Agenda Document for Planning Committee (SBDC)

Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham, Buckinghamshire, UB9 4LH 01895 837236 [email protected] www.southbucks.gov.uk

Planning Committee

Wednesday, 15 August 2018 at 4.15 pm

Council Chamber, Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham

A G E N D A

Item

1. Evacuation Procedure

2. Apologies for Absence

3. Minutes (Pages 5 - 16)

To approve the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 18 July 2018.

4. Declarations of Interest

5. Applications and Plans

The files for each application are available for public inspection at the Council Offices.

A. Committee decision required following a site visit and/or public speaking

17/02396/FUL - Police Station, Oxford Road, Denham, Buckinghamshire, SL9 7AL (Pages 17 - 30)

18/00884/RVC - Grafton House, 31 Camp Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 7PG (Pages 31 - 36)

Chief Executive: Bob Smith Director of Resources: Jim Burness Director of Services: Steve Bambrick PL/18/2173/FA - Car Park, 42-46 Station Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire (Pages 37 - 62)

B. Committee decision required without a site visit or public speaking

None

C. Committee observations required on applications to other Authorities

None

D. To receive a list of applications already determined under delegated powers by the Head of Planning and Economic Development (Pages 63 - 92)

For information

6. Verbal Update on Enforcement Matters (if any)

7. Planning Appeals and Schedule of Outstanding Matters (Pages 93 - 96)

For information

Note: All reports will be updated orally at the meeting if appropriate and may be supplemented by additional reports at the Chairman’s discretion.

Membership: Planning Committee

Councillors: R Bagge (Chairman) J Jordan (Vice-Chairman) M Bezzant T Egleton L Hazell (substitute for D Anthony) P Hogan M Lewis Dr W Matthews D Pepler (substitute for B Gibbs) D Smith

Date of next meeting – Wednesday, 12 September 2018

Chief Executive: Bob Smith Director of Resources: Jim Burness Director of Services: Steve Bambrick Public Speaking If you have any queries concerning public speaking at Planning Committee meetings, including registering your intention to speak, please ask for the Planning Committee Co-ordinator 01895 837210; [email protected]

Audio/Visual Recording of Meetings This meeting might be filmed, photographed, audio-recorded or reported by a party other than the Council for subsequent broadcast or publication. If you intend to film, photograph or audio record the proceedings, or if you have any questions please contact Democratic Services. Members of the press please contact the Communications Team.

If you would like this document in large print or an alternative format, please contact 01895 837236; email [email protected]

Chief Executive: Bob Smith Director of Resources: Jim Burness Director of Services: Steve Bambrick This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 3

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Meeting 18 July 2018

Present: R Bagge* (Chairman) D Anthony*, T Egleton*, B Gibbs*, P Hogan*, J Jordan*, M Lewis*, Dr W Matthews* and D Smith*

Also Present: J Read

Apologies for absence: M Bezzant

*attended site visit

The Chairman welcomed Mark Jaggard, the new Head of Planning and Economic Development, to the meeting.

6. MINUTES

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 23 May 2018 were approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

7. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor P Hogan declared a personal interest in application 18/00533/FUL: Corner Cottage, 45 Stratton Road, Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, HP9 1HR as a Member of Beaconsfield Town Council. Councillor Hogan confirmed that he did not attend any meetings when the application was discussed by the Town Council nor expressed a view on the application, and had not pre-determined the application.

8. APPLICATIONS AND PLANS

Key to the following decisions:

ADV - Consent to Display Adverts; ARM - Approval of Reserved Matters; CI - Certificate of Lawfulness Issued; CON - Conservation Area Consent; D - Deferred; D (INF) - Deferred for Further Information; D (SV) - Deferred for Site Visits; D (PO) - Deferred for Planning Obligation; D (NEG) - Deferred for Negotiations; FCG - Consent for Tree Work; PCR TPO Part Consent/Part Refusal; LBC - Listed Building Consent; OP - Outline Planning Permission; P - Application Permitted; R - Refused or Rejected; R (AO) – Refused against Officer recommendation; RC - Removal of Condition; TC - Temporary Consent; TP - Temporary Permission; ULBC - Unconditional Listed Building

Page 5 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

Consent; UP - Unconditional Permission; VG - Variation Granted; W - Application Withdrawn.

(A) COMMITTEE DECISION REQUIRED FOLLOWING A SITE VISIT AND/OR PUBLIC SPEAKING:

Decision Plan Number: 17/01750/FUL PER Applicant: Mr Ahmed Elfituri Proposal: Conversion and extension of Bulstrode into a 60 bedroom hotel with supporting ancillary spaces, including new-build bedroom accommodation, spa, function pavilion and staff accommodation. Works include the demolition of the 1970's residential accommodation, garaging, warehouse, and modern residential cottage and bungalow. External works to enhance existing landscape to support proposed hotel use and provide car parking provision at Bulstrode, Oxford Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 8SZ Notes:  A site visit was undertaken by Members.  Application 17/01750/FUL and related listed building application (17/01751/LBC) were discussed together.  Officers updated Members confirming that Highways England had no objection to the proposed scheme.

Councillor J Jordan proposed that the application be permitted subject to the conditions and informatives as per the officer’s report. This proposal was seconded by Councillor D Smith and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That the application be permitted subject to the conditions and informatives as per the officer’s report.

Decision Plan Number: 17/01751/LBC LBC Applicant: Mr Ahmed Elfituri Proposal: Listed Building Application for conversion of Bulstrode into a 60 bedroom hotel with supporting ancillary spaces, including new-build bedroom accommodation, spa, function, pavilion and staff accommodation. Works include the demolition of the 1970's accommodation, garaging, warehouse,

180718 Page 6 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

and modern residential cottage and bungalow. External works to enhance existing landscape to support proposed hotel use and provide car parking provision at Bulstrode, Oxford Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 8SZ Notes:  A site visit was undertaken by Members.  Application 17/01751/LBC and related planning application (17/01750/FUL) were discussed together.  Officers recommended amendments to conditions 3 regarding the requirement to implement approved details, and to conditions 7 and 8 to read “approved” and not “agreed”.

Councillor J Jordan proposed to grant listed building consent subject to the conditions and informatives as per the officer’s report with amendments to conditions 3, 7 and 8 as recommended by the Officers. This proposal was seconded by Councillor D Smith and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That listed building consent be granted subject to the conditions, and informatives as per the officer’s report but with amendments to conditions 3 regarding the requirement to implement approved details and to conditions 7 and 8 to read “approved” and not “agreed.

Decision Plan Number: 18/00100/RVC PER Applicant: Skyline Roofing Property Management Company Ltd Proposal: Variation of Conditions 2 and 16 of Planning Permission 17/00385/RVC to allow the addition of solar panels and roof lights, and amendment to site layout to increase parking provision at 69 Denham Green Lane, Denham, Buckinghamshire Notes:  Members noted that 1 additional objection had been received relating to parking.  The Committee noted an amendment to condition 9 to make direct reference to the Arboricultural Statement.

Councillor J Jordan proposed granting permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation with an amendment to condition 9 and an additional informative regarding tree works. This proposal was seconded by Councillor M Lewis and agreed at a vote.

180718 Page 7 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

RESOLVED:

That the application be permitted subject to the conditions, and informatives as per the officer’s report, but with an amendment to condition 9 to make direct reference to the Arboricultural Statement and an additional informative regarding tree works.

Decision Plan Number: 18/00392/FUL PER Applicant: Brunning And Price Proposal: Demolition of existing front porch, construction of single storey front extension incorporating roof lantern and bin store at Loch Fyne Restaurant, 70 London End, Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, HP9 2JD Notes:  A site visit was undertaken by Members.  Mr Matthew Chinery spoke on behalf of the objectors.  Ms Mary Wilcox spoke on behalf of the applicant.  The Planning Officer confirmed that the summary of the comments by the Conservation Officer (page 51 of report) incorrectly implied that the application building was listed. The first paragraph of this summary was corrected to read: “The Heritage Officer originally advised that the front extension would not be characteristic of the Conservation Area and would affect the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings.”  The Committee proposed an amendment to condition 4 to ensure that the submitted parking scheme does not result in a reduction in car parking spaces.

Councillor J Jordan proposed granting permission in accordance with the officer recommendation with condition 4 being amended to ensure that the submitted parking scheme did not result in a reduction in car parking spaces. This proposal was seconded by Councillor M Lewis and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That the application be permitted subject to the conditions and informatives as per the officer’s report but with condition 4 being amended to ensure that the submitted parking scheme did not result in a reduction in car parking spaces.

Decision Plan Number: 18/00494/FUL PER Applicant: Mr Karmjit Sidhu

180718 Page 8 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

Proposal: Erection of 1 metre high front boundary wall, with 1.8 metres high brick piers (retrospective) at 27 Green Lane, Burnham, Buckinghamshire, SL1 8DZ Notes:  A site visit was undertaken by Members.  Mr Kevin Dean spoke on behalf of the objectors.  Mr Como Sidhu and Mr Paul Coogan spoke on behalf of the applicant.  The Committee were informed that Buckinghamshire County Council’s Highways Team had no objections to the application.  It was noted that 5 additional letters of support for the application were received on 18 July 2018.  The Committee proposed an amendment to condition 1 to read that the gates be constructed a minimum of 4.2m distance back from the carriageway instead of 5m.

Councillor J Jordan proposed granting permission in accordance with the officer recommendation with condition 1 being amended to refer to 4.2m instead of 5m. This proposal was seconded by Councillor T Egleton, and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That the application be permitted subject to the conditions as per the officer’s report but with condition 1 being amended to refer to 4.2m instead of 5m.

Decision Plan Number: 18/00533/FUL PER Applicant: Anil Nandan Walia and Sumandeep Kau Proposal: Demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new building comprising 6 flats with basement accommodation, parking and associated hardstanding at Corner Cottage, 45 Stratton Road, Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, HP9 1HR Notes:  A site visit was undertaken by Members.

Councillor T Egleton proposed that the application be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development to determine subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 planning obligation agreement regarding affordable housing contributions and subject to such conditions as the Head of Planning and Economic Development considers appropriate or if agreement cannot be reached refused for such reasons as considered appropriate. This proposal was seconded by Councillor J Jordan and agreed at

180718 Page 9 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018 a vote.

RESOLVED:

The application be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development to determine subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 planning obligation agreement regarding affordable housing contributions and subject to such conditions as the Head of Planning and Economic Development considers appropriate or if agreement cannot be reached refused for such reasons as considered appropriate.

(B) COMMITTEE DECISION REQUIRED WITHOUT A SITE VISIT OR PUBLIC SPEAKING:-

Decision Plan Number: 17/02314/FUL PER Applicant: Mr Jerome Challen Proposal: Provision of mobile home for a temporary period of three years to house an agricultural Worker at Challens Chicks Farm, Marsh Lane, Taplow, Buckinghamshire, SL6 0DE Notes:  The Committee noted amendments to conditions 1, 2 and 3 to make reference to the ‘mobile home the subject of this application’.

