Meeting documents

2001/34/TC

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     22/06/01     Decide by Date:     03/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Gold Hill

App Type:     Work to unpreserved trees in Conservation Area

Applicant:      ALISON FERGUSON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chalfont St Peter - Gold Hill Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Class C Road

Northolt Airfield safeguarding zone

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

97/0046/CH     Felling of two sycamore trees. No TPO made.

98/0627/CH     Alterations, single storey extension to lounge on south west elevation and new dormer window in south west elevation. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Felling of three birch trees.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s advice.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Propose removal due to possibility of trees undermining our neighbour’s wall – attach letter from neighbour commenting:- 9in boundary wall 10ft high – ground level at Hibbert Lodge 4ft higher – no concrete foundation and evidence of bulging – trees 4-7ft from wall and some 30ft high – concerned that as trees continue to increase in height with consequential root extension absorbing additional moisture from soil that foundation of wall may be damaged, possibly affecting safety and stability of wall – plans/sketches attached – consider prudent to cut down trees to remove potential danger.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Three young birch trees 10-12m high about 1-2m from wall – wall appears to be from old walled garden – about 1.5m high on Hibbert Lodge side but 3m high on Meadowcroft side – weight of soil etc pushing wall out along entire length – presence of trees would not help situation – trees fairly closely spaced – back tree leaning and top recently broken off – trees useful but not of particular importance.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy CA5 

ISSUES

1.     The three birch trees are situated at the rear of Hibbert Lodge and are partially visible from Meadowcroft. There is only very limited visibility of the very tops of the trees from Gold Hill Common.

2.     It is considered that the trees do not make a significant contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. A Tree Preservation Order would therefore not be appropriate.

3.     It is considered that it would not be appropriate to request replacement planting.

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

RECOMMENDATION: That a TPO shall not be made; no replacements requested

2001/35/TC

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Gold Hill

App Type:     Work to unpreserved trees in Conservation Area

Applicant:      ALISON HADDOCK

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chalfont St Peter - Gold Hill Conservation Area

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

Class C Road

Northolt Airfield safeguarding zone

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

98/0054/TC     Crown reduction and reshaping of five sycamores and crown thinning of an ash. No TPO made.

99/0038/TC     Felling of an ash tree. No TPO made,

01/0864/CH     Redevelopment to provide two storey building comprising two flats. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Pruning back of trees on both sides and reduce by 2.5m.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s advice.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Intend to prune back the driveside trees between the driveway to the Manse (Austenwood Lane) and Chapel End.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Sycamores down both sides of drive – work to trees on Manse side under 98/0054/TC – now propose work to trees on Chapel End side on boundary of Conservation Area – line of five sycamores covered in ivy – appear to have previously been pollarded at height of about 4m – 2-5m regrowth – telephone wires close to trees – branches over driveway and Chapel End, nearly touching building – not important trees – proposed work appears to be to two front trees – work considered reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy CA5 

ISSUES

1.     The trees are situated between the drive to the Manse and Chapel End and are visible from Chapel End and Austenwood Lane.

2.     The trees are not considered to be of high quality and the proposed work is considered to be reasonable management. A Tree Preservation Order would therefore not be appropriate.

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

RECOMMENDATION: That a TPO shall not be made; no replacements requested

2001/1043/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Austenwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS S D SHUTER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Northolt Airfield safeguarding zone

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

00/1397/CH   Two-storey rear/side extension and rear conservatory.   Withdrawn.

00/1867/CH   Two-storey rear/side extension and rear conservatory.   Conditional Permission.

THE APPLICATION

A two-storey extension to the rear left-hand side angle of the existing property, conservatory and dormer window. The extension will be 3.5m wide (overhanging the flank by 0.7m) and 5.1m deep (projecting beyond the existing rear elevation by 3.1m). The roof is gabled to the rear at 7m in height. Across the remaining 5.9m of the property is proposed a 4m deep conservatory, with a 3.6m wide and 1m deep half hexagon bay to the left-hand side. The structure has an ‘L’ shaped gabled roof pitched to 3.6m in height. The application is completed by a 1.2m wide and 1.8m high, hipped roofed dormer to the right-hand section of the roof on the existing part of the house.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

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

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

ISSUES

1.     The application is in the built up area of Chalfont St. Peter where the two-storey element has not changed since the previous approval (01/1867/CH). The only alteration is the size and design of the conservatory and the addition of a dormer window into the existing rear roof slope.

2.     While the increase in the size and projection of the conservatory raises no further concern to the previous proposal (sited sympathetically into the two-storey angle of the property) the dormer window is a new element at first floor level that will overlook the properties detached side/rear garage. Neighbouring property No. 9 has a secondary first floor flank window, which is the only window this structure will be capable of overlooking and as such is not considered detrimental to the amenity of these residents. The window itself is of agreeable proportions, affording an acceptable design on this rear elevation. The small-scale nature of the proposal with hipped roof is fully in compliance with Local Plan Policy H18.

3.     The amended scheme to 00/1867/CH generates no further concerns to that already granted permission and as such raises no objections with reference to Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14.

4.     The detached garage and long front/side driveway cater for the off street parking requirements of Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.  

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

(3) C174 No additional windows in north west elevation of extension

(4) C176 Obscure glass in first floor single bathroom window in north west elevation

2001/1047/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS ALLEN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/0976/CH   Alterations, conservatory on south west elevation, two-storey extension on north east elevation and single-storey on north west elevation, incorporating double garage.   Refused permission.

