Meeting documents

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 18 December 2019 (attached).

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 18 December 2019 be approved as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

Councillor Ms Baughan: Planning application 19/06000/FUL – declared an interest as she had submitted written comments reflecting local concerns in relation to the application. However, Councillor Ms Baughan stated that she remained open minded and would listen to the debate prior to coming to a decision.

Councillor A Hill: Planning application 18/08330/FUL – declared an interest due to being a member of the Wycombe Society and stated that he had no conflict of interest.

Councillor H McCarthy: Planning application 18/08330/FUL – declared an interest due to being a member of the Wycombe Society and stated that he had no conflict of interest.

Councillor A Turner: Planning application 19/07384/FUL – declared a Pecuniary interest due to being a member of the Princes Risborough Town Council who was the applicant. He declared he would absent himself from the debate during this item.

Councillor C Whitehead: Planning application 19/07106/FUL – declared an interest due to being the Ward Member and that he had submitted written comments. However, Councillor Whitehead stated that he remained open minded and would listen to the debate prior to coming to a decision.

RESOLVED: that the reports be received and the recommendations contained in the reports, as amended by the update sheet where appropriate, be adopted, subject to any deletions, updates or alterations set out in the minutes below.

The Chairman announced that as the start time of this meeting had been changed after the letters had been sent out to interested parties, and as this item had no public speaking, it was decided to hear this item first. This, he believed, would give people a fair chance to attend the committee meeting if they understood it started at 7.00pm rather than 6.30pm

Following a full debate, Members voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation to approve the application.

          RESOLVED: that the application be approved.

The Committee was addressed by Councillors T Green, A Hussain and S Raja, the local Ward Members.

Members voted in favour of the motion to grant temporary permission for five years.

          RESOLVED: that the application be granted temporary permission for five years.

The Committee was addressed by Councillor R Scott the local Ward Member and by Councillor N Marshall, a neighbouring Ward Member.

The Committee was addressed by Ms Susan Spearman, a spokesman on behalf of the objectors and Mr Jeremy Povey, the Chairman of the rugby club and applicant.

Members voted in favour of the motion to approve the application.

          RESOLVED: that the application be approved.

Councillors A Hill and H McCarthy previously declared an interest in the item. However they remained in the Chamber for the debate and voting on the application.

Members vote in favour of the motion to refuse the application for the reason that in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the introduction of vehicles into an expansive pedestrianised area would be intrusive and visually harmful within the street scene.

Furthermore it raised safety concerns associated with the potential conflict between the operation of the bus stop, vehicles entering and exiting the site and pedestrians. This would significantly reduce the amenity value of the area for pedestrian users of the space.

These issues and concerns were considered to outweigh the perceived benefits associated with the provision of the small number of off-street parking spaces proposed.

The proposal was thus considered to be contrary to policies CP9 (Sense of Place), DM36 (Placemaking and Design Quality) and DM37 (Small Scale Non-Residential Development) of the adopted Wycombe District Local Plan (2019).

          RESOLVED: that the application be refused for the reasons stated above.

The Committee was addressed by Councillors J Savage and D Johncock, the local Ward Members.

The Committee was addressed by Parish Councillor Alec Barron on behalf of Chepping Wycombe Parish Council in objection.

Members voted in favour of the motion to refuse the application for the reasons that:

1.   In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed development, by virtue of its height and proximity to the boundary of the site, represented an overdevelopment of the plot that would fail to achieve a high standard of design. Symptomatic of this it was considered to be that the site frontage was occupied by 2-storey development which would appear unduly cramped in a location where more spacious layouts predominate. This impact was exacerbated by the lack of set back or set down of the extension which emphasised the prominence of the extension making this unduly prominent to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area.

This conflicted with policies CP9 (Sense of Place), DM36 (Placemaking and Design Quality) and DM36 (Extension and Alterations to Existing Dwellings) of the adopted Wycombe District Local Plan (2019), Policy 6 (Quality design) of the Daws Hill neighbourhood Plan (Adopted December 2019) and the Householder Planning and Design Guidance (Adopted January 2020).

2.   In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal would, by virtue of its depth, height and proximity to the boundary, result in a large flank wall which would result in a dominant and overbearing impact, detrimental to the amenities of number 27 School Close, the neighbouring property.

This conflicted with policies CP9 (Sense of Place), DM36 (Placemaking and Design Quality) and DM37 (Small Scale Non-Residential Development) of the adopted Wycombe District Local Plan (2019), Policy 6 (Quality design) of the Daws Hill neighbourhood Plan (Adopted December 2019) and the Householder Planning and Design Guidance (Adopted January 2020).

          RESOLVED: that the application be refused for the reasons stated above.