The officer recommendation to grant conditional planning permission with amendments to conditions 1, 2 and 3 to refer to “mobile home the subject of this application” was put to the Committee by the Chairman and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That the application be permitted subject to the conditions and informatives as per the officer’s report but with amendments to conditions 1, 2 and 3 to refer to “mobile home the subject of this application”.

None.

180718 Page 10 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

(D) APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

The Committee received for information a list of the applications dealt with under delegated authority by the Head of Planning and Economic Development.

9. PLANNING ENFORCEMENT DELEGATED REPORTS

RESOLVED:

1. That the enforcement reports be determined in the manner indicated below.

2. That follow up action be authorised in accordance with Central Government Guidance in paragraph 207 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Chiltern & South Bucks District Councils’ Joint Planning Enforcement Plan and that the Head of Planning and Economic Development and Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve such Enforcement Notices, including Stop Notices in respect of the development described above, as may be considered appropriate. The precise steps to be taken, period of compliance and the reasons for serving the notice to be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development. In the event of non-compliance with the Notice, the Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to instigate legal proceedings in consultation with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and/or take direct action to secure compliance with the Notice.

ENFORCEMENT DELEGATED REPORTS

17/10135/ENBEOP High Gables, Rectory Close, Farnham Royal, Buckinghamshire, SL2 3BG

The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor J Jordan, seconded by Councillor B Gibbs and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That follow up action be authorised in accordance with Central Government Guidance in paragraph 207

180718 Page 11 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Chiltern & South Bucks District Councils’ Joint Planning Enforcement Plan and that the Head of Planning and Economic Development and Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve such Enforcement Notices, including Stop Notices in respect of the development described above, as may be considered appropriate. The precise steps to be taken, period of compliance and the reasons for serving the notice to be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development. In the event of non-compliance with the Notice, the Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to instigate legal proceedings in consultation with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and/or take direct action to secure compliance with the Notice.

18/10079/ENCOND Land adjacent to 23A Colne Orchard, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9NA ("the Land")

The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor J Jordan, seconded by Councillor Dr W Matthews and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

That follow up action be authorised in accordance with Central Government Guidance in paragraph 207 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Chiltern & South Bucks District Councils’ Joint Planning Enforcement Plan and that the Head of Planning and Economic Development and Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve such Enforcement Notices, including Stop Notices in respect of the development described above, as may be considered appropriate. The precise steps to be taken, period of compliance and the reasons for serving the notice to be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development. In the event of

180718 Page 12 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

non-compliance with the Notice, the Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to instigate legal proceedings in consultation with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and/or take direct action to secure compliance with the Notice.

EN/18/2015 Highfield, 7 Old Marsh Lane, Dorney Reach, Buckinghamshire, SL6 0DZ ("the Land")

Officers described the unauthorised development as there were no photographs available for Members to view at the meeting and it was noted that photographs of the unauthorised development would be looked at by officers when considering appropriate follow up action.

Members noted that there had not been any recent dialogue with the owners about the alleged breach of planning control.

The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor J Jordan, seconded by Councillor P Hogan and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

180718 Page 13 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

to instigate legal proceedings in consultation with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and/or take direct action to secure compliance with the Notice.

EN/18/2029 11 Frensham Walk, Farnham Common, Buckinghamshire, SL2 3QF ("the Land")

Members noted that there had been some discussions with the owners regarding the built form and location of the unauthorised development. The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor J Jordan, seconded by Councillor B Gibbs and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

17/10302/ENBEOP Bien Venue, Denham Avenue, Denham, Buckinghamshire, UB9 5ER ("the Land")

180718 Page 14 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor B Gibbs, seconded by Councillor J Jordan and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

18/10105/ENCU Palmers Moor Poultry Farm, Palmers Moor Lane, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9LG ("the Land")

The officer recommendation that follow up action be taken was proposed by Councillor J Jordan, seconded by Councillor Dr W Matthews and agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED:

180718 Page 15 Agenda Item 3 Planning Committee (SBDC) - 18 July 2018

Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve such Enforcement Notices, including Stop Notices in respect of the development described above, as may be considered appropriate. The precise steps to be taken, period of compliance and the reasons for serving the notice to be delegated to the Head of Planning and Economic Development. In the event of non-compliance with the Notice, the Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to instigate legal proceedings in consultation with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and/or take direct action to secure compliance with the Notice.

10. PLANNING APPEALS AND SCHEDULE OF OUTSTANDING MATTERS

The Committee received for information a progress report which set out the up-to- date position relating to Planning Public Inquiries, Hearings and Court Dates.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The meeting terminated at 6.37 pm

180718 Page 16 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

PART A

South Bucks District Council Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 15 August 2018 Parish: Denham Parish Council

Reference No: 17/02396/FUL Proposal: Redevelopment of site to provide 34 new residential units (class C3), set out in 4 blocks of accommodation, comprising 6x1 bed and 28x2 bed apartments, together with associated car parking and access, private and shared amenity space, landscaping and other ancillary works. Location: Police Station, Oxford Road, Denham, Buckinghamshire, SL9 7AL Applicant: South Bucks District Council (Mr Anwar Zaman) Agent: Pick Everard (Mr Gregory Malek) Date Valid Appl Recd: 27.12.2017 Recommendation: PER Case Officer: Richard Regan

LOCATION PLAN – This plan is supplied only to identify the location of the site and for no other purpose whatsoever.

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of NOT TO SCALE`` the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office  Crown Copying. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or Civil proceedings.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 17 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL REASON FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION The application has been referred to the Planning Committee because South Bucks District Council is the applicant and the proposal is on the Council’s own land.

It is a major application.

Due to the size and scale of this application it is considered that value would be added to the decision making process if MEMBERS were to carry out a SITE VISIT prior to their determination of this application.

SITE LOCATION The application site consists of the former Gerrards Cross Police Station. The site is made up of five separate buildings, the main three storey police building, which is currently vacant, and four storey blocks of terraced residential dwellings, which are still occupied. The site is located on the northern side of Oxford Road, within the Green Belt Settlement of Tatling End, Denham. The area is made up of a mix of residential and commercial properties, with the neighbouring property to the east being a residential dwelling, Gerrards Cross Fire Station to the west, and residential dwellings opposite

THE APPLICATION The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 34 new residential units (class C3), set out in 4 blocks of accommodation, comprising 6x1 bed and 28x2 bed units, together with associated car parking and access, private and shared amenity space, landscaping and other ancillary works.

The proposed buildings would broadly reflect the layout of the existing buildings, in that there would be two buildings fronting onto the highway, and two further blocks set behind those front buildings, and set at 90 degrees so that they face inwards towards the centre of the site and front onto each other. The proposed three storey building would be sited in the same location as the existing three storey building, with the remaining buildings being two storey in height, following the height of the two storey buildings on the site.

The proposal would incorporate the existing vehicular access point that is currently present at the site and located slightly off centre along the front boundary. This would operate as the sole means of vehicular access to the site, with the other existing access points being stopped up.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None.

PARISH COUNCIL No objection.

- Need to ensure maximum amount of S106 contributions are applied for to be used in the immediate local community. - The Parish Council is primarily concerned about Doctor and Health facilities and support of local community schools.

REPRESENTATIONS 1 Letter of objection received. Concerns raised include:

- Three storey building will be out of keeping - Increase in traffic movements - impact on highway - Loss of privacy

CONSULTATIONS Environmental Health: No objections raised in terms of contamination or noise subject to conditions.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 18 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Cadent Gas: No objections.

Bucks County Archaeological Service: No objections.

District Landscape Officer: No objections.

Thames Water: No objections subject to conditions.

SBDC Housing Team: Supports the application which if delivered would provide an important contribution to meeting the District’s local housing need and the Council’s statutory obligations.

Arboriculturalist: Main concern was the lack of trees along the frontage which has been addressed via revised landscape plan.

Transport for Bucks: No objections subject to conditions.

Highways England: No objections.

Lead Local Flood Authority: No objections subject to conditions.

County Ecologist: Objections have been raised on the grounds that further survey work is required in order to accurately assess the potential impacts that the scheme would have on the ecology and biodiversity of the site, including protected species. [Officer note: The applicant's agent has confirmed that the survey work will be carried out in advance of the Planning Committee. An update on this matter will therefore be provided by Officers at the Planning Committee].

Historic Buildings/Conservation Officer: Revisions required in order to limit harm to the setting of the nearby listed building and visual prominence within the street scene. [Officer note: The applicant has submitted amended plans to include additional landscaping with a view to address the issues raised].

Bucks Education Service: No contributions required.

SBDC Waste: No objections.

POLICIES National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

South Bucks Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted February 2011: Saved Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP8, CP9, CP12, CP13

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 19 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL South Bucks District Local Plan - Adopted March 1999 Consolidated September 2007 and February 2011: Saved Policies GB1, GB3, EP3, EP4, EP5, EP6, H9, TR5, TR7.

South Bucks District Council Residential Design Guide SPD - Adopted October 2008

South Bucks District Council Affordable Housing SPD - Adopted July 2013

EVALUATION Principle of development - Green Belt 1. The site falls within the Green Belt where the types of development that are deemed acceptable are very limited. Policy GB1 of the Local Plan, together with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) set out the types of development that are deemed acceptable. Where there is a conflict, then the NPPF takes precedence. Section 9 of the NPPF sets out the Governments guidance on development within the Green Belt, as well as identifying its five purposes.

2. Para. 145 and 146 of the NPPF sets out the exceptions for types of development within the Green Belt which are not inappropriate. Point 'g' of para. 145 of the NPPF, states that the following type of development within the Green Belt is considered appropriate;

"limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land, whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would: not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development; or not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt, where the development would re-use previously developed land and contribute to meeting an identified affordable housing need within the area of the local planning authority."

3. The starting point is therefore to determine whether the site constitutes 'previously developed land'. The land consists of a mixed used development comprising a police station and residential dwellings. As such, it is considered that when assessed against the definition of such land as set out in the NPPF, it is considered that this site does constitute 'previously developed land', and therefore can be assessed against point 'g' of para.145 of the NPPF.

4. An assessment therefore needs to be made as to whether it is considered that the proposal would have no greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt or the purposes of including land within it, than the existing development or alternatively whether the proposal is contributing to meeting an identified affordable housing need within the District and would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt.

5. In this instance, given that the proposal is providing 40% of residential units as affordable homes, it is appropriate to apply the assessment of whether the proposal would cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt.

6. It is acknowledged that the proposal would result in an increase in the footprint of buildings on the site over that which currently exists. However, given that the NPPF allows for limited infilling on such sites, it is considered that an increase in the footprint of buildings does not automatically result in substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt. Rather it can allow for such increases provided it is in a form, scale, and layout that does not ultimately adversely impact on the Green Belt.

7. It is noted however that it would appear that the existing residential buildings could be enlarged under permitted development rights as well as under existing Green Belt Policy, therefore the amount of built form displayed by the existing dwellings could be significantly increased. This would itself reduce the proposed increases in floorspace that the current proposal results in.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 20 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL 8. In terms of building heights, at present, the ridge height of the three storey building is 12.5m, whilst the two storey dwellings all display ridge height of 8m. The proposed three storey building would have a maximum ridge height of 11.3m, which is 1.2m lower than the existing building, but this ridge height is only incorporated into a third of the building, with the remainder of the building having an even lower ridge height of 10.5m, which is 2m lower than existing. It is considered that these are significant reductions, which provide considerable benefits to the openness of the Green Belt. In terms of the proposed two storey blocks, two of these would incorporate a very small increase in ridge height of 0.2m to 8m, which is not considered material, whilst the remaining block would display a lower ridge height of 7.5m, 0.5m lower than existing. It is considered that the changes in ridge heights to the two storey buildings would result in a neutral impact, with the reduced ridge height of one block being counteracted by the two smaller increases to the other two blocks.

