 feet crossing the boundary line, the property does not run parallel to No.43 The Lagger, therefore the final position of the new extension will be within 6 inches at gutter height of No.43.

2.     My concern related to access between the two properties for maintenance of the rainwater gutters, roof tiles, painting of fascia and soffit boards, also for fire protection.  

3.     I understand that removal of the hedge between the two properties is anticipated for the length of the proposed single storey extension.

In addition the new letter noted –

1.     There is a possibility the ground floor extension at No.41 was erected without planning approval prior to Mr and Mrs Smith’s purchase of their property and before we purchased No.43.

2.     My reasoning is the hedge was removed and the existing wall is built over the boundary line.  To extend this wall a further 14 feet will eliminate access to maintenance of our property and create a fire hazard, as the properties do not run parallel to one another, narrowing in an eastward direction.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, H18, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     In terms of the design of the proposals it is considered that the single storey extension with a flat roof is acceptable.  In many cases a flat roof may be unacceptable, however, as this extension is to be an infill between two existing flat roofed extensions and would not be readily visible in terms of the street scene, it is felt that in this instance it would be acceptable.   The front dormer is considered to be small enough when viewed in relation to the roofslope in which it is to be located to comply with Policy H18.

2.     It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the amenities of the neighbouring properties.  The front dormer window would not increase overlooking to an unacceptable level and the rear extension would not result in any loss of light or privacy for the neighbouring property.  

3.     The neighbours comments regarding the boundary and the proximity of the adjacent extensions have been noted.  However, under planning policies there are no objections to a proposed single storey extension being constructed up to the boundary line between dwellings.  While the anticipated loss of a stretch of hedging between properties is regretted and the proximity of the two extensions would make maintenance difficult, a refusal of the planning application on these grounds could not be sustained.  

4.     No adverse car parking issues arise, no objections 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

(1) INFORMATIVE - It has been brought to the attention of the Council that the proposed rear extension may cross the boundary line with No.43 The Lagger, if this is the case then permission from the neighbouring property's owner may be needed .  It should be noted that this permission does not permit any part of this proposal to be constructed on land not within the ownership of the applicant.

2001/1021/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

Date Received:     14/06/01     Decide by Date:     08/08/01

Parish:     Latimer     Ward:     Ashley Green & Latimer

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS C CURTIS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

adjoining Public Amenity Open Space

adjoining Common land

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

01/1022/CH   Extension to roof over covered way, two-storey and single-storey rear extensions and pitched roof over existing dormer window in front elevation.   Undetermined.

THE APPLICATION

Demolition of boiler house and conservatory, extension to roof over covered way, two storey and single storey rear extensions and pitched roof over existing dormer window in front elevation. Currently the property consists of a two storey cottage with a long single storey extension with integral garage projecting from the north west elevation. Above this single storey element is a two-storey projection with forward facing dormer. The proposal is to extend this two-storey element backwards, repeating the 6.1m high, hipped roof arrangement so as to form a side facing valley feature. The structure will cover a floor area in the rear angle of the property 2.2m wide and 2.5m deep. On the rear elevation is proposed a half-dormer window with a gabled roof, to which the existing window in the front elevation will be given the same treatment (gable pitched at 4.8m above ground level).

The roof along the front of the single storey element overhangs the eves by a further 0.4m with three pillars spread asymmetrically to give support.  

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, GB13, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17, H18, LB1, TR11 and TR16.

Proposed Alterations to the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 - Deposit Copy - July 1998 (including Proposed Modifications- November 2000): Policies GB3.

ISSUES

1.     The application is to a timber framed dwelling in the Green Belt in the fields below Ley Hill. Although the property has undergone several extensions, the proposal involves the demolition of the conservatory, which counteract the volume of the new build, resulting in an addition of only 7.14sq.m floor space. As such this cottage will only be expanded by 32%, which is considered acceptable in terms of Local Plan Policy GB13. The majority of the additions are located to the rear of the dwelling, where they will not impact greatly on the surrounding Green Belt by virtue of their regard to the existing massing and their design which fuses them well into the dwelling.

2.     The additions to this Grade II Listed building are considered acceptable, not adding many pseudo cottage features to detract from the real historic interest of the structure. As such the proposal does not compromise this historic building and complies with Local Plan Policy LB1.

3.     The dwelling has no immediate neighbours who will be able to see the alterations and as such the structure generates no overlooking of loss of amenity under Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14. Furthermore the curtilage is enclosed by dense trees to the north west, 2.5m high leylandii above a bank to the south west, steep bank and 1.5m hedging to the south east and non-boundary trees about the lawns to the north east. As such the cottage is only partly visible from select public viewpoints and the extensions will not be visible to anyone beyond the curtilage.