The Committee was addressed by Councillors Mrs L Clarke OBE and A Hill, the local Ward Members.

The Committee was addressed by Ms Stephanie Weeks in objection and Mr Irfan Akram, the agent on behalf of the applicant.

Members voted in favour of the motion to refuse the application for the following reasons:

1.   In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed extension was of a design which was out of keeping with the existing dwelling and failed to safeguard its important architectural features. The site was in a location that was readily visible from the street and as such, the proposal failed to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Hambleden Conservation Area and would be visually intrusive in this part of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Therefore, the development conflicted with Policies DM 30 (The Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty), DM31 (Development Affecting the Historic Environment), DM35 (Placemaking and Design Quality) and DM36 (Extensions and Alterations to Existing Dwellings) of the Adopted Local Plan and the Chilterns Building Design Guide.

2.   In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal would, by virtue of its depth, height and proximity to the boundary, result in a flank wall which would be dominant and overbearing in appearance, detrimental to the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring property. This conflicts with policies CP9 (Sense of Place), DM35 (Placemaking and Design Quality), DM36 (Extensions and Alterations to Existing Dwellings) and the Householder Planning and Design Guidance (Adopted January 2020).

          RESOLVED: that the application be refused for the reasons stated above.

The Committee was addressed by Councillor C Whitehead the local Ward Member.

The Committee was addressed by Parish Councillor C Hussey on behalf of Hambleden Parish Council in objection and Mr Jeremy Evans, the agent on behalf of the applicant.

Councillor C Whitehead previously declared an interest in the item. However he remained in the Chamber for the debate and voting on the application.

Members voted in favour of the motion to approve the application subject to an amendment to Condition 2, as follows:

Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 of the Second Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order), the flat hereby approved shall not be occupied until the barrier erected on the site access has been removed. Thereafter no gates or other means of enclosure shall be erected on the site access.

Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off clear of the highway for the safety and convenience of the highway users.

          RESOLVED: that the application be approved.

The Committee was addressed by Councillors A Collingwood and N Marshall, the local Ward Members.

Members voted in favour of the motion to refuse the application subject to the inclusion of a third reason for refusal, as follows:

In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority insufficient information had been submitted with regards to the existing and proposed ground levels within the site, to demonstrate that the proposal would achieve a satisfactory form of development, without having an adverse impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring dwellings. It was considered that, bearing in mind the sloping nature of the site, the separation distance between the proposed dwelling and the existing properties in Micklefield Road was insufficient to ensure that the privacy of the existing properties is maintained.

The proposal was therefore contrary to policy DM35 (Placemaking and Design Quality) of the Wycombe District Local Plan (adopted August 2019), and the Residential Design Guidance (adopted June 2017).

RESOLVED: that the application be refused subject to the inclusion of an additional reason as stated above.

The Committee was addressed by Councillor Ms A Baughan, the local Ward Member.

Councillor Ms A Baughan previously declared an interest in the item. However she remained in the Chamber for the debate and voting on the application.

The Chairman, having declared an interest in the application, vacated the Chair and vacated the chamber for the duration of debate. The Vice-Chairman took the Chair for this application.

Members raised concern regarding the potential impact of noise and disturbance arising from the use of the rear courtyard in such close proximity to already established residential properties and, following a full debate, voted in favour of the motion to defer the application to allow the Head of Planning and Sustainability to negotiate with the applicant to see if a management plan and/or physical works could be prepared which would mitigate the concerns raised.

          RESOLVED: that the application be deferred for the reasons stated above.

The Committee was addressed by Parish Councillor Matthew Walsh of Princes Risborough Town Council, the applicant.

Members noted that a provisional presentation by Persimmon Homes Ltd and Redrow Homes Ltd regarding proposed development at land at Terriers Farm, Kingshill Road, High Wycombe, HP13 5BB had been booked for the next Pre-Planning Committee training / Information Session on Wednesday 12 February 2020 at 6.00pm

RESOLVED: That the details of the pre-Committee information / training session to be held on 12 February 2020 be noted.

To appoint Members to undertake site visits on Tuesday 11 February 2020 should the need arise.

RESOLVED: That in the event that it was necessary to arrange site visits on Tuesday 11 February 2020 in respect of the agenda for the meeting on Wednesday 12 February 2020, the following Members be invited to attend with the relevant local Members:

Councillors: Ms A Baughan, S Graham, D A Johncock, N B Marshall, H L McCarthy, N J B Teesdale, A Turner and P R Turner.

Members noted the Delegated Actions undertaken by the Planning Enforcement Team.

Submission of the file of actions taken under delegated powers since the previous meeting.

The file on actions taken under delegated authority since the previous meeting was circulated for the Committee’s attention.