99/1473/CH   Alterations, conservatory on south west elevation, two-storey extension on north east elevation and single-storey extension on north west elevation, incorporating double garage.   Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

A bell end conservatory 4.2m long and 4.3m wide (almost the full width of the south east two-storey gabled element of the dwelling). The structure has a shallow hipped roof at 3.7m above ground level. Also a 2.3m wide and 4.1m deep single storey structure on the south western elevation of the property in the existing two-storey angle, with a mono-pitched roof to 3.5m in height.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

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

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

ISSUES

1.     The application is sited on the corner of a leafy road in the built up area of the Chalfont Hights Estate. Neither of the extension constitutes significant architectural modifications to the character of the property, both appearing small scale and subordinate on the property, in terms of Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15. 180 degrees of the curtilage fronts the highway and as such both developments are exposed to the street scene due to the partially depleted and thinned hedge. Never the less the structures are appropriate in this location and are in compliance with Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15.

2.     The conservatory projects 4.2m to the south east of the property but will not extend in front of properties further up Chiltern Hill, being set beneath a bank and retaining wall with 1.8m fencing above. Furthermore adjacent neighbours in this direction (‘Highfields’) only have two secondary flank windows overlooking the site. The single-storey extension is located away from all neighbours and does not generate any concerns over neighbouring amenity. As such the proposal satisfies Local plan policy GC3, H13 and H14.

3.     Application 99/1473/CH proposes the construction of a double garage, should this take place or otherwise, the property will be capable of providing off street parking in compliance with Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

(3) C133 All plans amended - by plans (nos 2 & 3) received on 12/07/01

2001/1048/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      WHITECOURTER DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

Dwellings

Total New Dwellings - proposed:          2

Total Dwellings - displaced/demolished:     1

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

THE APPLICATION

Plot 1 - The design of the dwelling differs from that previously approved in that the depth has increased from 10.3m to 11.9m on the north-eastern (‘living room’) elevation, the hipped roof over would be extended.  A new window would be installed in the south-western elevation of the living room (as shown on the plans)

Plot 2 -     The design of the dwelling differs from that previously approved in that the height has been raised from 8m to 8.5m, although the width of the ridge has been shortened from 2.6m to 1.8m.  The depth of the dwelling has been increased to 12.75 and a flank window installed in the south-western elevation of the living room.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

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

ISSUES

1.     The main issue regarding the amended design and the impact upon the neighbouring properties is whether the increased depth of the dwelling on Plot 1 would appear overbearing when viewed from the existing neighbouring property, ‘Coniston’.  As the extra depth of the dwelling on Plot 1 is towards Plot 2 and not adjacent to ‘Coniston’, it is not considered that it would be sufficiently harmful to the amenities of ‘Coniston’ to justify a refusal, it is however accepted that the increased depth would have some impact upon the neighbour.

2.     The increase in depth of the dwellings does not have any adverse design implications.  The increase in the ridge height of Plot 2 does raise some concerns, however, given the relatively short length of the ridge itself 1.8m and the extant permissions, it is not considered that the extra height would be sufficiently objectionable to justify a refusal.

3.     No further parking implications occur.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C433 Materials - General Details

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

(4) C406 Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted

(5) C407 Landscaping Scheme to be Implemented

(6) C173A  No additional windows in first floor of SW elevation of dwelling on plot one

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

2001/1049/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Amersham - Little Chalfont     Ward:     Little Chalfont

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MRT A AND MRS M F HARRISON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

97/1057/CH   Alterations, single-storey rear extension and rear conservatory and replacement pitched roof over existing flat roof on rear elevation.   Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

New open front porch 3m wide and 1m deep, in front of existing flat roofed element, with pitched roof over all (ridge 5.5m in length terminated by front facing gable at 3.8m).

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter from neighbouring residents raising no objections.

POLICIES

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

ISSUES

1.     The application is in the built up area of Little Chalfont and although it is to the front of the property, it would be small scale on the existing elevation. As such the structure is not adverse on the appearance of the property when considering Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15.

2.     The structure is well distanced from any boundary and so small in volume that it raises no issues on grounds of local amenity.

3.     Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16 are satisfied by the three car space forecourt to the property.

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

2001/1054/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      V PAULSDOTTER AND D WOODWARD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/751/78     Garage and side extension (part of Merton), approved.

CH/1704/78     First floor extension, refused and appeal dismissed (file not in system).

00/1116/CH     Single storey side extension to provide garage, refused.

01/0457/CH     Part first floor, part two-storey rear extension, under construction.

THE APPLICATION

The proposed single storey side extension to provide a garage would be 2.8m in width and 4m in depth.  It would be 2.8m to its flat roof with a false pitch at the front elevation, this would reach a height of 3.7m.  Materials are shown to match the existing dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

If district Council were minded to agree this application members asked that a condition be sought for the garage to be maintained as such and not converted into living accommodation like the first garage.

POLICIES

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

ISSUES

1.     There are no objections to the design of the extension which is in keeping with the rest of the property and would not look obtrusive in the street scene.  No objections under Policies GC1, H13, H15 and H17.

2.     At present the dwelling is over 120m2 in floor area, therefore extra spaces cannot be required over an above the one that exists at present.  Although the proposed garage is of substandard length, as the proposal maintains an adequate forecourt depth, therefore maintaining the one space on site, no objections are raised under Policies TR11 and TR16.  The comments of the Parish Council have been noted, although, the garage is itself of substandard length, it would be considered reasonable to require a condition to prevent its conversion to a habitable room.