4.     The integral double garage and forecourt amply cater for the parking standards set out 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) C137 Selected plans amended by one unnumbered plan received on 23 July 2001

(4) Prior to the construction of the extension hereby permitted the existing boiler house and rear conservatory shall be demolished and all materials removed from the site.

Reason: In order that the development shall not increase the cumulative volume of the dwelling, which would detract from the character of the Green belt.

2001/1022/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

Date Received:     14/06/01     Decide by Date:     08/08/01

Parish:     Latimer     Ward:     Ashley Green & Latimer

App Type:     Application for Listed Building Consent

Applicant:      MR AND MRS C CURTIS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

adjoining Public Amenity Open Space

adjoining Common land

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

01/1021/CH   Extension to roof over covered way, two-storey and single-storey rear extensions and pitched roof over existing dormer window in front elevation.

THE APPLICATION

Demolition of boiler house and conservatory, extension to roof over covered way, two storey and single storey rear extensions and pitched roof over existing dormer window in front elevation. Currently the property consists of a two storey cottage with a long single storey extension with integral garage projecting from the north west elevation. Above this single storey element is a two-storey projection with forward facing dormer.  The proposal is to extend this two-storey element backwards, repeating the 6.1m high, hipped roof arrangement so as to form a side facing valley feature. The structure will cover a floor area in the rear angle of the property 2.2m wide and 2.5m deep. On the rear elevation is proposed a half-dormer window with a gabled roof, to which the existing window in the front elevation will be given the same treatment (gable pitched at 4.8m above ground level).

The roof along the front of the single storey element overhangs the eves by a further 0.4m with three pillars spread asymmetrically to give support.  

CONSULTATIONS

Marlyn Cottage is a 17th century timber-framed house extended in the late 20th century. This proposal seeks to re-order and slightly enlarge the extensions, and remove some of the minor additions.

There are no listed building objections to the demolition of the boiler room and existing conservatory. These are both recent additions, of no special interest, that detract from the historic character of the building.

There are also no objections to the amended proposals for the extensions. They make no structural impact on the historic fabric, and make minimal alteration to the visual appearance of the house from the road. The only difference here will be to the side of the existing extension, which will be given a modest amount of tile-hanging and a covered passage to the garage. The amended detail is sufficiently simple for the extension to remain subordinate to the original house. To the rear new garden room and bedroom will replace an unsightly flat-roofed landing, and the more uniform detailing, as reduced in the amendment, should help to improve the overall appearance.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1 and LB1.

ISSUES

1.     The application affects a Grade II Listed Building in the open Green Belt below Ley Hill where the alterations will largely be contained to the rear of the property and have little impact on the general appearance of the listed structure from the front and side. The amended scheme reduced the peripheral decor of the original more extravagant scheme, giving it a less ostentatious appearance. The revised design being simpler fuses better with the 17th century cottage and as such the Historic Buildings Officer is minded to approve the scheme under Local Plan Policy 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) C437 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Interior and Exterior

(5) C137 Selected plans amended by one unnumbered plan received on 23 July 2001

2001/1032/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

Date Received:     18/06/01     Decide by Date:     12/08/01

Parish:     Amersham - Little Chalfont     Ward:     Little Chalfont

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS GRIMSEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Adjoining Green Belt

Unclassified road

THE APPLICATION

A two-storey side extension in the angle between two two-storey elements of the house. The structure will be 6.3m deep (flush with the rear elevation of the property and 4.8m wide (overhanging the flank by 1.2m). The flank wall continues a further 1.6m at ground floor level the full width of the extension with a half hexagon bay at the end 3.5m wide and 1m deep. The two-storey element is hipped to the side and front, forming valley features on both elevations (matching the main ridge height of the house at 8.4m). The single-storey element has a pleated arrangement of hipped roofs round the structure at 4m in height. To the centre of the flank inset by 2m from either end is a 4.1m wide chimneybreast 0.9m deep, reaching a height of 7.8m.

To the right-hand side of the rear elevation is a two-storey high projection 1.6m deep. To the left-hand side of this inset by 0.1m and 5.4m in length will be a single-storey extension. This will have a 3.7m high mono-pitch roof only interrupted by a 2.2m long and 0.5m deep hexagon bay with glazed gabled roof cutting into the roof at 4m in height. Furthermore the existing single-storey element which is between these proposed single-storey extensions is to be removed altogether.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H4, H11, 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): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1.     The extensions to this large Neo-Georgian property in the Chalfont St. Giles Established Residential Area of Special Character faithfully adhere to its 1930’s character. The roofing and sash windows emulate the existing design found throughout the house and ensures that the extensions will coexist comfortably against the existing build. As such the works to ’Cherry Trees’ satisfies local Plan Policy GC1 and H15.