9. The proposal would result in the reduction in the number of buildings present on site. At present, there are 5 main buildings on site, the three storey police building and then 4 blocks of two storey dwellings. The proposed development would incorporate a three storey building and 3 blocks of two storey dwellings. The consolidating of the built form within less buildings on site is considered to be beneficial to the openness of the Green Belt, as it reduces the spread of development within the site. The spread of development is also reduced by the fact that a greater gap would now be retained to the northern rear boundary, with the built form not projecting as close to this boundary than at present. This helps to bring development away from the open undeveloped Green Belt land to the rear, and thereby reducing the encroachment of built form on the site.

10. A further benefit of the scheme that is directly related to the reduction in the number of buildings is the ability to open up a significant gap through the middle of the site which is free from built form, and enables views through the site to the open undeveloped land to the rear. It is considered that this layout increases the sense of openness within the site, a characteristics that benefits this Green Belt location.

11. Overall, whilst there are increases in footprint and volume over what currently exists, there is also a reduction in the height, and number of buildings on site, as well as a reduction in the spread of development across the site. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and would meet with the exception to inappropriate development set out in point 'g' of Paragraph 145 of the NPPF. No objections are therefore raised with regard to impact of the development on the Green Belt.

Principle of Development - Community Facility 12. As noted above, the lawful use of the site comprises a police station and residential dwellings. A police station is classified as a community facility and the proposal therefore needs to be assessed against policies COM2 of the Local Plan and CP6 of the Core Strategy. These policies seek to prevent the loss of such community facilities.

13. In this instance, it has been confirmed that the site is no longer required by Thames Valley Police due to re-structuring of the forces assets and resources. As such, whilst the community facility that was once present on this site has been lost, it is evident that the police services have been re-organised and re-located to an alternative site. It is therefore considered that the requirements of policy COM2 and CP6 have been met by virtue of the fact that the Police services are still being provided but from alternative sustainable locations within the District.

Design/character & appearance 14. The proposed new buildings are considered appropriate in terms of their size, scale, style, and appearance. The proposed development would not appear over-dominant or obtrusive within the street scene. The site currently exhibits a three storey building, therefore its replacement with a building of similar height and scale is not considered to be out of keeping for the locality, nor would a building of this size appear incongruous within the street scene. It is considered that the proposed development would therefore not adversely impact upon the visual amenities of the locality, or the general character and appearance of the area.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 21 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

Impact on designated/non-designated heritage asset 15. The site is within the setting of the Grade II listed Pennyfarthing Restaurant (currently Indigo Bar and Grill) and the wider setting of Giles Cottage and Rowan Tree Cottage further to the east which are also Grade II.

16. The Councils Heritage Officer has raised concern in relation to the proposed three storey building, it terms of its impact on the setting of the listed buildings and the appearance of the street scene. Concerns have been raised that this proposed three storey block, would result in undue attention being drawn to the site within the context of the listed buildings to the east. Suggestions on how this could be addressed include ensuring the use of materials similar to surrounding properties, which can be secured by way of condition, and the introduction of additional screening in the south-eastern section of the site to help soften the streetscene appearance of the site, and provide a suitable buffer between neighbouring sites.

17. Following receipt of these comments, an amended landscape plan has been produced to introduce additional landscaping and screening along the front of the site and in the south eastern corner of the site to help mitigate overall impact of the development on the setting of the listed building.

18. On balance, when taking into consideration the revisions to the landscaping within the south eastern corner and along the front of the site, the proposed development would not result in a level of harm to the setting of the nearby listed buildings that would warrant refusing the scheme. Consequently, the scheme is considered acceptable from a heritage point of view.

Residential amenity 19. With regard to the neighbouring property to the east, whilst the proposal involves moving built form away from the boundary, and creating a physical gap, the three storey element of the main building would be sited slightly closer to the boundary with this property. Notwithstanding this, a gap of 3.2m would still be retained to the boundary. A limited amount of the three storey building would project beyond the rear of this neighbouring property and it would not project as far as the conservatory on that property. Given these distances and the juxtaposition of the two buildings to one another, it is considered that the proposed new buildings would not appear overdominant or obtrusive when viewed from this neighbouring property, nor would it lead to any unacceptable loss of light. In terms of privacy, there would be no windows in the nearest side elevation facing towards this neighbouring property. It is acknowledged that there would be a side window facing towards the side boundary, on a another section of the three storey building, but the distance retained to the neighbouring property from this window is almost 30m, and therefore would not lead to any unacceptable overlooking opportunities. Likewise, the first floor rear windows in Building D that face towards this neighbouring property would also retain considerable distances, in excess of 30m and as such would not lead to an unacceptable loss of privacy.

20. In terms of the neighbouring property to the west, this consists of the Fire Station which includes a number of associated residential dwellings. However, given the significant distances retained to these properties, it is considered that the proposed dwellings would not adversely impact upon their amenities in terms of loss of light, loss of privacy, nor would they appear overdominant or obtrusive.

21. The distances retained to the dwellings on the opposite side of the main road are such that they would not be adversely impacted upon in any way.

Parking/Highway implications 22. The proposed development would provide 62 parking spaces, which is the appropriate number of spaces for the number of units and bedrooms being proposed. As such, the proposal adheres to the Councils parking standards, and meets the requirements of policy TR7.

23. From a highway point of view, the County Highways Authority have assessed the scheme and advise that subject to the inclusion of a number of conditions, they consider the proposed development acceptable and that it would not lead to any unacceptable highway implications. One of these suggested conditions include

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 22 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL the creation of a ghost island right turn on Oxford Road, which is required to prevent any potential queuing on the main road.

24. Given the comments of the Highway Authority, it is considered that the proposed development would not lead to any unacceptable highway implications and therefore adheres to the requirements of policy TR5.

Affordable housing 25. The NPPG sets out guidance and thresholds for when planning obligations relating to affordable housing can be sought on planning applications. This application exceeds the thresholds for when such obligations should not be sought, therefore the Councils own affordable housing policy can be applied to the application.

26. Policy CP3 of the Core Strategy sets out the Council's affordable housing requirements. It requires that schemes of 5 or more units must provide 40% of the proposed units as affordable housing. If this cannot be achieved, then it would be for the applicant to demonstrate and justify this, providing a viability assessment setting out what they consider to be a more appropriate amount or justifying zero provision.

27. In this instance, 14 of the 34 units would be designated and retained as affordable housing units, which equates to a 40% provision. As such, subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the affordable housing, the proposal complies with the Core Strategy Policy CP3.

Trees and Landscaping 28. The Councils Landscape Officer raises no objections to the proposal. Notwithstanding this, the Councils Tree Officer did raise some concerns regarding the need for further tree planting at the front of the site, as well as more details regarding their size. As already noted within this report, an amended landscape plan has been submitted which provides this extra information as well as introduces additional trees to the front of the site. In light of these revisions, it is considered that the concerns of the Tree Officer have been successfully addressed and the scheme is acceptable from a landscape and tree point of view.

Trees and Landscaping 29. The Councils Environmental Health Department raise no objections to the proposals from a contaminated land point of view, nor do they raise any objections from a noise impact point of view.

Flooding/Drainage 30. Bucks County Council, as the Lead Local Flood Authority, initially raised an objection on grounds relating to surface water drainage, and the fact that they consider that the information submitted with the application is inadequate. Subsequent to the receipt of these comments, the applicant has submitted revised and additional information to address these concerns. The Lead Local Flood Authority has confirmed that this information is sufficient to overcome the previous concerns and no objections are now raised in this respect subject to conditions.

Ecology / Biodiversity 31. The County Ecologist raised an initial objection on the grounds that further survey work was required in order to accurately assess the potential impacts that the scheme would have on the ecology and biodiversity of the site including protected species. In this case bats have been found to be roosting within some of the existing buildings. There is case law, which focuses on how LPAs should approach the discharge of their duty in relation to Regulation 3(4) of the Conservation Regulations (1994), in coming to planning decisions and in particular the need to properly consider the three tests set out in the Conservation Regulations that should be considered when harm to European Protected Species (EPS) is likely. In this instance the initial surveys that had been undertaken and submitted as part of this application have identified that there are bats present on site. The three tests need to be satisfied to allow derogation to be granted from the protection afforded to EPS. These tests are:

- that there should be no satisfactory alternative to the plan or project as a whole or in the way it is implemented

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 23 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL - that the plan or project must be "in the interests of preserving public health or public safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI), including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of importance for the environment". - and that the favourable conservation status of the species affected must be maintained.

32. Planning permissions that make surveys for protected species a condition of a planning permission, clearly demonstrate that the LPA could not have had regard to EPS as they did not understand their presence or know enough about how EPS might be using a site. The judgements in case law make it clear that regardless of the licensing regime, LPAs must also address specifically the three tests to allow derogation when determining a planning application that may result in harm to an EPS.

33. In this case, it has been identified that three surveys are required to establish the specific issues relating to the bats on site. The applicant has already undertaken two surveys and a further survey is to be completed in advance of the Planning Committee. It is considered that the results of the final survey will allow the Local Planning Authority to determine the application in accordance with the tests outlined above. As such, an update on this matter, including any comments from the County Ecologist and any additional conditions required, will be provided to Members at the Planning Committee.

Other matters 34. Under Policy CP6, contributions can be sought towards essential infrastructure such as education however the Bucks County Education Service has advised that a contribution is not required in this instance.

35. The County Archaeological Service raise no objections to the proposals.

36. The Council's Waste Department is satisfied with the proposed development from a waste collection point of view.

37. The proposed inclusion of Photovoltaic panels will supply at least 10% of the energy required for the site from renewable/low carbon sources, in accordance with Core Policy 12.

38. The comments and concerns raised by the Crime Prevention Design Officer (CPDO) are noted. Primarily, the CPDO has concerns over the lack of identifiable boundary treatments and separation of the different curtilages. Whilst the amended landscape plan does indicate the siting of such boundaries, further details could be sought to the nature of the boundary treatment by way of a condition.

Conclusions 39. It is considered that a fair and reasonable balance would be struck between the interests of the community and the human rights of the individuals concerned in the event of planning permission being granted in this instance.

Working with the applicant 40. In accordance with section 4 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the Council, in dealing with this application, has worked in a positive and proactive way with the Applicant / Agent and has focused on seeking solutions to the issues arising from the development proposal.

41. South Bucks District Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by; - offering a pre-application advice service, - updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application as appropriate and, where possible and appropriate, suggesting solutions. In this case, South Bucks District Council has worked with the applicant to secure amended plans to achieve a scheme which is considered acceptable by Officers.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 24 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL 42. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: APPLICATION 17/02396/FUL BE DELEGATED TO THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND THE SATISFACTORY PRIOR COMPLETION OF A SECTION 106 PLANNING OBLIGATION AGREEMENT RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IF THE SECTION 106 AGREEMENT CANNOT BE COMPLETED THE APPLICATION BE REFUSED FOR SUCH REASONS AS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE.

Subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning from the date of this decision notice. (SS01)

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (or any statutory amendment or re-enactment thereof).

2. No development shall take place until a schedule of materials to be used in the elevations of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority in writing. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (SM01)

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the locality. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a specification of all finishing materials to be used in any hard surfacing of the application site shall be submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority in writing. Thereafter the development shall be constructed using the approved materials. (SM02)

Reason: To ensure that such works do not detract from the development itself or from the appearance of the locality in general. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

4. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the landscape proposals submitted and approved as part of this application. None of the trees, shrubs or hedgerows shown to be planted or to be retained shall be removed or felled, lopped or topped within a period of five years from the date of this permission, without the prior written permission of the District Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity. (Policies EP3 and EP4 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refer.)

5. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the development hereby permitted or the substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees, hedgerows or shrubs forming part of the approved landscaping scheme which within a period of five years from the occupation or substantial completion of the development, whichever is the later, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the District Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. (ST02)

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory and continuing standard of amenities are provided and maintained in connection with the development. (Policies EP3 and EP4 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refer.)

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 25 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

6. No works or development hereby permitted shall take place until details of the siting and design of all walls and/or fencing have been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority in writing. All walls and fencing shall be erected in accordance with the approved details before the initial occupation of the development hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory resultant appearance and standard of amenity of the site. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

7. Development shall not commence until a drainage strategy detailing on and/or off site drainage works, has been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority. No discharge or foul or surface water from the site shall be accepted into the public system until the approved works have been implemented and completed.

Reason: To prevent the flooding of the sewerage system and to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to cope with the new development. Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) and policy CP13 of the South Bucks District Core Strategy (adopted February 2011) refers).

8. The development hereby approved shall incorporate a scheme of interior noise mitigation, which shall be equal to or exceed the specifications of the recommended glazing and ventilation strategies detailed in S.6 of the submitted Acoustic Assessment Report, ref. GM15/17365/0 of 8/11/17.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the amenities of the occupiers of the development from road traffic noise. Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.

9. All external lighting units intended for this site, shall be erected and directed so as to avoid nuisance to residential or other accommodation in close proximity to the site. The main beam angles of all lights must be kept below 70 degrees from vertical to keep off site glare to a minimum. Light trespass received into windows of nearby residential properties should be no more than a maximum of 10 lux m2 07.00 - 23.00 hrs and 2 lux m2 after 23.00 hrs.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Council Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

10. Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:

i) An options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results and detailed risk assessment found in the following reports prepared by Ashdown Site Investigation Ltd: Revised Ground Contamination Report (Document ref. R17-12187) and Supplementary Ground Investigation (Document ref. R17-11920).

ii) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (i) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 26 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers).

11. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme and prior to the first use or occupation of the development, a verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced together with any necessary monitoring and maintenance programme and copies of any waste transfer notes relating to exported and imported soils shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The approved monitoring and maintenance programme shall be implemented.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers).

12. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

13. The proposed development hereby permitted shall not be implemented until such a time that the highway rights over the parking spaces fronting the site have been extinguished. Upon cessation of highway rights, the scheme for parking and manoeuvring and the loading and unloading of vehicles shown on the approved plans shall be laid out prior to the initial occupation of the development hereby permitted and that area shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose.

Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park, load/unload and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway. (Policies TR5 and TR7 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (Adopted March 1999) refer).

14. Prior to occupation of the development hereby permitted, a scheme of off-site works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include:

- A ghost island right turn lane on Oxford Road; - Widening of the existing footway fronting the site to 2m; and - Tactile crossing points at the site access.

No part of the development shall be occupied until the offsite works have been laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 27 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the development. (Policy TR5 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (Adopted March 1999) refer).

15. Within one month of the occupation of the development hereby permitted, all other existing access points not incorporated in the development hereby permitted shall be stopped up by raising the existing dropped kerb or removing the existing bellmouth and reinstating the footway and highway boundary to the same line, level and detail as the adjoining footway and highway boundary.

Reason: To limit the number of access points along the site boundary for the safety and convenience of the highway user. (Policy TR5 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (Adopted March 1999) refer).

16. No development shall take place, including works of demolition, until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in conjunction with the Highway Authority. The CTMP shall include details of:

i) the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials; iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; iv) operating/delivery hours; and v) wheel washing facilities

The approved plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period

Reason: In the interests of highway safety, convenience of highway users and to protect the amenities of residents.(Policy TR5 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (Adopted March 1999) refer).

17. The development to which this planning permission relates shall be undertaken solely in accordance with the drawings referred to in the list at the foot of this decision notice. (NMS09a)

Reason: To ensure that the appearance of the development is not detrimental to the character or appearance of the conservation area or the neighbouring Listed Building, in accordance with Policies EP3 and C1 of the South Bucks Consolidated Local Plan (Feb 2011) and Policy CP8 of the South Bucks Local Development Framework Core Strategy (adopted February 2011).

INFORMATIVE(S)

1. INFORMATIVE -It is the responsibility of the developer/applicant to ensure that the development proceeds in accordance with the approved details and in compliance with any conditions on the planning permission. The condition(s) 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 13 and 16 on this planning permission that appear in bold text are known as conditions precedent. These are conditions which require compliance before any development whatsoever starts on site. Where conditions precedent have not been complied with any development purporting to benefit from the planning permission will be unauthorised and a breach of planning control. The Development Control section will not normally approve details required by a condition precedent retrospectively. A new planning application will usually be required under these circumstances.

Conditions precedent must be formally confirmed as being complied with by the District Planning Authority prior to commencement of work. Formal discharge/compliance may also be required for other conditions. Any requests for the discharge/compliance of conditions must be submitted to the District Planning Authority in writing. Each such written request to discharge/compliance any conditions will require payment of a separate fee. (SIN02)

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 28 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

2. INFORMATIVE: Due to the close proximity of the site to existing residential properties, the applicants' attention is drawn to the Considerate Constructors Scheme initiative. This initiative encourages contractors and construction companies to adopt a considerate and respectful approach to construction works, so that neighbours are not unduly affected by noise, smells, operational hours, vehicles parking at the site or making deliveries, and general disruption caused by the works.

By signing up to the scheme, contractors and construction companies commit to being considerate and good neighbours, as well as being clean, respectful, safe, environmentally conscious, responsible and accountable. The Council highly recommends the Considerate Constructors Scheme as a way of avoiding problems and complaints from local residents and further information on how to participate can be found at www.ccscheme.org.uk. (SIN35)

3. INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that the off-site works will need to be constructed under a section 278 of the Highways Act legal agreement. This agreement must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway. A minimum period of 8 weeks is required to draw up the agreement following the receipt by the Highway Authority of a completed Section 278 application form. Please contact Highways Development Management at the following address for information or apply online via Buckinghamshire County Council's website at

https://www.buckscc.gov.uk/services/transport-and-roads/highways-development- management/apply-online/section-278-/agreement/

Development Management 6th Floor, County Hall Walton Street, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UY 01296 382416

LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

Plan Reference Date received by District Planning Authority TGC-KDA-ST-00-DR-L-9001 P4 26.07.2018

6608(PL) 016 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 017 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 015 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 014 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 009 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 008 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 002 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 003 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 004 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 005 P2 02.07.2018

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 29 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL 6608(PL) 006 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 007 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 001 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 013 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 012 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 011 P2 02.07.2018

6608(PL) 010 P2 02.07.2018

SOU025-PEV-XX-XX-DR-A-9001 27.12.2018

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 30 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

PART A

South Bucks District Council Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 15 August 2018 Parish: Gerrards Cross Town Council

Reference No: 18/00884/RVC Variation or Removal of a Condition Proposal: Variation of condition 5 to Application No: 17/01979/FUL to allow new roof height Location: Grafton House, 31 Camp Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 7PG Applicant: Mr Charlie Reed Agent: Mr Ian Bird Date Valid Appl Recd: 13 May 2018 Recommendation: PER Case Officer: Vicki Burdett

LOCATION PLAN – This plan is supplied only to identify the location of the site and for no other purpose whatsoever.

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the NOT TO SCALE`` Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office  Crown Copying. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or Civil proceedings.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 31 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL CALL IN Cllr Barbara Gibbs has requested for this application to be determined at the Planning Committee.

It is considered that value would be added to the decision making process if MEMBERS were to undertake a SITE VISIT in this case.

SITE LOCATION The application site is located within the developed area of Gerrards Cross and is identified as a Residential Area of Exceptional Character (RAEC) within the South Bucks Proposals Map. The South Bucks Townscape Character Study defines Camp Road as having a 'Woodland Road' typology and this property also falls within the Camp Road Area of Special Character as also designated by the Character Study. Tree Preservation Order No. 31, 1995 covers the proposal site. The site is located on a private residential road and is set within a large plot which is flanked to both sides by similar detached properties.

THE APPLICATION The application seeks permission for the variation of Condition 5 of planning permission 17/01979/FUL to allow a new roof height for the approved part single storey/part two storey front/side extension to provide triple garage with additional accommodation above.

Condition 5 relates to the approved plans. The alterations proposed are:

- Raising a proportion of the existing wall and parapet (by approx. 0.3m) to a maximum height of 3.6m. - Removal of a proportion of the existing parapet wall - Raising the height of the approved extension by approx. 0.5m (which will result in the ridge sitting just under the roof eaves of the existing house)

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY PL/18/2125/FA - Single storey rear extension. Conditional permission.

18/00886/FUL - Part single/part two storey front extension for creation of triple garage and habitable accommodation above, single storey side extension and alterations to front boundary wall and entrance (Amendment to planning permission 17/01979/FUL). Withdrawn.

18/00696/NMA - Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 17/01979/FUL for raising first floor and eaves height. Refused.

17/01979/FUL - Part single/part two storey front/side extension to provide triple garage with additional accommodation above. Alterations to front boundary wall and entrance incorporating entrance gates and railings. Conditional Permission.

09/00194/FUL - Replacement front porch. Conditional Permission.

04/00846/FUL - Replacement dwelling (Amendment to Planning Permission 04/00344/FUL). Conditional Permission.

04/00344/FUL - Replacement dwelling. Conditional Permission.

03/01356/FUL - Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of detached dwelling with detached double garage. Refused.

TOWN COUNCIL ‘Cllr T Scott declared an interest in this application and took no part in the discussion or the decision. Although Conditional Permission has been granted, Council wishes to restate its objection to application 17/01979/FUL. Council further objects to this current application which will further exacerbate the reasons for Council's previous objection. Council objects to this application which it

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 32 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL considers to be contrary to Policies EP3, H9 and H10 of the Local Plan. The bulk and siting - the proposed triple garage will be 9.3m forward on the plot - will be out of keeping and overbearing, being the most forward building on the road. The development in such a prominent location will change the character of the road which is an RAEC, detracting from the visual amenity of the area and setting an unwelcome precedent for other potential developments’.