3.     As was the case with the previously refused scheme (2000/1116/CH), the amenities of the neighbouring properties should not be adversely affected by the proposal.  Although the extension is on the boundary with ‘Rosemary’, the majority of the work would be viewed against the backdrop of the existing building and should not be too overbearing as a result.  It is noted however, that there is a row of hedging and bushes (approximately 4m high) on the boundary between the properties at the point where the garage is to be sited, due to their proximity with the boundary, concern is expressed with regard to their long-term health.  At present these bushes form partial screening between the properties.   However the applicant stated in her accompanying letter that the wall would be built of a shallow raft foundation in an attempt not to damage the hedge.  As no objections were raised to this under the previous application, it would not be considered reasonable to raise objections under this application.

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

2001/1058/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

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

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham the Hill

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

Applicant:      MICHAEL SHANLY INVESTMENTS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Amersham - Elm Close Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Chiltern District Council (Land at rear 5 Elm Close, Amersham) Tree Preservation Order 1987 (No 15 of 1987) covering five individual lime trees.

87/0164/CH     Construction of parking for offices at 43 Hill Avenue with access via service road at Elm Close. Conditional permission.

98/1224/CH     Construction of parking area ancillary to commercial premises fronting Hill Avenue. Refused permission.

00/2101/CH     Erection of two storey office building with car parking. Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Pruning of lime trees to provide clear ground to branch height over service road of five metres and branches to be lopped so that they are three metres clear of new office building.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve subject to Forestry Officer comments.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Given that Courtyard Close, the service road running alongside the application site will be the principal road serving our new office development at the rear of 41-47 Hill Avenue we are intending tidying the approach to the building and creating unrestricted access along the road. Currently there are several low hanging branches which both look untidy and impede access. Also propose to keep branches clear of new office building. Work will be carried out in accordance with BS3998 and tree surgeon will be chosen from The Arboricultural Association’s ‘Directory of Consultants and Contractors’.

A letter of concern from Elm Close Estate (1980) Limited commenting - that only trees 3 and 4 directly front the new office building – seems that little or no work is necessary for trees 1,2 and 5 where the lane is wider and there are no low branches – concerned because of proximity of new office to Estate boundary and final extent of lopping of trees 3 and 4 – would expect a sympathetic tree profile but proposed clearances may give a poor profile to the trees.

Three letters of objection from residents of Elm Close making the following points:

a) Work to give clearance of 3m from building would only involve two or three trees.

b) Branches already several feet away – only minor work required – assume much greater damage planned – building lorries have made it past trees.

c) Trees provide significant screening – removal of branches would expose unsightly rear of shops and damage privacy.

d) Building only recently built – if distance required should have been taken into account and building works restricted – if not why should protected trees be damaged subsequently.

e) Few mature trees in centre of town – should be fully protected.

f) Suspicious that builders intend to kill trees or severely reduce them should permission be granted.

g) Lopped trees rarely regain their former beauty and work should not be permitted.

h) Any reduction in height should be either refused or carefully controlled.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Line of five lime trees along what was once rear boundary of 5 Elm Close– beside access road to rear of properties in Hill Avenue – about 7m from office building nearing completion – trees once pollarded at height of about 4m – some lower branches of trees currently hanging down to about 2m – branches of some trees within 1-2m of new building – some vehicle damage to some trees – minor crown lifting over road and minor trimming close to building considered reasonable – would not involve significant work or large branches – should have little effect on screening.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The five lime trees are beside the access road to the rear of Hill Avenue and the tops of the trees are also visible in more distant views.

2.     The trees currently have some lower branches hanging over the road and close to the new office building. Some minor pruning work to allow clearance for vehicles and around the building is considered to be reasonable management. This should only involve small branches and have little effect on the amenity value of the trees.

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 the removal of small lower branches give a clearance over the access road of five metres, and the pruning of branches to give a clearance of three metres from the new office building.

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

(1) INFORMATIVE - I213 Quality of Tree Work                                                        

(2) INFORMATIVE - I211 Tree Work - Branch Removal                                                  

2001/1059/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

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

Parish:     Seer Green     Ward:     Seer Green & Jordans

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      M TURNEY ESQ

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

96/1029/CH: Alterations, single storey extensions incorporating replacement garage and new vehicular access. Conditional permission.

96/1266/CH: Alterations, single storey side extension incorporating replacement garage and new vehicular access (amendment to planning permission 96/1029/CH). Conditional permission. Not implemented.

97/0641/CH: Single storey front/side/rear extension incorporating double garage. Conditional permission. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

There are numerous aspects to the application. They include the erection of a single storey extension to the north western elevation measuring 3.3m deep, 1.5m wide and to a hipped roof height of 4m. The erection of a front porch measuring 3m wide, 0.7m deep and to a pitched roof height of 3.7m. The erection of a single storey rear extension infilling the rear middle part of the dwelling, projecting beyond the existing elevation by 0.4m. It would have a pitched roof to the same roof height as existing and would replace an existing conservatory. New mono pitched roofs would also be constructed over the existing front bay windows. All materials would match those of the existing.

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

2.     It is considered that the works proposed to the front elevation of the dwelling would improve its appearance within the street scene. No objections raised in relation to Policy H13(ii).

3.     As the footprint of the dwelling would only be marginally increased the proposed works would not have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC3, H13(i) and H14.