2.     The property is fortunate in having at least 12m to the boundary from the anticipated positioning of the new two-storey extension. Furthermore the dense grouping of trees, ensures that neighbouring property ‘Larksfield’ will be unaffected by the structure. ‘Orchard Corner’ although able to gain limited view over the 2m hedging and walling will likewise not be affected by these additions, mostly obscured by projecting existing build. As such the proposal is not in breech of amenity policies GC3, H13 and H14.

3.     One leylandii tree may require works carried out due to its close proximity to the extension, but will not be considered unacceptable.

4.     The detached double garage and large gravel forecourt are more than acceptable in terms of Local Plan Policy TY11 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) C134 Single plan amended by plan (no 2000/477/5 Rev A) received on 05/07/01

2001/1033/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Giles     Ward:     Chalfont St Giles

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR T SMITH

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

THE APPLICATION

The proposed conservatory would have a floor area of 6.9m by 3.5m.  The conservatory would have an eaves height of approximately 2.1m to a ridge height of approximately 3.4m.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letter submitted by the agent acting on behalf of the applicant –

1.     The policy approach which the Council adopts towards extensions to residential properties in the Green Belt is understood.  However, it is asked that the following be taken into account;

2.     The conservatory is largely to be constructed of glass and to that extent, it will appear more as an open structure than a solid mass of building.  This has benefits for the openness of the Green Belt.

3.     The application development will have no adverse impact on neighbouring properties, which are some distance away.

4.     Neither will it adversely impact upon the rural landscape, as the area where it is to be sited is set down from the road and the site is well screened by hedges on all boundaries.

5.     In relation to the existing dwelling, the proposed extension will be subordinate and will not harm its character.

6.     There have been a number of appeal decisions in the Chiltern area relating to extensions to properties in the Green Belt which have been allowed on the basis of different interpretations of GB13, these include 2 Mantles Green Cottages, School Lane, Amersham (95/1484/CH), Bowers Cottage, Magpie Lane, Coleshill (97/0797/CH) and Ballinger House, Ballinger Common (97/167/CH).

7.     In addition, I would like to draw your attention to a very recently determined appeal decision in respect of the addition of a conservatory to a dwelling in the South Bedfordshire Green Belt.  It is clear in paragraphs 11, 12, 13 & 14 that although the proposed conservatory (of some 29m2) would, if allowed, more than double the floorspace of the original dwelling, the Inspector considered the determining factor was harm or the lack of harm.

8.     He concluded that the latter was the case and he felt justified in allowing the appeal.  It is hoped that the same approach can be taken to the consideration of this appeal.

Letter from ‘Tier Cottage’ stating that they have no objections to the proposal.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB2, GB13, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the open Green Belt wherein it is the Council’s Policy only to allow residential extensions which are both subordinate to the size and scale of the original dwelling and also which are not intrusive in the landscape.

2.     In this case, the dwelling has already been substantially enlarged over and above the size of the original dwelling.  The cumulative effect of previous additions and that now proposed constitute development which is clearly not subordinate to either the size or scale of the original dwelling, the existing dwelling has been extended by approximately 62%, including the proposal the cumulative increase in gross floorspace would be approximately 94% over the original dwelling (an increase from 73m2 to 142m2).  As such the proposal is contrary to Policy and is considered to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

3.     The proposal would be well screened by the boundary hedge and in addition, due to the topography of the site, would be set at a lower level than the road, as such it is not considered that the proposal would be visually intrusive or out of character with the area.  Notwithstanding this and having due regard to the representations made by the agent acting on behalf of the applicants, the proposal would add to existing floorspace and this floorspace has already been substantially increased over the size of the original dwelling, as such it is concluded that the proposed extension would be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

4.     The amenities of the neighbouring properties would not be adversely affected by the proposal.

5.     There would be no adverse car parking implications, no objections are therefore raised under Polices 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) Within those parts of the Green Belt which are located outside existing rows of dwellings or settlements falling within Policy GB4 or GB5 areas, as defined on the Proposals Map of the Adopted Local Plan, it is the Council's Policy only to allow domestic extensions which are both subordinate to the size and scale of the original dwelling and also which are not intrusive in the landscape.  The dwelling has already been very considerably extended such that any further extension cannot now be considered subordinate to the size and scale of the original dwelling.  Therefore the proposal is considered to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would be, by definition, harmful to it.  The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policies GB2 & GB13 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.

2001/1034/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

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

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS G ARBIB C/O AGENT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Adjoining Green Belt

Class B Road

adj Biological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

96/1254/CH Two-storey extension including triple garage and staff flat.   Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

A single storey rear extension 2.7m deep and 11.8m wide, flush with the north west flank, and projecting a further 3.65m for the first 5.5m to the right-hand side. The roof is pitched to 3.5m over the shallower section and 4.2m over the deeper section. A rear facing canopy gable over the 3.1m wide and 0.8m deep half hexagon bay to the shallower section matches that to the rear of the deeper section.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, 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): Policies GC3.