REPRESENTATIONS Three letters of objection have been received raising the following concerns: - Increase in height results in bulkiness and exceeds what is acceptable - Dominating and obtrusive - Results in a restriction of skylight, daylight and outlook - Impact on primary windows and garden area - Crown roof results in a dominant appearance - Potential for further extensions - Contrary to Local Plan Policies - Adverse impact on neighbours’ amenities - Incongruous and prominent in the street scene - Increase in height will make the extension more visible in the street scene

CONSULTATIONS District’s Arboriculturist: No objections.

POLICIES National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

South Bucks Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted February 2011

South Bucks District Local Plan - Adopted March 1999 Consolidated September 2007 and February 2011: Saved Policies - EP3, EP5, H10, H11, H12, TR5 and TR7.

South Bucks District Council Residential Guide SPD - Adopted October 2008

Chiltern and South Bucks Townscape Character Assessment (Published November 2017)

EVALUATION Principle of development: 1. The application site is located within a built up area where extensions to existing dwellinghouses are acceptable in principle, subject to complying with the relevant policies of the Development Plan. Given the site is identified as part of a 'Residential Area of Exceptional Character' (RAEC), of particular relevance is Policy H10 of the Local Plan. This policy states that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) will have regard to plot sizes and frontages; the siting of proposed extensions to ensure consistent spacing and layout of dwellings in the locality; that important features, characteristics of the site are retained; that the design is of a high standard; and that it would comply with other policies in the Local Plan. As such, proposals which would have an adverse effect on the dwellings' exceptional character will not be permitted.

Design/Character and appearance: 2. The NPPF at paragraph 17, under the heading "Core planning principles" sets out guiding principles for the operation of the planning system. One of the principles set out is that authorities should always seeks to secure high quality design. Local Plan Policy EP3 states that development will only be permitted where its scale, layout, siting, height, design, external materials and use are compatible with the character and amenities of the site itself, adjoining development and the locality in general. Poor designs which are out of scale or character with their surroundings will not be permitted.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 33 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL 3. This application is submitted under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and as outlined above, seeks a variation of Condition 5 of planning permission 17/01979/FUL. In determining this type of application the National Planning Practice Guidance states that Local Planning Authorities should, in making their decisions, focus their attention on national or local policies or other material considerations which may have changed significantly since the original permission.

4. The proposed alterations, as aforementioned, comprise of removal of part of the parapet wall, leveling of the existing wall to a continued height and raising of the extension by 0.5m. Whilst it is acknowledged that the extension would be visible in the street scene of Camp Road, the extension would still be positioned below the eaves of the existing house and would not involve any other alterations. The materials and design details would remain the same. The extension itself would not increase in footprint size or be moved any closer to the site boundaries. Comments have been raised with concern over the siting of the extension when viewed from the street scene, however, the increase of 0.5m is not considered to result in the development having a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area or the wider locality.

Neighbour Impact 5. The NPPF at paragraph 17, under the heading "Core planning principles" sets out guiding principles for the operation of the planning system. One of the principles set out is that authorities should always seek to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. Local Plan Policy EP3 requires regard to the amenities of adjacent properties. Policy EP5 states that development will be permitted only if it would provide for adequate daylight and where possibly sunlight, to reach into spaces around and between buildings and other physical features and would not result in a significant loss of daylight or sunlight to adjacent buildings or land. Policy H11 further stipulates that the impact on proposals on the amenities of dwellings and their gardens will be considered, to ensure that the extension would not adversely affect the amenities of any adjacent properties, for example through overlooking, over dominance, obtrusiveness or loss of daylight.

6. The proposed alterations are not considered to adversely affect the amenities of any neighbouring properties by virtue of the separation between the host dwelling and 'Beechcroft', the lack of fenestration in the east flank elevation of the extension and the level of screening. Whilst it is acknowledged that the extension would be visible when viewed from the habitable rooms of 'Beechcroft' and the garden area, the extension itself would not include any overlooking fenestration nor result in any loss of light to habitable rooms. A loss of view is not a material planning consideration and in this case, the extension is not considered to be overbearing or obtrusive. Approximately half the flank of the host dwelling would be covered by the extension which would continue to the front proportion of the dwelling. Therefore, given the above, the proposed alterations would not adversely impact the amenities of neighbouring properties and are considered acceptable.

Parking/Highway implications 7. The application proposal is of a nature which would not be considered to result in any increase in the level of parking at the property. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy TR7 of the South Bucks Local Plan.

Conclusion 8. In conclusion, it is considered that a fair and reasonable balance would be struck between the interests of the community and the human rights of the individuals concerned in the event of planning permission being granted in this instance.

Working with the applicant 9. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the Council, in dealing with this application, has worked in a positive and proactive way with the Applicant/Agent and has focused on seeking solutions to the issues arising from the development proposal. South Bucks District Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by;

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 34 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL - offering a pre-application advice service,

- updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application as appropriate and, where possible and appropriate, suggesting solutions.

11. 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. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning from the date of planning permission ref: 17/01979/FUL granted on 01.03.2018.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (or any statutory amendment or re-enactment thereof).

2. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be as specified in the application hereby approved.

Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers).

3. The extensions hereby permitted shall only be used ancillary to the occupation of the existing dwelling on the site and shall at no time be occupied as an independent unit or used for any business, commercial or industrial purposes at any time.

Reason: To prevent the undesirable establishment of such uses, to the potential detriment of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. Furthermore the establishment of an independent unit within the curtilage of the main dwelling would lead to an intensification in the use of the site which would be out of keeping with and detrimental to the character of its surroundings.

4. No further windows, dormer windows or roof lights shall be inserted at or above first floor level in the east flank elevation of the extensions hereby permitted.

Reason: To prevent overlooking and loss of privacy in the interests of the amenities of the adjoining dwelling. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers).

5. The development to which this planning permission relates shall be undertaken solely in accordance with the drawings referred to in the list at the foot of this decision notice. (NMS09a)

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 35 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

Plan Reference Date received by District Planning Authority 7029/4A 13.05.2018

7029/4 13.05.2018

7029/1 13.05.2018

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 36 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

PART A

South Bucks District Council Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 15 August 2018 Parish: Gerrards Cross Town Council

Reference No: PL/18/2173/FA Proposal: Construction of multi-storey car park, comprising a total of 442 car parking spaces and associated landscaping Location: Car Park, 42-46 Station Road, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire Applicant: Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering Ltd Agent: Peter Brett Associates Date Valid Appl Recd: 15 June 2018 Recommendation: PER Case Officer: Mrs Tracey Francis

LOCATION PLAN – This plan is supplied only to identify the location of the site and for no other purpose whatsoever.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 37 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL REASON FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is application is made by Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering Ltd but referred to Planning Committee as the proposal is on the Council’s own land.

It is a Major Application.

Due to the nature of the application and the significant level of local concern it is considered that value would be added to the decision making process if MEMBERS were to carry out a SITE VISIT prior to their determination of this application.

SITE LOCATION The proposed development is on the site of the existing District Council owned and run Station Road car park which is located on the south-east of Station Road towards its junction with Marsham Lane in the Town Centre of Gerrards Cross.

The existing surface-level car park currently provides 122 spaces including 5 disabled parking spaces, cycle parking and trolley bays which are currently leased to Waitrose Supermarket located on the opposite side of Station Road. The car park serves not only Waitrose shoppers but the Town Centre in general. It is some 0.2 miles (approx. 4 minute walk) from Gerrards Cross Railway station. The main vehicular and pedestrian access to the site is obtained from Station Road.

A mix of commercial, residential and business uses surround the site. The site is bordered by the library and offices to the north-west and a residential development to the south-east which is currently under construction. The car park backs on to the existing Tesco car park, which is constructed over Network Rail, railway line. A pedestrian link is maintained between the existing two car parks with access through the rear fence.

THE APPLICATION Planning permission is sought for the construction of a multi-storey car park containing five storeys, with the parking configured on 12 staggered half-decks (for the avoidance of doubt there would be open car-parking on the roof of the fifth storey). The fifth storey (upper deck) is to be set back some 4.8m from the main Station Road frontage of the building.

422 car parking spaces are proposed, that is an additional 320 spaces over and above the existing provision. The parking includes 28 disabled bays and 4 fast-charging electric bays in respect of the latter ducting would be included in the build so there would be the potential for increasing fast-charging bays in the future. Four disabled bays are shown located on the ground floor and on floors 1 to 4 there will be 6 disabled spaces on each floor, all located near the lift/stairs. On the ground floor bicycle spaces are being provided adjacent to the pedestrian access, supporting statements confirms 12 spaces. Motorcycle parking is also provided on the ground floor submitted plans show this in an area equivalent to 2 car parking spaces, supporting statements confirms 6 spaces.

At the time of drafting this report, the applicant’s agent has been asked to clarify if cycle spaces could be increased to 15 and motorcycle parking likewise increased to 15 spaces

At the north eastern end of the building, located central to the depth of the building, the building will be increased to 6 stories to incorporate pedestrian access to all floors via stairs and to half-levels via a lift, the lift shaft will protrude above the 6-storey height. There would also be a fire escape stair located at the south east end of the car park that would provide an alternative means of escape from all levels to exit at ground floor. The proposed building is some 68.7m in width and 33m in depth. In terms of height, the building would be four-storeys high on the Station Road frontage (open parking to be accommodated on the flat roof) such that the overall height including balustrade would be approximately 13m. The fifth floor, as indicated above is then set back and likewise with open parking on the roof top, the overall height to the top of the balustrade would be approximately 16.5m. The main core incorporating stair access and lift shaft is set back from the front of the building by some 11m and rises to a height of 19.75m with lift shaft protruding

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 38 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL approximately 1.5m above frontage, however this section is only some 7.5m in width. The fire stair well at the other end of the building is of a comparable height. The five-storey element at the rear fronting Tesco’s car park rises to approximately 17m in height to top of balustrade.

The front of the building is to be located some 3m back from the edge of the footway on Station Road. The building will be a minimum of 3.2m from the north-west boundary of the site with 38 Station Road, with a new footway created to provide access to the Tesco car park. Along the rear, south west, boundary with Tesco car park a distance of 1.8m widening to 2.6m is shown. To the south east where the site is adjacent to Marsham House residential development, the building is set a distance of 5m at the front of the site narrowing to 4.6m at the rear (maintaining access to the electricity sub-station).

Vehicular access and egress would be located in a similar position to that for the existing car park, at the south-east end of the frontage, directly off Station Road. Level pedestrian access would be provided to the ground floor in the north-west corner of the building.

In terms of the differences between this and the previous 2016 withdrawn application fundamentally the building is the same, the same size and location with the main change being the materials/pattern of materials to be used on the external elevations. The principle elevation to Station Road is divided into areas of bronze coloured bespoke foliage pattern perforated panels – this being the main change in design feature interspersed by solid flat silver/grey panels. The side elevations are solid bronze flat panels with the main stair core in flat solid silver/grey panels and perforated silver-grey panels.

The balustrading to be provided on top of the fourth and fifth floors at the Station Road frontage and on top of the fifth floor at the rear and at ground and first floor on the rear is to comprise solid metal panels to minimise light spillage from cars head/tail lights. The opaque metal panels up to hand rail height will also be provided behind the external panels on other floors again to minimise light spillage from car lights.