4.     The proposed works would aesthetically improve the visual appearance of the dwelling. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC1 and H15.

5.     Although a condition was imposed on planning permission 97/0641/CH that prevented the garage from being converted to provide additional living accommodation, the description of the proposal seeks to alter this condition in that part of the garage is converted to form additional living accommodation. However, three parking spaces could still be provided 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) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

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

2001/1062/CH

Case Officer:      Sarah Moss

Date Received:     27/06/01     Decide by Date:     22/08/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Application under Advertisement Regulations

Applicant:      NICHOLAS KING HOMES PLC

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/1982/CH     Erection of 8 detached houses and garages and entrance road. Refused. Subsequent Appeal (Ref: T/APP/X0415/A/00/1037931/P8) Appeal dismissed.

00/0085/CH     Erection of 8 detached houses and garages and entrance road. Refused. Subsequent Appeal Allowed (Ref: T/APP/X0415/A/ 00/1041250/P8)

00/0438/CH     Erect 8 detached houses and garages and access road from Wyngrave Place. Conditional Permission. Implemented.

00/2158/CH     Retention of 3 flagpoles at site entrance and erection of 5 flagpoles within development site. Refused. The 8 flagpoles collectively contribute to visual clutter in the street scene and the surrounding locality and as such the development is contrary to Policy A1 if the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.

011063/CH     Retention of two flagpoles. At the time of writing this report no decision had been made.

THE APPLICATION

The application is to retain a developers advertisement board. The developers board consists of a collection of 5 panels which measure 1.68 metres in width and collectively 3.09 metres in height attached to two wooden poles which raise the sign 1.8 metres above ground level, with the sign being at total of 4.89m above ground level. The board is located on the south eastern boundary of Plot 1 of the development, facing Pitch Pond Close.

PENN PARISH COUNCIL

No comments to make on this application

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter objecting to the hoarding stating:

1. The developer has knowingly flouted planning requirements since the site opened and now, to suit his ends, is applying for retrospective permission.

2. Wyngrave Place / Pitchpond Close is a cul-de-sac with no passing traffic.

3. The boards and flagpoles only act to detract from the natural beauty of the area.

4. If it is approved it should be subject to conditions relating to no lighting of the sign and the sale of the properties.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies A1, GC1 and GC3

ISSUES

1. The application site is currently being developed to provide 8 houses with garages.  Four houses appear completed and three are occupied, the rmainder of the development is still under construction. The site lies within an established residential area of special character and the eastern boundary of the development site is adjacent to the Open Green Belt and the Chilterns area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  However the signs are at the opposite end of the site by the entrance off Wyngrave Place and as such are not visible from the Green Belt or Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2.     The main issues to be considered in respect of applications for advertisement consent is the impact of the signage on local amenities and public safety.

3.     The board is black in colour and is sited so that it is visible from Pitch Pond Close and Wyngrave Place. Whilst the sign is high, having regard to the overall size and appearance, on balance, it is not considered that it contributes to excessive visual clutter in the street scene such that it would be detrimental to the amenities of the locality and near by residential properties, having regard also to the concurrent separate application for advertisement consent for the two flagpole signs.

4.     The sign is set back from the access to the site and adjacent road and as such it is not considered that the sign is detrimental to public safety.

5     Having regard to the above and on balance it is considered that no objection should be raised in respect of Policy A1, GC1 or GC3 of the Adopted Local Plan.

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) This consent is granted for a limited period which will expire on 30 December 2001  or when all houses are occupied, which ever is sooner, and at the end of this period the advertisement hereby permitted shall be removed from this site unless permission has already been renewed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: Whilst the Local Planning Authority considers the retention of the developers advertisement board acceptable for a temporary period during the sale of the properties, the sign is not considered acceptable for permanent retention in this location having regard to the amenities and character and appearance of the locality.

(2) C261 Standard Advert Conditions

(1) INFORMATIVE It is drawn to the attention of the applicant that this application is for the retention of an advertisement board. Any external or internal illumination of this board would require a further application as the illumination of this board has not been applied for. The applicant is advised that the Council has not given consent for this sign to be illuminated.

2001/1063/CH

Case Officer:      Sarah Moss

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

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Application under Advertisement Regulations

Applicant:      NICHOLAS KING HOMES LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

99/1982/CH     Erection of 8 detached houses and garages and entrance road. Refused. Subsequent Appeal (Ref: T/APP/X0415/A/00/1037931/P8) Appeal dismissed.

00/0085/CH     Erection of 8 detached houses and garages and entrance road. Refused. Subsequent Appeal Allowed (Ref: T/APP/X0415/A/ 00/1041250/P8)

00/0438/CH     Erect 8 detached houses and garages and access road from Wyngrave Place. Conditional Permission. Implemented.

00/2158/CH     Retention of 3 flagpoles at site entrance and erection of 5 flagpoles within development site. Refused. The 8 flagpoles collectively contribute to visual clutter in the street scene and the surrounding locality and as such the development is contrary to Policy A1 if the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997.

01/1062/CH     Retention of developers advertisement board. At the time of writing this report no decision has been made on this application.

THE APPLICATION

The application is to retain two flagpoles that have been erected on the south eastern boundary of the site outside plot 1. The flag poles are 6 metres in height and have one flag measuring 1.8 metres by 1.0 metres.