ISSUES

1.     The single storey extension is hidden to the rear of a very large property in the Chalfont St. Giles Established Residential Area of Special character along Nightingales Lane, where it can not be seen from any public viewpoint. The design has taken into consideration the architectural merits of this 1920’s brick and timber country house, and while the structure is primarily brick, it has black and white mock timber detailing in the gables. No objections can be raised in relation to the design of the structure under Local Plan Policy GC1, H4 and H15.

2.     The structure is stepped away from the boundary and will only just be possible to be seen from the rear first floor windows of ‘Ashmore’. Otherwise the 3.5m hedging and dense trees around the garden screen it from all other neighbours. No issues are raised in terms of neighbouring amenity and as such Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14 are satisfied.

3.     The property has been expanded dramatically since application 96/1254/CH and even though this extension will further extend this property, it is situated on a large plot of land and will not be considered as overdevelopment of the property.

4.     The triple garage and grand forecourt amply cater for off street car parking in line with the Policy standards of 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

2001/1035/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Amersham - Little Chalfont     Ward:     Little Chalfont

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS I BROCKLESBY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

90/0745/CH: Two storey side extension. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a single storey extension to the north western elevation measuring 2.65m wide, 9.1m deep and to a flat roof height of 2.9m. It would project beyond the existing rear elevation by 2m. All materials would match those of the existing.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

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

2.     The extension would be set back from the front elevation by 3.8m. The site is well screened and a dummy pitched roof is proposed to the front of the extension so that the flat roof would not be prominent within the street scene. No objections in relation to Policies GC1,  H13(ii) and H15.

3.     Due to the level of screening at the site and having regard to the height and design of the proposed extension no effect would be had upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     Sufficient parking would be provided within the site to comply with the Council’s standards. No objections raised with regard to 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

2001/1036/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      P BROWN ESQ.  C/O AGENT

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

Dwellings

Total New Dwellings - proposed:          1

Total Dwellings - displaced/demolished:     0

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

THE APPLICATION

Proposes four bedroom two-storey detached dwelling with attached forward projecting single storey garage and car port.  Access would be sought from Cherry Acre.  Height to main ridge approximately 8.5m and to eaves 5m.  The dwelling would be approximately 9m in width and between 7.5 and 9.3m in depth.  The rear garden depth varies between 13.4m and 15m with the width of the plot at approximately 13m.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

Two letters of objection which could be summarised as follows –

1.     Strongly object to yet another property and particularly access from Cherry Acre.

2.     Density of houses and number of cars using a narrow road is already great.

3.     Loss of trees.

4.     Loss of a beautiful view.

5.     Lower value of houses.

6.     If approved this will be a further step in the downgrading of the rural area; this is now rapidly deteriorating into crowded suburbia.

7.     Increased noise due to extra motorised gardening equipment, children at play, smoke and fumes from barbecues etc.

One letter stating no objections but noting –

1.     Many developments in Cherry Acre over the years – narrow and partly surfaced road, level of car parking, turning area abused.

2.     Proposed developments lead to dust, dirt, builders lorries driving over gardens and parking where they want, early noisy starts and utility companies digging the same hole at different times.  What protection can you give local residents?  Can you protect the turning area?  Can you attach clauses making the builders control their activities?

CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency – No comments.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H3, H11, H12, TR2, TR11 & TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The principle of a dwelling on this plot of land has already been established under the previous approvals.  The principle consideration is therefore whether the current proposal raises any new issues which would warrant objections to the development.

2.     Notwithstanding the comments of the neighbouring properties whose comments have been duly noted and considered, it is not considered that there have been any material changes in circumstances that would now warrant a refusal of this application.  

3.     As was noted when the previous application was determined, it is considered that although sited further forward on the plot, the dwelling and projecting garage / carport would not result in such a prominent or incongruous feature in the street scene to warrant an objection.  Existing planting on adjacent sites would screen the new development, in particular the projecting single storey element to an acceptable level and No.14 already has a detached garage immediately adjacent to the carriageway of Cherry Acre.  The forward projection would have no significant dominating or overbearing impact upon No.21 or result in loss of light to unacceptable levels.  A gap of 2.6m is retained off the boundary with No.21.  The rear garden depth is below 15m, however given the garden depths and character of surrounding development in Cherry Acre, the garden depth proposed would not be so detrimental or out of character with surrounding development to warrant an objection on grounds of conflict with H12.