The applicant’s agent has been requested to provide samples of materials and a detailed schedule of where the materials will be used on the building.

A Planning Statement and Design and Access Statement has been submitted to accompany the application and additional information including the following:

- Transport Assessment - Daylight and Sunlight Statement - Drainage Strategy - Noise Impact Assessment - Ground Condition Assessment - Renewable Energy Statement

The applicant’s agent, PBA, has in addition submitted information pertaining to the need for an Air Quality Assessment in response to issues raised by Members of the Public and responded to concerns in respect of potential impact on air quality.

PBA have also submitted a response to an issue raised by Members of the Public who had a ‘Highways and Transport Technical Note’ prepared for them by Mayer Brown.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY There have been several applications relating to the site, the most recent and pertinent being:

12/00239/FUL – Relocation of existing lampposts and construction of trolley enclosures to facilitate amended car park layout in association with Waitrose Store and widening of existing vehicular access to Station Road. Conditional permission – implemented.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 39 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

16/02094/FUL Construction of a multi-storey car park, comprising a total of 450 car parking spaces.

This application was reported to the Members of the Planning Committee at their meeting on 18th January 2017 subject to the final views of the BCC Highways Authority, the BCC Sustainable Drainage Officer, the Environment Agency and the Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor. The views of the BCC Highways Authority were received on 16th January and it was recommended that the application should be refused for the following reasons: -

1. Insufficient information has been submitted with the planning application to enable the highways, traffic and transportation implications of the proposed development to be fully assessed. From the information submitted, it is considered that the additional traffic likely to be generated by the proposal would adversely affect the safety and flow of users of the existing distributor road network, contrary to saved policy TR5 of the South Bucks District Local Plan, the National Planning Policy Framework and the aims of the Buckinghamshire Local Transport Plan 4.

2. The proposed development fails to adequately demonstrate its need and will encourage the use of the private car contrary to Core Policy 7 of the South Bucks Core Strategy, the National Planning Policy Framework and the aims of the Buckinghamshire Local Transport Plan 4.

The BCC Highways Authority did conclude however that a number of items of clarification and additional information would be required in order to determine that the impact of the scheme would not be detrimental to Highway safety and convenience. Consequently, the application was withdrawn from the planning committee agenda by Officers to enable the applicant's agent to engage with the Highways Authority and to amend and update the application accordingly. Revised comments were received from BCC Highways withdrawing their objections subject to conditions and a legal agreement. The application was scheduled to be reported back to the Planning Committee in September 2017, however prior to the agenda being published the application was withdrawn by the applicant.

Adjacent development at Marsham House Station Road - 14/02192/FUL – Redevelopment of site (formerly a four storey office block) to provide residential building consisting of 30 one-bedroom apartments and 20 two-bedroom apartments with basement and ground floor car parking. Relocation of existing vehicular access and associated landscaping. Conditional permission granted and currently under construction. (The permission has been subject to a number of minor amendments).

The building as approved and under construction is 5 and 6 stories in height, designed with flat roof. The building is L shaped with a greater distance being retained between the car park site the subject of this application and the rear.

GERRARDS CROSS TOWN COUNCIL No objection but raised the following concerns: There is inadequate reference to or provision in the proposal to deal with safety concerns e.g. lack of CCTV and anti-social behaviour. The car park could become an alternative hub for the gatherings that regular occur on the commons which result in anti-social behaviour.

REPRESENTATIONS Letters of objection from some 238 separate sources have been received (including a letter from the Directors of Maple Court on behalf of the 10 Residents). Some correspondence includes copies sent to local Councillors and also copied to Cheryl Gillan MP, some correspondence does not contain postal addresses. .

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 40 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL The grounds of objection are summarised below.

In addition, there has been correspondence from objectors to the application not only objecting on grounds of impact on air quality but also specifically challenging the lack of submission of a full Air Quality Assessment with the application and why one was not required.

There has also been correspondence challenging the Transport Report submitted by the applicant’s agent. A ‘Highways and Transport Technical Note’ prepared by Mayer Brown has been submitted by objectors to the development, objectors also submitting the report direct to BCC Highway Authority for consideration.

Impact on character and visual amenity of the area: - Inappropriate building design, footprint and building height, mass (contravention of EP3 of Local Plan) - Bigger footprint - Since the previous withdrawn planning application 16/02094/FUL only cosmetic changes have been made to the façade and landscaping of the proposed building. It remains a monolithic construction, 6 storeys high and c.7m (23ft) above the neighbouring commercial building (the equivalent of 2.5 residential floors). The scale of this building is not suited to a small community like Gerrards Cross and will blight Station Road. Other new developments on Station Road have been required to provide underground parking to mitigate the effect on adjacent properties. - Monstrous design, taller than the buildings either side – materials more industrial in nature. - Unlikely trees will provide effective screen, this is virtually the same scheme as before – with just a little window dressing - Contravenes Local Plan which states that designs – should not be detrimental to the character and amenity of nearby properties - Loss of last remaining undeveloped space in Station Road. Proposal would transform the street into a dark, unpleasant and unfriendly street; Out of character to street, this is a hub for leisure brunch, yoga, coffee bars. Presence of a car park will overshadow the street, customers like sitting outside and enjoy the street – this will have a detrimental impact. - Would appear over dominant and as a total eyesore; ugly, overbearing and out of scale/character with Gerrards Cross and bereft of any architectural merit. It is an appalling hulk of brooding metal and would appear as a massive metal box that has no sympathetic design features; would dominate the street, destroy privacy, overshadow everything and blight the town centre for years to come. There will be little/no sunshine on Station Road. Building would create a wind tunnel down Station Road; - Marsham Way is predominantly early 20th Century houses with large gardens in keeping with the low rise and semi-rural character of Gerrards Cross, proposal is totally at odds with the character of the area in general and Marsham Way and Station Road in particular.

Detrimental to residential amenity (and amenity of the adjacent offices) - Detrimental impact on residential amenity, contravention of EP3,4 and 5 Of Local Plan. - Frontage of 70m long will have an overbearing impact on existing and proposed residential properties - Loss of view and sunlight to residential flats opposite - light pollution will affect surrounding properties; - totally ugly, inappropriate design particularly with regard to height, mass, density, overbearing and nature and use of materials, basically a hideous monstrosity - Inappropriate building design, footprint & building height/mass (contravention of EP3 of the Local Plan) ; Impact on residential amenity (contravention of EP3,4&5 of the Local Plan). - Under Adopted Local Plan Policy EP5 new development should not result in loss of light to adjacent properties, some uses including residential are dependent upon adequate daylight and sunlight – the development will impact on residential but also on adjacent offices.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 41 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL - Unacceptable impact on Marsham House redevelopment. Height and mass out of context, the car park will be around 5m away and 7m higher than the recently approved terrace level of the Marsham House redevelopment. Unreasonable and unacceptable impact on this residential development. - Development will take light from office buildings, cannot assume internal layout of eh offices will not change or indeed having regard to the provisions of the GPDO, the offices will change to residential

Highway safety and impact on highway network. - Additional traffic will adversely affect the safety of pedestrians using the existing distributor road network (contravention of saved policy TR5 of the South Bucks District Local Plan, the National Planning Policy Framework and the aims of the Buckinghamshire Local Transport Plan 4) - Unacceptable impact on the Highway Network, compromises Pedestrian and Public Safety - Station Road is narrow busy and congested and much used by pedestrians, totally unsuitable for high capacity car park

Air Pollution/Air quality - Implications for air quality (contravention of Guidance on Air Quality in www.gov.uk) There has been no assessment of the impact on air quality. Government guidance states that an air quality assessment should be conducted if a planning application involves increased traffic congestion/volume, adding to the turnover of a large car park and if new residential areas are being built where there are concerns about air quality. - For a Council led scheme one would expect AQ impact examined as part of the proposals, particularly as they are arguing it is a sustainable development. Although the proposed development is not located within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), its nature and location in a busy, potentially congested, city centre are still relevant considerations in terms of air quality impacts. The trip rates matter which drives AQ seems unclear at best and incorrect at worst and these need to be investigated by the planning authority. - The most recent guidance for undertaking air quality assessments is the Environmental Protection UK and Institute of Air Quality Management - Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2017), which identifies the criteria which prompts the requirement for an Air Quality Assessment. These appear to be triggered. -- Increase in traffic and fumes would constitute both a health and safety hazard - Adverse health effect by reason of dust, noise pollution - Exhaust fumes will contaminate the air in nearby flats

Noise/Disturbance Increase in noise from traffic Noise impact on surrounding properties has been underestimated.

Not sustainable location - Encourages car usage and ignores most town plans are assuming car usage will decrease with autonomous vehicles. - Unsustainable to significantly increase the quantity of car parking which will exacerbate congestion, pollution and greenhouse gas emissions

Anti-social behaviour - Safety and security of the town centre (contravention of EP6 of the Local Plan) The proposed car park will be significantly under-utilised, especially at night. This will encourage anti-social behaviour and presents a potentially unsafe environment, especially on the upper floors. - Will attract homeless/people sleeping rough - Tesco car park and Station car park used for illegal car meets - Parking in multi-storey car park would be an unpleasant experience.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 42 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

No need/Failure to demonstrate need - The ‘Highways and Transport Technical Note’ prepared by Mayer Brown, which included its own more up-to-date survey than the applicants does not demonstrate a need. The forecasting method adopted by Peter Brett is unreliable. TEMPro projections do not take into account policies to curb car usage. The Mayer Brown assessment is more reliable. - There is clearly no need for the Council to spend more public money on a larger capacity car park, when there is no need, - Failure to adequately demonstrate need and encouragement of use of private cars (contravention of Core Policy 7 South Bucks Core Strategy, the National Planning Policy Framework and the aims of Buckinghamshire Local Transport Plan 4) - The NPPF Core Strategy Para 2.2.16 notes that Gerrards Cross has good road and rail links but has issues with the availability of parking, particularly for rail users. In the previous (withdrawn) planning application for this new car park 16/02904/FUL there are conflicting statements regarding the rationale. The PBA document “Gerrards Cross Car Park Planning Statement” Oct 2016 Section 6.4.10 states that the proposed additional car parking provision will facilitate use of the railway network as well as providing for town centre shoppers. Yet the PBA report “Future Car Park Demand in Gerrards Cross” May 2017 Section 8.7 concludes that the proposed expansion of the Station Road car park would meet short term demand but not long stay - Unclear purpose of car park, Councillors have implied it will provide parking for residents in the new flats – but this should be responsibility for developers - The car parking surveys undertaken can not be viewed as independent and results are misleading and not reliable, reaching misleading conclusions. Examples include - Predicated car park occupancy figures are misleading by being in percentages rather than numbers. The PBA assessment November 2016, Section 1.2.3 states that on a typical weekday the Station Road car park was operating at 80% capacity in 2014 with a predicted increase to 87% by 2033. In March 2017 the Station Road car park exceeded an 85% occupancy level. The current Station Road car park has 121 spaces. In reality this means that an increase from 85% to 87% occupancy is two car parking spaces – poor justification. On street parking assessed over May 2017 Bank Holiday when many people away, so not representative. - Current surface-level car park is seldom/never full so no need to create so many parking spaces/ no need for a multi-storey. At most a single deck would suffice. - Current car park always has space, never full Other comments do concede that more car parking is required in Gerrards Cross. However, Council's own survey indicates that this would provide well over the stated requirement up to 2033;

Wrong location /Alternative location for additional parking: - If a multi-storey car park is required it should be located out of site and if it is to provide parking for rail commuters then it should be provided in the railway car park, on the Tesco's car park or in the car park at the rear of Lloyds bank; - Train station would be better location, encourages drivers to walk to shops- healthier, safer keeping pedestrians away for shopping and safe.