PENN PARISH COUNCIL

No comments to make on this application

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter objecting to the hoarding stating:

1. The developer has knowingly flouted planning requirements since the site opened and now, to suit his ends, is applying for retrospective permission.

2. Wyngrave Place / Pitchpond Close is a cul-de-sac with no passing traffic.

3. The boards and flagpoles only act to detract from the natural beauty of the area.

4. If it is approved it should be subject to conditions relating to no lighting of the sign and the sale of the properties.

POLICIES

The Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan 1991 – 2011 Policies A1, GC1, GC3

ISSUES

1.     The application site is currently being developed to provide 8 houses with garages.  Four houses appear completed and three are occupied, the remainder of the development is still under construction. The site lies within an established residential area of special character and the eastern boundary of the development site is adjacent to the Open Green Belt and the Chilterns area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  However the flagpoles are at the opposite end of the site by the entrance off Wyngrave Place and as such are not visible from the Green Belt or Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2.     The main issues to be considered in respect of applications for advertisement consent is the impact of the signage on local amenities and public safety.

3.     The flagpoles are either side of the developers board being considered under application 2001/1062/CH. and are visible from Pitch Pond Close and Wyngrave Place. It is not considered that the flagpoles contribute to excessive visual clutter in the street scene having regard also to the developers sign board such that they detract from the amenities of neighbouring residential properties or general character of the locality bearing in mind that the signage is require only for a temporary period. As such on balance it is considered that no concerns are raised in respect of Policy A1, GC1 or GC3 of the Adopted Local Plan.

4.     The flagpoles are site away from the road in a position which is not considered to be detrimental to public safety.

5.     It is noted that application 2000/2158/CH for the retention of 8 flagpoles was refused on the grounds of visual clutter in the street scene and the surrounding locality. The significant reduction in the number of flagpoles is considered to overcome objections to the previous application.

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) This consent is granted for a limited period which will expire on 30 December 2001 or when all houses are occupied, which ever is sooner, and as the end of this period the advertisement hereby permitted shall be removed from this site unless permission has already been renewed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: Whilst the Local Planning Authority considers the retention of the flagpoles acceptable for a temporary period during the sale of the properties, the flagpoles are not considered acceptable for permanent retention on this site having regard to the  amenities and character and appearance of the locality.

(2) C261 Standard Advert Conditions

2001/1065/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      GLASSWICK LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Shopping area - Principal Shopping Frontage

Class C Road

Mineral Consultation Area

Floor Space

Codes:     SP

Proposed (m2):     34

Displaced (m2):     0

THE APPLICATION

A single storey flat roofed extension 4.6m wide, 8.1m long and 3.6m in height, between the left-hand side access stairs and the flank of No. 6’s single-storey rear extension.

PARISH COUNCIL

Objection due to loss of parking in Churchfield Road which is very congested with traffic.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, S2, TR11 and TR16.

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

ISSUES

1.     The application is to the rear of a retail unit in the S2 Policy Area of Chalfont St. Peter, where the application provides a new store area to the shop and offices in the Broadway, helping to further strengthen the role of the District Centre of Chalfont St. Peter.

2.     The application faces onto an access road with few townscape merits and as the proposal is very similar to other single storey flat roofed extensions to the rear of this parade of shops, it is not considered to be unacceptable in terms of Local Plan Policy GC1.

3.     As the structure is to infill the gap between adjacent single/storey rear extensions, then it is considered not to generate amenity issues with neighbouring properties. The only premises to view the extension is the light industrial unit on the opposite side of the access road facing the site.

4.     The total floorspace of the property has been expanded to195sq.m. requiring 6 car parking spaces to comply with standards housed under Local Plan Policy TR16. The site though will only be capable of parking one car, leaving a shortfall of five spaces. The extension involves the loss of existing car parking spaces and no additional parking provision is made for the additional floorspace. The application clearly fails to meet the requirements of Policy TR16. This is considered particularly important in this location where congestion from on street parking exists, as the Parish Council have pointed out.

5.     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 proposed development would involve the building of an extension on land currently available for off street parking, resulting in a loss of parking spaces. Furthermore, no provision is made for additional parking elsewhere on the site to serve the existing or extended shop and storage premises. The proposal would thus exacerbate the shortage of parking spaces in this locality, resulting in congestion on the adjacent highway and would be contrary to Chiltern District Council Adopted Local Plan Policies TR11 and TR16.

2001/1066/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Latimer     Ward:     Ashley Green & Latimer

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR FOWLER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB5

Unclassified road

Eastern Gas pipeline

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

THE APPLICATION

A rear left-hand side half hexagon bayed conservatory, 3.7m in width, 4.5m in length and 3.1m to the ridge of the roof.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB5, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application is for the construction of a rear conservatory to a property in the GB5 Green Belt Settlement of Ley Hill. The design of the structure is acceptable and it is not possible to view it from a public viewpoint. As such Local Plan Policy GC1 and H15 are adhered to.

2.     The well-planted boundaries to the rear garden screen the proposal all round, except the first 3m along the eastern boundary (adjacent to the structure) where only a 1.5m fence marks the boundary. The neighbour beyond this fence extends out parallel to the conservatory at single-storey level, with only a side door to view the structure. As such the new build will not inhibit light to any principal windows. Furthermore the amenity of this neighbour is preserved by the unfenestrated flank, which preserves the privacy of this neighbour. Policy GC3, H13 and H14 of the Local Plan have been complied with.