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) C421 Materials - Bricks, Roofing Tiles, Hanging Tiles

(3) C167 Screen fence on southern boundary

(4) C173A  No additional windows in northern elevation of dwelling

(5) C173A  No additional windows in southern elevation of dwelling

(6) C177 Obscure glass in multiple windows in northern elevation - 1st floor only

(7) C406 Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted

(8) C407 Landscaping Scheme to be Implemented

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

(10) C308 Car Port Not to be Converted to be Part of Dwelling

(11) C413 Landscaping - No Felling

(12) C356 Surfacing and Retention of Parking Areas

(13) C452 Garaging/Parking as specified on plan no. 96-1635-1A received on 19/06/2001

(14) C296 Exclusion of Permitted Development in Class A, Part 1

2001/1037/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Austenwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      S J HOBBS ESQ C/O AGENT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chalfont St Peter-Firs Estate Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Northolt Airfield safeguarding zone

Mineral Consultation Area

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of single storey extensions to the northern and western elevations. The extension to the northern elevation would measure 5.3m deep and to a hipped roof height of 3.3m. It would be built flush with the existing northern elevation. The western elevation extension would measure 2.5m deep and 1.1m wide and to a hipped roof height of 3.3m. All materials would match those of the existing.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11, TR16 and CA1.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the built up area of Chalfont St Peter 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.     The proposed extensions would not have an impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene or the Conservation Area as they would be located to the rear. Furthermore, the boundary treatment forms good screening. No objections raised in terms of Policies H13(ii) and CA1.

3.     The neighbouring property The Nest has no windows on its southern flank elevation. On the boundary between the application site and this property is a close boarded fence and trellis to a height of approximately 2.2m. This would prevent any overlooking of the garden of The Nest. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The height, scale and design of the proposal is considered acceptable. No objections raised under Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     The property as with all the other dwellings within the immediate vicinity of The Queensway provide no space within the curtilage for parking. As no change would therefore occur no objection is 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

2001/1038/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Ashley Green     Ward:     Ashley Green & Latimer

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      GRAHAM WATKINS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB4

adjoining Common land

Class C Road

Bovingdon Beacon - safeguard zone - all development

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

00/1062/CH     Single storey rear and two-storey side extension, approved, extant.

THE APPLICATION

The garage would be 6m deep and 5m in width, 2.15m to the eaves and 3.2m to the ridge.  The plans indicate that the roof would be constructed of low profile metal sheet roofing with the colour to match the tiles on the main dwelling.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H20, TR11 & TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The design and proportions of the garage is considered acceptable and bearing in mind the amount of screening between it and the road, no objections are raised in terms of its impact upon the street scene.

2.     The only neighbouring property that could be affected is at ‘Foxglove Cottage’, however, given the relatively low height of the garage and the two ancillary buildings between the proposal and the neighbouring dwelling, it is not considered that any impact upon the amenities of the neighbour would be significant enough to warrant a refusal.

3.     No adverse car parking issues arise, no objections under 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) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

(3) C196 Ancillary residential buildings at 'Chilterns' - garage

2001/1039/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     19/06/01     Decide by Date:     13/08/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS CUTHBERT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Adjoining Green Belt

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/1160/67: Extension. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a first floor side extension incorporating a pitched roof over the garage and a single storey rear extension. The first floor side extension would measure1.9m wide, to the same depth as existing and to a hipped roof height as existing. The single storey rear extension would measure 3.6m deep, utilising the whole width of the dwelling and to a lean-to roof height of 2.9m. The pitched roof over the existing garage would be at a height of 4.2m. All materials would match the existing.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

Five letters of representation have been received. Three of which raise no objection to the proposal. The other two raise concern over the proposed hanging tiles as the external material for the first floor extension. This is considered to be detrimental to the appearance of the dwelling and to the road where other properties have been extended sympathetically. It is considered that the hanging tiles would be out of keeping with the existing brick built house.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17, TR11 and TR16.

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.     A metre distance would be maintained between the flank wall of the proposed first floor extension and the north western boundary. The existing garden store and car port wall on this elevation already abut the boundary. As there is only 1m between the south eastern flank elevation and that boundary, the resulting dwelling would utilise a significant proportion of the plot’s width. However, as other properties within Longfield Drive have wide frontages it is not considered that the proposal would have an effect upon the appearance of the street scene. No objection as regards Policy H13(ii).

3.     Having regard that the first floor extension would only measure 1.6m wide and consist of a hipped roof, it is not considered that it would result in having an overbearing appearance or reducing the amount of light to the neighbouring property No.30. No windows are proposed either on any of the flank elevations. It is therefore considered that the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties would be maintained. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The scale, height and design of the first floor side extension and pitched roof over the existing garage would aesthetically improve the appearance of the dwelling. It is not considered that the proposed hanging tiles would be out of keeping with the existing dwelling as the amount of area that would be covered by the tiles would be insignificant in relation to the proportion of the overall frontage of the dwelling.

5.     Sufficient parking space is available within the curtilage of the site to comply with the Council’s standards. No objections 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) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

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

2001/1042/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     19-Jun-01     Decide by Date:     13-Aug-01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Townsend

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS D TAYLOR

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

98/5719/CH   Single storey extension. Permitted development.