Other issues - Internal layout not well thought out, currently 8 disabled spaces on the surface level car park, only 4 at ground level on proposed. Whilst others disabled spaces on upper floors this could prove challenging to disabled users. - Changes to car parking pricing in May has seen drop in commuter parking in the Station Road car park, allowing it to be used by shoppers - Potential to create a fire hazard - No parent and baby parking spaces proposed.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 43 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

Lack of public consultation: - Residents have not been properly consulted on this; - New proposal silently slipped through the system without proper consultation or approach to seek local input. SBDC ignoring tax-payer but keen to spend our hard earned money. - Failure to provide sufficient notification of SBDC meetings. - No public consultation, just a laminated notice on lamp-posts - FOI request submitted requiring Council to disclose whether or not the application was going to be resubmitted – response stated application had been withdrawn to review options for delivering additional parking and will be continuing to discuss with interested parties. May have breached FOI by not disclosing intention to resubmit - Lack of transparency regarding the true motivation of SBDC – revenue generation. The legality of this requires urgent investigation as the Traffic Management Act 2004 states “Authorities should never use parking charges just to raise revenue or as a local tax”. (PLANNING OFFICER NOTE – The applicant’s motivation behind the submission of a planning application is not material to the local planning authority’s assessment of the planning merits or otherwise of the development)

CONSULTATIONS Transport for Bucks, Bucks County Council Highways Officer : The County Highway officer points out that the Highway Authority previously provided comments dated the 16th January and 3rd July 2017 on a similar planning application at this site, no.16/02094/FUL, which proposed a 450 space car park. This application was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant.

Initially the Highway Authority raised concerns due to insufficient information being submitted to enable the highways, traffic and transportation implications of the proposed development to be fully assessed. Additionally, there were concerns that the proposed development failed to adequately demonstrate its need, contrary to the sustainability aims of the NPPF.

The applicant subsequently submitted further details to the County Council, in an email dated the 27th January 2017, a Technical Note dated the 7th June 2017 and a revised parking study dated May 2017 which overcame the concerns raised.

A Transport Assessment (TA) has been submitted with the application to address the highway implications of the proposed development on the surrounding network. The TA states that there are seven car parks in Gerrards Cross, giving a total of 1,118 parking spaces. However, this includes car parks at the Tesco and Sainsbury stores which may not be available to people who are not using the stores.

Previously under planning application no. 16/02094/FUL the proposal was originally justified on the basis of a parking study undertaken by ‘YES Engineering’ in 2014 for South Bucks District Council, which concluded that there was a need for an additional 110 spaces across Gerrards Cross in line recommended guidance.

The study suggested that the car park was operating at 80% of its capacity on a weekday in 2014, predicted to increase to 87% in 2033; while it was operating at 63% of capacity on a Saturday, forecast to increase to 67% in 2033. The study suggested that an additional 79 short stay and 31 long stay parking spaces are required in the area to ensure a maximum theoretical occupancy of 85% in all town centre car parks to be achieved in line with recommendations by the Institution of Highways and Transportation (IHT).

The ‘YES Engineering’ report was based on the maximum occupancy during one hour of the day. Appendix B contained a profile of car park capacity on a weekday and at a weekend, which showed that whilst there may be a peak parking demand of 80% at 11am on a weekday, there is significant capacity available for the remainder of the day.

The parking study suggested that while there may be some peaks in demand in Gerrards Cross, the Station Road car park itself is not experiencing parking stress. The proposed additional 328 parking spaces was

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 44 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL significantly greater than the 79 short stay and 31 long stay spaces required to provide a maximum occupancy of 85% during the peak part of the day in Gerrards Cross.

In view of the above, given that the application proposed a 450 space car park, the Highway Authority considered that there was insufficient evidence provided to justify the proposal for 328 additional spaces in this location.

To seek to address this concern, a further parking study was undertaken by Peter Brett Associates in May 2017. Where previously the car park was put forward with a design life up to 2033, the application now proposed to extend the design life of the car park to 2053.

The current occupancy of the 8 car parks across Gerrards Cross was re-surveyed and then an exercise undertaken to uplift the existing shortfall in parking to accommodate growth in the area up until 2053. This included the use of the Tempro system which forecasts natural traffic growth, and can also account for committed developments in a particular area. The first exercise carried out used Tempro without the addition of committed development in the area. Development was then accounted for by separately studying the forecasts for residential, retail and commercial growth in the area.

Further deficit in parking was added on by accounting for the current waiting list for season tickets and permits, and the potential for existing car parks which are privately owned, e.g. Tesco’s, to redevelop their site resulting in a loss of parking provision in the town.

The exercise also accounted for the potential for existing on-street parking in the town maintained by Buckinghamshire County Council to be lost. Whilst I am aware that the County Council’s Parking team are currently not reviewing the on-street parking restrictions; as noted later in this response, it would be a requirement of any planning consent granted for the applicant to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions as a result of the proposed development. Therefore, the Highway Authority was satisfied that this could be included in the justification for the need for additional parking spaces in Gerrards Cross.

This exercise concluded that until 2053 there would be a need for 641 additional parking spaces across the town, comprising of 296 short stay and 336 medium/long stay spaces.

A second exercise was carried out as a sensitivity test, which used Tempro with committed development instead of separately accounting for residential, retail and commercial growth forecasts in the area. All other factors remained the same as the first exercise. This concluded that there was a need for 604 spaces across Gerrards Cross, comprising of 305 short stay and 310 medium/long stay spaces, which was not significantly dissimilar to the results of the first exercise.

Whilst it was questionable whether some of the assumptions made in the exercises were robust and reasonable, the parking study did demonstrate a clear need for additional parking in Gerrards Cross for both now, and to account for future growth in the area up until 2053. Furthermore, the need for parking demonstrated was circa 199 parking spaces above the level of parking provision proposed as part of the application. In view of this, the Highway Authority concluded at that time that they could no longer justify this as a reason for refusal of the application in the event of an Appeal.

The application now before us has again used the second parking study undertaken by Peter Brett Associates in May 2017 as an evidence base to justify the need for this additional car parking provision in Gerrards Cross.

A separate Highways & Transport Technical Note dated the 6th July 2018 prepared by Mayer Brown Transport Consultants has been submitted by local residents. As part of this, a further parking survey has been undertaken by Mayer Brown on Wednesday 27th June 2018 which concluded that the Station Road car park reached a maximum occupancy of only 71 vehicles. The report states that as the car park has 122 bays, there is clearly a significant amount of spare capacity remaining, which does not indicate the need for

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 45 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL additional parking in Gerrard’s Cross. It is noted that the parking survey carried out by Mayer Brown has not been submitted to allow the Highway Authority to fully consider the results.

The results seen in the Mayer Brown survey are not dissimilar, in that the parking surveys undertaken by the applicant also indicate that the Station Road car park itself tends to operate within capacity. However, I understand that the car park is being proposed to address capacity strain in parking across the whole of Gerrards Cross town centre, not just the Station Road car park. It is also proposed to address the anticipated future demand for parking in the area up to 2053.

Anticipating the future demand for parking is not an exact science and parking surveys showing existing demand only capture a snap shot in time. With this in mind, it is accepted that arguments put forward justifying the need for additional parking could always be subject to challenge. Equally, it would be just as difficult to put forward a sound evidence based argument that there is not the need for a certain quantum of additional parking. It was previously noted that the robustness of some of the assumptions made in the applicants justification were questionable, however the parking study did demonstrate a clear need for additional parking in Gerrards Cross which was well in excess of the level of parking provision proposed as part of the application. In view of this, the Highway Authority would not be able to justify this as a reason for refusal of the application in the event of an Appeal.

Further Gerrards Cross town centre is not a destination in its own right which would attract people from outside towns and villages. Therefore, the level of parking proposed is unlikely to attract additional car journeys even if there was an excess available, given that there is only ever going to be a finite number of people who would visit the town centre.

The revised NPPF dated July 2018 also states at paragraph 106 that “In town centres, local authorities should seek to improve the quality of parking so that it is convenient, safe and secure, alongside measures to promote accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists.” The proposed car park also promotes sustainable travel by the inclusion of cycle parking and electric charging point bays.

Traffic Generation The application proposes two options for a mix for space types in terms of the percentage of short stay and medium/long stay parking spaces proposed.

For the purposes of the assessment the applicant has assumed that the existing 122 spaces and half of the additional spaces would be used for short term parking, while the remaining 164 spaces will be used for ‘medium’ term parking.

Trip generation rates associated with the short stay parking spaces have been derived from a parking survey undertaken at the existing car park, which is considered a reasonable approach. Trip rates per space have been derived for the weekday morning and evening peaks and a Saturday peak.

For the medium stay parking spaces, trip rates per parking space have been estimated using the turning counts at the B416 Packhorse Road/Station Approach T- junction which provides access to the railway station car park.

Traffic Flows Traffic counts undertaken in November 2015 were obtained for a number of junctions for a weekday and a Saturday. The base flows were factored to 2021 using TEMPRO using a base date of 2016. Whilst this is unusual, given that the counts were undertaken late in 2015, it is unlikely to have a material impact on the results of the analysis. The traffic flows associated with two committed developments on Station Road, at Marsham House and Optimal House were also included in the assessments.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 46 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Traffic Distribution The TA has assumed that trips to the car park would originate from each of eight routes towards the site. The distribution of trips to the car park has been estimated on the basis of observed traffic flows along each route to the car park. The Highway Authority previously raised concerns that whilst this appears to be a reasonable approach, it does not reflect the current eastbound and westbound movements to and from the existing car park access. For example, at present on a weekday evening peak over 60% of the traffic turns right out of the site towards Marsham Lane, while the proposed distribution has only 18% of evening peak hour trips turning right out of the site. Similarly, in the morning peak hour at present, around 63% of traffic turns into the site from the east, while the distribution suggests only 18% of trips will travel to the site from the eastern end of Station Road.

In addition, observed flows at the weekend suggest a relatively even east/west distribution into the site, whereas the proposed distribution suggests that the majority of trips would originate from the west. In view of these discrepancies, it was requested that the local distribution of traffic into and out of the site was revised to be based upon the observed traffic flows. The applicant subsequently amended the traffic distribution to be in line with observed traffic flows as requested, and updated the operational assessments accordingly.

Traffic Impact The redistribution of the car park trips on the network in generally an eastern direction resulted in a material change in traffic impact at key junctions, including the car park access/Station Road junction, Marsham Way/Marsham Lane junction and Oak End Way/Marsham Lane junction. In addition, the redistribution highlighted that the development traffic would have a material impact at the Marsham Lane/East Common junction, which had previously not been assessed.