3.     The integral double garage and complementary driveway caters for parking standards housed under Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

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

2001/1069/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

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

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS R P GILLESPIE

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Northolt Airfield safeguarding zone

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

88/0198/CH   Alterations, single-storey rear and two-storey front extension incorporating double garage.   Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

A rear dormer window 2m wide and 1.5m high, inset by 1.3m from the right hand side elevation of the property and 1.6m up from the guttering, matching that existing further across on this roof slope. Both windows will be capped with hipped-pitched roofs at 1m in height.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

POLICIES

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

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

ISSUES

1.     The application seeks approval for a second dormer window on the rear elevation of a chalet style property in the built up area of Chalfont St. Peter, where it will have little if any impact on the character of the area, being out of view from the public realm. Furthermore the two windows together amount to an acceptable design for the rear elevation of the property. They are in scale with the rear roof slope and include agreeable pitches to secure an acceptable scheme for this property. As such the project is considered satisfactory in appearance in terms of Local plan policy GC1, H15 and H18.

2.     The properties along this section of Joiners Lane are stepped at an angle towards the highway. As such No. 54 is forwards of the application, while No. 58 is set further back. The new dormer window will be closer to the boundary with No. 58 that has no side fenestration’s to be looked into from the dormer. Furthermore the existing single storey rear extension to No56, obscures a great deal of overlooking from this window into its neighbours garden (over the 2.5m hedging). Although the boundary to No. 54 is less well defined, the dormer is furthest away from this property and will generate no greater overlooking than the other existing window to the left-hand side of the roof. As such it would be considered unreasonable to raise objections to the additional structure to the rear of this property, in view of the impact of the existing dormer window. Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14 are not considered breached in relation to this application.

3.     The property has an integral double garage and three car parking spaces on the forecourt to cater for Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

2001/1070/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     25-Jun-01     Decide by Date:     19-Aug-01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham the Hill

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS A LIGHT

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Amersham - Elm Close Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

THE APPLICATION

1.     The two storey side extension would project 4.5m away from the side of the existing dwelling, the rear elevation of such would be level with the rear of the existing dwelling and would project forward by 5.46m, this would be 1.85m.  The roof would be pitched at the same angle as the existing with the ridge at 6.8m (the main ridge height is 7.45m).

2.     The garage is to be 7.505m deep and 3m in width.  This would have a pitched roof over to a height of 3.6m.  It would be constructed of stained feather-edge boards with plain tiles over to match the existing dwelling.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approve subject to appropriate materials being used.

CONSULTATIONS

District Engineers (Highways) - It is suggested that the new access is laid out such that it joins Elm Close at right angles.  No objections subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, CA1, CA2, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H20, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     Is considered that the main issue is the impact the design of the proposal would have upon the setting of the Elm Close Conservation Area, in this respect reference is made to the Elm Close Conservation Area guide.  Section five relates to how extensions can be constructed sympathetically.  It notes that successful extensions have been achieved ‘with several properties which have been given two-storeyed side extensions with pitched roofs which are set back from the front elevation, and which have ridge lines below that of the main roof...In this way they have remained subordinate to the form of the original building’(para 5.1).  It is considered that the design and features of this extension meets these criteria although it is noted that this side extension projects further to the side than the other similarly designed extensions which were more restricted by their plot widths.  Notwithstanding this it is not considered that this extra width would detract from the setting of the Conservation Area.  The front boundary is relatively well screened and the proposal would not appear intrusive in the street scene.   Consequently no objections are raised to the design and bulk of the extension in the context of both the street scene and in terms of preserving the setting of the Conservation Area.

2.     The proposed garage is to be at the rear of the dwelling, of modest size with no objections raised to its design.  This follows guidance in the Conservation Area booklet which states that garages should be in the rear garden.  As such no objections are raised to the garage.

3.     It is not considered that the proposal would have a significantly detrimental impact upon the amenities of the neighbouring properties.  No objections are raised under Policies GC2, GC3, H13 and H14.

4.     Sufficient car parking provision is provided within the curtilage of the application site to comply with Policies TR11 and TR16.  The comments of the District Engineer are noted, however, Elm Close is an unclassified road, therefore planning permission is not required for the access, it would therefore be considered unreasonable to include conditions restricting what does not require planning permission.  The plans also indicate that the access gap through the front boundary screening is to be maintained and not widened beyond that strictly necessary for the driveway, (this follows guidance in the Conservation Area Guide paragraph 5.5).

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) C433 Materials - General Details

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

(4) C176 Obscure glass in single window in southern elevationb at first floor

2001/1072/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     26/06/01     Decide by Date:     20/08/01

Parish:     Chesham Bois     Ward:     Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      THE BEACON SCHOOL

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Class A Road

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

There have been numerous applications for expansion of the school and for facilities on the site. The most recent of which were:

98/0199/CH: Alterations and single storey extension to southern elevation of Jones/Jubilee blocks. Approved. Implemented.

98/1000/CH: Closure of southern most vehicular access and construction of new vehicular access and drive and additional parking areas. Conditional permission. Implemented.

01/718/CH: Two temporary classroom units for three years. Conditional permission. Not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the creation of an access ramp and for the fixing of a handrail to the southern elevation of the dining hall which is a Grade II listed building. The dining hall forms part of the building which includes the Headmaster’s House situated at the northern end of the site. The access ramp would measure 6m long and 1.4m wide. The handrail would measure 4m long.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

A letter received with the application submits that the ramp and handrail are being proposed for the particular circumstances of a pupil that will be joining the school in September.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, H13(ii) and H15.