01/0817/CH   Single storey front extension and two storey side extension including two dormer windows in front elevation and one front elevation in rear elevation. Withdrawn.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a single storey front extension and a two storey side extension including a dormer window in the rear elevation. The front extension is to extend the existing front porch and is to measure 800mm by 1m and 3.6m high to the top of the pitched roof, equalling that of the existing front porch. The two storey side extension is to measure part 4.7m/ part 3.9m wide, 7.2m deep and 7.8m high, equalling the ridge height of the main dwelling. The dormer window in the rear elevation is to measure 5.15m wide with a gently sloping roof, the top of which is to equal the ridge height of the dwelling.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H18, TR11 and TR16.

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 single storey extension to the front porch will not have an adverse impact upon any of the neighbouring dwellings and will not detract from the appearance of the dwelling or that of the street scene. No objections are raised to it.

3.     The two storey side extension, though representing a large addition to the dwelling, will respect the scale and proportions of the dwelling and will not represent overdevelopment of the site. The resultant dwelling will be in keeping with some of the other dwellings in Prior Grove and will not detract from the appearance of the street scene.

4.     There are three windows in the flank elevation of no.8 Prior Grove facing no.6 (two at ground floor level, serving a kitchen and a dining room, and one at first floor level, serving a bathroom), all of which are obscure glazed. The proposed extension would be sited between 5m and 6m from the ground floor flank elevation of no.8. It is would not appear overbearing or visually intrusive when viewed from no.8 (which is at a level approximately 2m above that of no.6). Furthermore, the difference in height between the two dwellings reduces the impact of the extension. The extension will not appear overbearing for, or have an adverse impact upon, the other neighbouring dwellings.

5.     The two storey side extension does not maintain a one metre gap to the boundary with the flats to the west to the site. However, objection is not raised as the extension would be adjacent to the rear boundary of the curtilage of the flats: visual coalescence between buildings will therefore not occur. No objections are raised in terms of Policies H11 or H16.

6.     The rear dormer window, though quite large at 5.15m wide, is not considered to be excessively large for the roofslope into which it is to be inserted. Furthermore, it is not in a prominent location and will not be readily visible from either the surrounding streets or, considering the boundary treatments, the neighbouring dwellings. Overlooking to the first floor windows of the flats to the north west of the site is a potential issue. However, the room is to be used as a study: the use of obscure glazing to prevent overlooking is not considered to be unreasonable.

7.     By virtue of the extensions, the floorspace of the dwelling will exceed 120sq. m. However, it is possible to park three vehicles within the curtilage of the dwelling. No objections are raised in terms of Policies TR11 or TR16.

8.     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 materials to be used in the construction of the single storey front extension and the two storey side extension shall match the size, colour and texture of those of the existing dwelling.

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

(3) The exterior of the dormer window hereby permitted shall only be constructed in the materials specified on the plans hereby approved.

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

(4) The dormer window in the north elevation of the development 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.

(5) C173A  No additional windows in first floor of west elevation of dwelling

2001/1050/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     20/06/01     Decide by Date:     14/08/01

Parish:     Great Missenden - Prestwood     Ward:     Prestwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS ANSTEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Adjoining Green Belt

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

adjoining Ancient Woodland

adj Biological Notification site

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/1062/79   Single storey side extension. Conditional permission – implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for single storey front and rear extensions. The front extension is to measure 11.9m by part 1.7m/ part 1.8m/ part 2.1m, linking the detached garage to the main dwelling. A pitched roof, 3.1m high, is to be constructed over the extension, 6.7m in length, from the existing front gable projection of the dwelling to the front of the garage. A dummy pitch is also to be constructed over the garage, 3.1m high and 7.1m in length. The rear extension is to measure 4m by 4.1m and 3.4m high to the top of the pitched roof.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Amended Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, TR11 and TR16.

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 proposed front extension, including the dummy pitch over the garage, will relate to the existing dwelling in a satisfactory manner. It will not detract from the appearance of the dwelling or that of the street scene. The extension will not have an adverse impact upon the neighbouring dwelling, no.3 Manor Close, and will not result in overlooking of the neighbouring properties. No objections are raised to the front extension.

3.     The rear extension will not have an adverse impact upon either of the neighbouring dwellings. Overlooking from the high level windows in the south east flank elevation (there is a large clear glazed window in the flank elevation of no.14 Nairdwood Close facing no.2) can be overcome through the use of obscure glazing (overlooking to the private amenity area of no.14 from these windows is not considered to be an issue). Overlooking from the French Doors in the north west elevation across to no.3 will not be an issue either due to the boundary treatment with that property. There are no properties to the rear. The extension will respect the scale and proportions of the dwelling and will not represent overdevelopment of the site. No objections are raised to the rear extension.

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

5.     The floorspace of the dwelling already exceeds 120sq. m. There are therefore no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards.