ISSUES

1.     Having regard to the level of development that is proposed and to its siting it is not considered that it would be detrimental to the appearance of the street scene or be out of character with the existing buildings on site. No objections raised in terms of Policies GC1, H13(ii) and H15

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

2001/1073/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     26/06/01     Decide by Date:     20/08/01

Parish:     Chesham Bois     Ward:     Chesham Bois & Weedon

App Type:     Application for Listed Building Consent

Applicant:      THE BEACON SCHOOL

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Class A Road

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

There have been numerous applications for expansion of the school and for facilities on the site. The most recent of which were:

98/0199/CH: Alterations and single storey extension to southern elevation of Jones/Jubilee blocks. Approved. Implemented.

98/1000/CH: Closure of southern most vehicular access and construction of new vehicular access and drive and additional parking areas. Conditional permission. Implemented.

01/718/CH: Two temporary classroom units for three years. Conditional permission. Not implemented.

THE APPLICATION

An application has been submitted for listed building consent for the creation of an access ramp and for the fixing of a handrail to the southern elevation of the dining hall which is a Grade II listed building. The dining hall forms part of the building which includes the Headmaster’s House situated at the northern end of the site. The access ramp would measure 6m long and 1.4m wide. The handrail would measure 4m long.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

A letter received with the application submits that the ramp and handrail are being proposed for the particular circumstances of a pupil that will be joining the school in September.

CONSULTATIONS

Historic Buildings Officer: The proposed ramp is to provide access to the school dining hall which occupies a former barn listed Grade II. The construction of the ramp will not affect the structure of the barn, and the handrails are sufficiently slight that they have minimal visual impact on its character. There are therefore no objections on historic building grounds.

POLICIES

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

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policy LB1.

ISSUES

1.     The Historic Buildings Officer’s comments are noted and no objection is raised to the proposal as it is considered that the structure of the barn would not be affected and that only minimal visual impact would be had upon the character of the listed building. No objections raised in terms of 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) C435 Listed Building Materials - Affecting Exterior

2001/1076/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     26/06/01     Decide by Date:     20/08/01

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

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

Applicant:      J H TAYLOR

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Unclassified road

Tree Preservation Order

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Amersham Rural District Council (St Heliers, Little Chalfont) Tree Preservation Order, 1967 covering 2 individual trees and 4 areas of trees at Birkett Way, Little Chalfont.

91/0640/CH     Alterations, single storey rear extension and dormer window in front elevation above garage. (18 Birkett Way). Conditional permission.

91/0814/CH     Removal of two branches from an oak tree. (18 Birkett Way). Conditional permission.

97/0010/CH     Crown reduction of an oak tree. (16 Birkett Way). Conditional permission.

THE APPLICATION

Pruning of a horse chestnut and an oak.

PARISH COUNCIL

The Parish Council is unable to present its objections or support, as no details of the work proposed have been submitted.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Proposal is basic forestry work – horse chestnut is leaning towards No 16 and oak tree is leaning towards our own property.

Four letters from neighbours having no objections to the proposed work.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Area of trees on corner of road – includes large horse chestnut about 3m from neighbours’ garage and extension – some branches touching roof – large secondary stem growing forwards with branches over road – some reduction and shaping sensible.

Belt of trees at rear between houses – one oak at rear corner of dwelling slight lean to house – some low branches removed – branches touching roof of single storey extension – some pruning reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The horse chestnut is a large prominent tree near the corner of the road while the oak is less visible, being situated in a belt of trees at the rear of the house.

2.     Both trees are close to houses with branches touching roofs so some reduction and reshaping work 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 of the horse chestnut by 30%, and crown reduction and re-shaping of the oak by 25%.

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

(1) INFORMATIVE - I213 Quality of Tree Work                                                        

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction                                                 

2001/1078/CH

Case Officer:      Andrew Fuller

Date Received:     26/06/01     Decide by Date:     20/08/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Giles     Ward:     Seer Green & Jordans

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS V HANDFORD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Green Belt settlement GB4

Locally Important Landscape

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Mineral Consultation Area

THE APPLICATION

A single storey side extension to provide double garage. The structure proposed is 5.5m wide, 6.3m deep and 4.8m high to the ridge of its hipped roof.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997: Policies GC1, H13, H14, H15, H17, GB4, TR11 and TR16.

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

ISSUES

1.     The application is sited in Deanwood Road, which is designated as an existing row of dwellings in the Green Belt near Jordans village. This GB4 area is characterised by a mix of properties on varied plots, well screened amongst dense mature trees. The application for a single storey side double garage is located at basement level, due to the steep incline in the land from north east to south west. The structure as such sits low on the profile of the property and appears as a sensitively designed addition to the property, which is well landscaped on most aspects by a mix of vegetation. As such the proposal is acceptable in terms of Local Plan Policy GC1, H15 and GB4, where it will have a minimum impact on the rural character of the area.

2.     The only neighbouring property able to view the extension will be ‘Cedarwood Cottage’, currently under renovation (99/1438/CH). The part two-storey, part single-storey front/side link extension to this neighbour will only have a ground floor secondary window and roof lights. As such this extension will not be to the detriment of this neighbours existing or new build. Although located on an elevated slab, the garage will preserve a 1m gap to the boundary, which is adequate under Local Plan Policy H17. As such the structure is not considered adverse on the neighbourhood in term of Local Plan Policy GC3, H13 and H14.

3.     The new garage will be accessed by a long driveway, which will exceed the necessary parking requirements set out under Local Plan Policy TR11 and TR16.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

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

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

2001/1082/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

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

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Newtown

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS R SPENCER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Adjoining Green Belt

Class C Road

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

87/2454/CH  Demolition of barn and boundary walls, erect detached house, convert two barns into two detached dwellings: car parking, alterations to access and new boundary walls.  Permitted – Not implemented.

87/2255/CH  Listed building consent for works subject of 87/2454/CH.  Granted – Not implemented.

89/2839/CH  Alterations, extension and conversion of 2 agricultural barns and granary to provide 3 detached dwellings and double garages.  Permitted and implemented.

89/2840/CH  Listed building consent for works subject of 89/2839/CH.  Granted.

91/0544/CH  Erection of detached building to provide garages for Granary and Barn No.2 at Vale Farm.  Refused: prominent siting and detrimental to visual amenity of Green Belt, setting of listed building and residential amenities of occupants of dwelling.

92/0170/CH  Alterations, extensions and conversion of granary to provide detached dwelling (amendment to 89/2839/CH).  Permitted and implemented subject to a legal agreement to prevent the implementation or further implementation of the 1987 permission and 1989 permission.

92/0171/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 92/0170/CH.  Granted.

97/1080/CH  Rear conservatory.  Refused: design and materials to be used in external construction would have an adverse effect on the special character and appearance of the listed building.

97/1081/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 97/1081/CH.  Refused: as above.

98/0101/CH  Single storey rear extension.  Permitted – Not implemented.

98/0102/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 98/0101/CH.  Granted.

01/1083/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of the current application.

Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes a single storey rear extension measuring 4.25m wide x 4.46m deep, with a pitched roof 4.4m high.  The building in question is a Grade II Listed Building.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections subject to the use of sympathetic materials in keeping with the main building.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer: The Granary is one of a group of listed farm buildings at Vale Farm.  It was moved from its original position further south in 1988, and extended and converted to a house in 1992.  This application proposes a small extension to the far end of the extension.  It does not affect the structure of the original building, and is sufficiently subordinate in character to have little visual impact on its character.  There are therefore no objections on listed building grounds as long as the materials match as stated on the plans.

Thames Water: No objection.

Environment Agency: No comment.

POLICIES

The Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan 1991 – 2011 Policy HE1

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, LB1, H13, H14, H15, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located in 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.  The building in question is a Grade II listed building.

2.     There is an extant permission (98/0101/CH) on the site for an extension of identical proportions in the same location.  The current proposal involves the removal and relocation of the windows and doors.  No objections were raised with regard to the impact of the extension on the neighbouring properties, and the proposed extension will have no adverse impact on these properties.

3.     The extension does not affect the character of the listed building, and as it sited to the rear of the property there will be no adverse impact on the street scene.  No objections are raised in relation to Policies GC1, LB1 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

2001/1083/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

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

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Newtown

App Type:     Application for Listed Building Consent

Applicant:      MR AND MRS R SPENCER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

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

Adjoining Green Belt

Class C Road

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

Grade 2 Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

87/2454/CH  Demolition of barn and boundary walls, erect detached house, convert two barns into two detached dwellings: car parking, alterations to access and new boundary walls.  Permitted – Not implemented.

87/2255/CH  Listed building consent for works subject of 87/2454/CH.  Granted – Not implemented.

89/2839/CH  Alterations, extension and conversion of 2 agricultural barns and granary to provide 3 detached dwellings and double garages.  Permitted and implemented.

89/2840/CH  Listed building consent for works subject of 89/2839/CH.  Granted.

91/0544/CH  Erection of detached building to provide garages for Granary and Barn No.2 at Vale Farm.  Refused: prominent siting and detrimental to visual amenity of Green Belt, setting of listed building and residential amenities of occupants of dwelling.

92/0170/CH  Alterations, extensions and conversion of granary to provide detached dwelling (amendment to 89/2839/CH).  Permitted and implemented subject to a legal agreement to prevent the implementation or further implementation of the 1987 permission and 1989 permission.

92/0171/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 92/0170/CH.  Granted.

97/1080/CH  Rear conservatory.  Refused: design and materials to be used in external construction would have an adverse effect on the special character and appearance of the listed building.

97/1081/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 97/1081/CH.  Refused: as above.

98/0101/CH  Single storey rear extension.  Permitted – Not implemented.

98/0102/CH  Listed building consent for works the subject of 98/0101/CH.  Granted.

01/1082/CH  Single storey rear extension.  planning permission sought for works the subject of this Listed Building Consent.   Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for listed building consent for a proposed extension to a Grade II listed building.  The proposed extension measures 4.25m wide x 4.46m deep, with a pitched roof 4.4m high.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections subject to the use of sympathetic materials in keeping with the main building and subject to the further comments of the Historic Buildings Officer.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer:  No objections subject to matching materials.  (For full comment see application 01/1082/CH)

POLICIES

The Adopted Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan 1991 – 2011 Policy HE1

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997 (Including the Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies LB1.

ISSUES

1.     The application concerns a Grade II Listed Building, with the proposed single storey extension located to the rear of the property.  The extension does not affect the structure of the original building, and is sufficiently subordinate in character to have little visual impact on its character.  No objections are raised in relation to Policy HE1 of the Adopted County Structure Plan, 1991, or Policy LB1 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan, 1997.

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