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) The windows in the south east elevation of the rear extension hereby approved shall at no time be enlarged without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

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

(4) The windows in the south east elevation of the rear extension 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.

(5) C174 No additional windows in south east elevation of extension

(6)  This permission shall relate to the submitted application form and plan as subsequently amended by the two part plans received by the local planning authority on 27/7/01, relating to the side/garages and the breakfast room.

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

2001/1051/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     20/06/01     Decide by Date:     14/08/01

Parish:     Coleshill     Ward:     Coleshill & Penn Street

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MS DOMIN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Coleshill Conservation Area

Green Belt settlement GB4

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

00/2165/CH   Single storey rear extension. Conditional permission – not implemented

THE APPLICATION

The application is for a rear conservatory, measuring 3m wide by a maximum 1.8m deep and 2.8m high to the top of the pitched roof. It is to be set off the boundary with no.2 Amber Cottages by approximately 100m and off the boundary with no.4 Amber Cottages by approximately 200mm. Adjacent to these boundaries, the conservatory is to be 1.125m deep and 2.1m high with the roof pitching away from the boundaries.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comment.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter received from a neighbouring cottage, with no objections

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, GB4, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11, TR16 and CA1.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the Coleshill Conservation Area and a Green Belt Settlement. There is no objection in principle to the proposed extension subject to its compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     It is not considered that the conservatory will have an adverse impact upon either of the neighbouring dwellings. Though the rear elevation of the conservatory is to be 4.6m to the rear of the no.4 Amber Cottages, it will not have a significantly greater impact than once the extension approved under reference 2000/2165/CH is constructed as it is to be set off the boundary with no.4 by approximately 200mm, is to be lower than the pitched roof of the approved extension and is to be shielded by the 2m high boundary fence. The roof of the conservatory is to pitch away from no.4 Amber Cottages. The conservatory will be largely screened from this dwelling and will have an acceptable impact upon it.

3.     The rear elevation of the conservatory will be approximately 4.5m to the rear of no.2 Amber Cottages, as existing (there is an extant permission for a single storey rear extension at this dwelling, 2000/2164/CH, not yet implemented). As with no.4 Amber Cottages, the proposed conservatory will be largely screened by the pitched roof of the single storey rear extension granted permission under reference 2000/2165/CH. The conservatory is to be set off the boundary with no.2 by approximately 100mm and will be shielded to a large degree by the 1.8m high boundary fence. The roof of the conservatory is to pitch away from no.2, such that it will not have an adverse impact upon that dwelling.  

4.     The conservatory represents a minor addition to the dwelling. It will preserve the character of the conservation area. No objections are raised in terms of Policy CA1.

5.     Located within the Green Belt Settlement of Coleshill, the conservatory will not detract from the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. No objections are raised in terms of Policies LSQ1.  

6.     The floorspace of the dwelling will remain below 120sq. m. once the extant permission and the conservatory have been constructed. There are therefore no implications for the Council’s Adopted Carparking Standards.

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) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

2001/1053/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     22/06/01     Decide by Date:     16/08/01

Parish:     Great Missenden     Ward:     Ballinger & South Heath

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS MANTON

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

Archaeological site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/0819/58  Additions.  Permitted and implemented.

AM/0139/63  Additions.  Permitted and implemented.

AM/0794/67  Conservatory.  Permitted and implemented.

CH/0699/75  Erection of single storey side extension.  Refused: excessive cumulative increase in size of dwelling, flat roof design detrimental to amenities of locality which is within area of High Landscape Value and Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and establishment of separate dwelling unit contrary to Green Belt policy.  Appeal dismissed.

93/1171/CH  Erection of single storey rear extension.  Permitted and implemented.

96/0216/CH  New vehicular access, rear conservatory and pitched roofs over first floor flat roofs.  Permitted and implemented

THE APPLICATION

Proposes detached garage incorporating store measuring 12.7m wide by a maximum of 7.6m deep, with a stepped in section to the rear.  The garage is to have a catslide roof measuring 4.9m high.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

CONSULTATIONS

County Archaeological Officer: Scheme is too small scale to have significant archaeological implications.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, GB15, GB16 and LSQ1.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the open Green Belt and also within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whereby ancillary residential outbuildings may be acceptable in principle, provided that they are both small and subordinate in scale to the original dwelling, and are not visually intrusive in the landscape.

2.     The Council does not consider that the land edged in red on the site location plan submitted with the application constitutes the residential curtilage of ‘Hillcroft’, and it is therefore considered that part of the detached building comprising double garage and store is located outside of the residential curtilage.  The erection of part of this building in the open Green Belt, outside of the residential curtilage of the property would result in a material change of use of the land from agricultural to residential curtilage within the Green Belt.  As such the proposed garage is considered to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and is therefore contrary to Policy GB2 of the Adopted Local Plan.  Furthermore, in accordance with Policy GB16 of the Local Plan, planning permission will not be granted for the extension of the existing residential curtilage onto land in the Green Belt that is in non-residential use.

3.     The floor area of the proposed garage measures 91.4sq m, with the floor area of the buildings to be demolished totalling 53sq m and the floor area of the original dwellinghouse measuring 155sq m.  Notwithstanding that part of the garage is located outside of the residential curtilage, it is nevertheless considered that the proposed double garage and store, by virtue of its floor area and overall bulk, is neither small scale nor subordinate to the size and scale of the original dwellinghouse, and as such there will be a reduction in the openness of the Green Belt location.  Objection is therefore raised in relation to Policy GB15.  

4.     There will be no detrimental impact on the amenities of the surrounding properties.  No objections are raised in this respect.

5.     The garage is set well back from the road, and is screened behind the main house.  There will be no adverse impact on either the street scene or the surrounding Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and no objections are raised.

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 Council does not consider that the land edged in red on the site location plan submitted with the application constitutes the residential curtilage of 'Hillcroft', and it is therefore considered that part of the detached outbuilding comprising double garage and store is located outside of the residential curtilage of 'Hillcroft'.  The erection of part of this building in the open Green Belt, outside of the residential curtilage of the property, would result in a material change of use of the land from agricultural to residential curtilage within the Green Belt.  As such, the proposed double garage and store is considered to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and is therefore contrary to Policy GB2 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan, 1997 (including the Adopted Alterations May 2001).  Furthermore, in accordance with Policy GB16 of the Local Plan, planning permission will not be granted for the extension of the existing residential curtilage onto land in the Green Belt that is in non-residential use.

(2) The floor area of the proposed garage is significantly larger than the floor area of the buildings to be demolished, and is approximately two thirds the size of the original dwellinghouse.  Nothwithstanding that part of the garage is located outside of the residential curtilage, it is nevertheless considered that the proposed double garage and store, by virtue of its floor area and overall bulk, is neither small scale nor subordinate to the size and scale of the original dwellinghouse, and as such there will be a reduction in the openness of the Green Belt location.  Objection is therefore raised in relation to Policy GB15 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 (including the Adopted Alterations May 2001).

2001/1056/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     21/06/01     Decide by Date:     15/08/01

Parish:     Great Missenden     Ward:     Ballinger & South Heath

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR A M FYFFE

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB5

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

94/1123/CH  Alterations, demolish existing garage and erect single storey front/side and rear extension.  Permitted and implemented.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes single storey side/rear extension measuring 11.2m deep x 3.55m wide.  The extension is to have a flat roof 2.7m high, with a dummy pitch at the front and rear measuring 2.8m high.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB12, LSQ1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within a Green Belt settlement in South Heath and also in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whereby there are no objections to the proposed development in principle subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     The extension is adequately screened from the neighbouring property.  There will be no impact on the neighbouring properties and therefore no objections are raised in this respect.

3.     The extension replaces an existing store and will improve the overall appearance of the property.  The property is well screened from the road, and as such there will be no adverse impact on either the street scene or the surrounding Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  No objections are raised in relation to Policies GC1, GB12, LSQ1 and H15.

4.     Adequate parking space exists within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council’s parking requirements.  No objections are 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

2001/1068/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     25/06/01     Decide by Date:     19/08/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS Y VIDOW

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

THE APPLICATION

Proposes rear conservatory measuring 3.8m wide x 3m deep, with a pitched roof 3.342m high.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comments.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

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

2.     There will be no adverse impact on the neighbouring properties, and no objections are raised in this respect.

3.     The proposed conservatory is sited to the rear of the property, and there will be no adverse impact on the street scene.

4.     Adequate parking space exists within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council’s parking requirements.  No objections are 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

2001/1081/CH

Case Officer:      Thomas Gabriel

Date Received:     27/06/01     Decide by Date:     21/08/01

Parish:     Great Missenden     Ward:     Ballinger & South Heath

App Type:     Application for Listed Building Consent

Applicant:      MR TIMOTHY TAYLOR

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class C Road

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/1712/72   Development of cubicle unit, milking parlour and dairy, silage and grain store and slurry lagoon (outline application). Conditional permission – implemented.

95/0527/CH   Erection of single storey farm building for dairy cows. Conditional permission – not implemented.

98/1334/CH   Retention of windows (LBC). Conditional consent.

99/0352/CH   Alterations, conversion and change of use of farm building to single storey dwelling and change of use of land to residential use. Conditional permission – not implemented.

00/1917/CH   Alterations, conversion and change of use farm building to single storey dwelling and change of use of land to residential (amendment to planning permission 99/0352/CH). Conditional permission – under implementation at time of this application.  

THE APPLICATION

The application is for external alterations comprising the removal of hanging tiles on the first floor front elevation, repair of timber framing and rendering of panels  between the framing.

CONSULTATIONS