The applicant undertook to provide revised operational assessments of these key junctions, which all showed that these junctions would continue to operate with minimal queuing and delay with the addition of the development traffic.

Sustainability The site is in a sustainable location only a short walking distance from Gerrards Cross town centre and the railway station. The application proposes 12 cycles parking spaces and 6 motorcycle spaces, however in line with the overarching aim of the NPPF to promote sustainable development, further cycle parking spaces should be provided as this may encourage more people to travel by alternative modes. I am satisfied that this can be secured by condition.

As the Local Planning Authority, I understand you will assess whether the required level of cycle and motorcycle parking is acceptable. Notwithstanding this, Buckinghamshire Countywide Parking Guidance which was adopted on September 2015 provides up-to-date guidance relating to recommended parking provision. In relation to motorcycle parking this guidance states that “The Department for Transport provides vehicle licensing statistics for motorcycles based on postcode (DfT 2013), and this guidance has used this data to calculate the recommended standards. The motorcycle licensing statistics indicate that Buckinghamshire has approximately a ratio of 30:1 car ownership to motorcycle ownership.” In view of this, the guidance recommends that for non-residential developments, 1 space is provided per 30 parking spaces. As the application proposes 442 car parking spaces, this equates to 15 motorcycles spaces.

There is no set guidance for cycle parking for this type of development, and therefore it should be assessed on a case by case basis. The BCC parking guidance does however state that “Safe and secure cycle parking is an important component in encouraging cycling. For new developments, BCC aims to ensure that developers make efficient use of land and promote sustainable travel choices.” Given the sustainable location of the site and the opportunity to encourage people to make journeys by bicycle instead of the private car, it is considered that a higher provision of cycle parking should be proposed. As a minimum, I would recommend this is in line with the motorcycle parking provision of 15 cycle spaces.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 47 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Proposed Access The site would be accessed from Station Road in a similar location to that at present. The access would be approximately 10m in width and provide a separate entrance and exit. A new footpath is also proposed to be provided from the car park to the adjacent Tesco car park.

It is noted that directly opposite the proposed car park access there are designated short term stay on-street parking bays. Having consulted Buckinghamshire County Council’s Parking team who manage these bays, they have concerns regarding the increase in traffic flow on Station Road as a result of the proposed development, and the impact on the level of use, and the ability to use these bays. The County Council as Highway Authority may need to make adjustments which are dependent on the impact of the additional parking. The applicant will therefore be required to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions resulting from the increased use of Station Road and also the required works. A contribution of £15,000 would need to be secured by way of a Legal Agreement between Buckinghamshire County Council and the Applicant before planning permission is granted.

Construction Management Plan Given the scale of the proposed development a Construction Management Plan (CMP) would need to be prepared and agreed with the Highway Authority. I am satisfied that this can be secured by condition.

The Highway Authority has concerns that during construction there will be a loss of parking available at the site, which will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area, given that it has been demonstrated there is an existing capacity strain on parking in the area. In view of this, it is expected that the applicant makes adequate provisions to minimise disruption during the construction phase. As part of the CMP, the applicant would need to provide details of phasing, including timescales for each phase. This should include details of, where possible, how the maximum amount of car parking will remain undisrupted, and where a loss of parking cannot be avoided, an indication of any potential alternative locations where parking may take place. Details should also be submitted of public notices to be displayed in advance of works to make users of the car park aware there will be a loss of parking.

It will also be required that a swept path analysis of a construction vehicle entering, manoeuvring and exiting the site is provided for each phase of the construction. The applicant will need to discuss the Traffic Management of the site with the Street Works team and apply for a licence to erect hoarding on public highway. Furthermore, the Parking team should also be consulted regarding the temporary suspension of some on-street parking bays on Station Road.

The Highway Authority would expect that any deliveries to/from the site by HGV are only made between the hours of 10:00 – 15:00 on weekdays to avoid the network peak hours and afternoon school peak hour. As Marsham Lane is not suitable for HGV’s, all deliveries would be required to enter and exit from Packhorse Road.

Conclusion: Mindful of the above, this application is acceptable in Highway terms. NO OBJECTIONS are therefore raised subject to Conditions and the a S106 Obligation to secure payment of a £15,000 developer contribution to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions.

Bucks County Council SuDS Officer: Buckinghamshire County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority has reviewed the information provided in the Surface Water Drainage Strategy (38693/2002 – Rev A, 23rd May 2018, Peter Brett Associates). The LLFA has no objection to the proposed development subject to the conditions .

The applicant is proposing to attenuate on site before discharging surface water to the Thames Water foul network utilising a complex control device, it is proposed that the discharge won’t be any greater than 8 l/s for the 1 in 100 year + 30% climate change events. However, as according to the Non-statutory Technical Standards the flows should be limited to not exceed the 1 in 100 year equivalent, this should be adjusted

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 48 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Thames Water has provided in-principle permission for the foul network connection if the applicant demonstrates compliance with the SuDS hierarchy.

There are different variations of the SuDS hierarchy, the one utilised by Thames Water is as follows:

Water reuse Infiltration techniques such as porous surfaces Attenuate rainwater in ponds or open water features for gradual release to a watercourse Attenuate rainwater in tanks for gradual release to a watercourse Discharge rainwater direct to a watercourse Discharge rainwater to a surface water drain Discharge rainwater to the combined sewer

Connection to a foul sewer network does not sit on the hierarchy and any surface water connections to a foul network are at the discretion of the sewerage undertaker.

The applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the SuDS hierarchy; in particular the applicant has not acknowledged the ordinary watercourse approximately 80m south East of the site boundary. This watercourse is noted on our mapping to be a tertiary river that joins the River Misbourne further downstream. We request that the applicant completes a full viability assessment of a potential connection to the ordinary watercourse. We also request that the applicant completes an assessment of compliance with the SuDS hierarchy, providing reasonable justification for not meeting the hierarchical components.

Bucks County Council Ecology Adviser (Transport. Economy. Environment Team): No objection

District Strategic Environment Team (Sustainable Development, Climate Change, Air and Land Quality, Radioactivity) – Air Quality: Having reviewed the information provided by the applicant’s consultant Peter Brett Associates and having reviewed current national guidelines and policy advise, whilst the Council does not yet have in place any formal adopted local planning policies on air quality, concerns could arise if a development is likely to generate an air quality impact in an area where air quality is known to be poor. Applicants could in some cases be asked to additionally undertake a simple assessment or detailed assessment depending upon existing baseline conditions.

Looking at congestion and traffic flow, estimated flows are approximately 3,500 vehicles per day along Station Road. Station Road connects to Packhorse Road, a ‘B’ road that runs through Gerrard’s Cross and from the submitted information; this indicates increases on this road of approximately 5.2/5.3%. However, in terms of creating additional congestion, the applicant has provided information on traffic impacts and this indicates that the network would operate within capacity and that speeds will not be significantly impacted.

As there is a predicted increase in traffic identified by the applicant it is appropriate to reflect on the existing air quality in the area.

The Council specifically looks for air quality to be considered if the development is within a designated Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) or where concentrations are just below the threshold for designation, to prevent or reduce the requirement for a new AQMA designation. The annual mean objective for Nitrogen Dioxide is 40 µgm-3¬

The Council has a network of air quality monitors across the District which provides data on nitrogen dioxide levels. Currently nitrogen dioxide is being measured by diffusion tube on the junction of Packhorse Road and Bulstrode Way. For the last 5 years concentrations of nitrogen dioxide have been measured at 32µgm-3¬ in 2013 reducing to 29µgm-3¬ in 2017.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 49 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Background levels of the nitrogen dioxide annual mean are indicated to be at a level of 16.67 µgm-3¬ for this 1km grid square using the ambient air quality maps produced by DEFRA.

In conclusion, if the information provided by the applicant is considered against the current very low levels of pollution then the increase in traffic is not likely to result in an AQMA being declared or pollution being increased significantly to a level that would require the designation of a new AQMA and therefore further assessment is not required.

As such NO OBJECTION is raised to the development and no conditions are considered necessary.

However, it remains good practice to consider options for improving air quality generally. As such the developer should be encouraged to consider native tree species with a high capacity for maintaining good air quality.

Other notes for information:

- Four Electric Vehicle Fast Charging points are to be installed. However we would recommend that the car park is future proofed to enable more charging points to be provided.

- Promotion of cycling infrastructure is beneficial to facilitate local green travel. I note that 12 cycle spaces/cycle storage is mentioned in the Transport Assessment. Its location is not evident on the ground floor plan. The cycle storage should be easily accessed and its existence made clearly apparent to cyclists in the area for it to be utilised to its full potential.

District Strategic Environment Team (Sustainable Development, Climate Change, Air and Land Quality, Radioactivity) – Noise:

I have reviewed the documents from a sound noise and vibration management perspective, both during the construction and operational phases.

Operation It is noted that the current and historical use of the site is for public car parking. Neighbouring residential and commercial receptors will therefore be familiar with the noise from vehicles entering, parking and leaving the site. The PBA Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) uses ambient noise change to predict likely outcomes. This is consistent with the intensification of the use. Provided the assumptions and supporting calculations in the NIA are correct I would have no additional comments to make on sound noise and vibration. Construction

From the design and access statement it was noted that complaints had been received from residents during construction of other recent developments.

NO OBJECTIONS subject to Conditions relating to hours of construction and a construction management plan to reduce the likelihood of complaints specific to this development.

District Environment Team (Environmental Health, Sustainability and Resilience) – Contaminated Lane The Phase 2 Ground Condition Assessment prepared by Peter Brett Associates (Document ref. 38693/3500). Has been reviewed. The investigation has identified exceedances of commercial screening criteria for Benzo(a)pyrene, Benz(a)anthracene and Dibenz(ah)anthracene. These exceedances were identified within the made ground. They are considered likely to be associated with old tarmac, in which coal tar was used as a binder. This material is distributed across the site. Gas monitoring indicates predominantly near atmospheric conditions. No mitigation measures are required. CFA piles have been recommended. The method minimises the potential for creation of preferential pathways and is protective of groundwater. The consultant has recommended that 300mm of clean cover is provided in any areas of soft landscaping. The risk to future users is considered to be very low. If the made ground remains in situ, contaminants are unlikely to become

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 50 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL mobilised and site users are unlikely to come into contact with contaminants in site soils. If the made ground is to be removed, the material will have to be sampled for waste classification purposes.

District Tree Officer: An opportunity exists to deliver high quality sustainable development by improving the natural capital of this development which will have multiple benefits of adhering to healthier living objectives (mental and physical) by place making/shaping principles and significantly improve the visual appearance of the car park within the setting of the town with new tree planting, green roof/wall or a combination of both to ensure an award winning design.

The car park would have the potential to improve air quality and rainwater harvesting as well as possible carbon storage (living roofs/walls/rain wall) as part of climate change mitigation and adaption. As outlined under section 40 of NERC Act 2006 the Council has a duty to consider ecological net gain in all work undertaken by the council. Green Infrastructure must be well planned, designed and maintained. It can help mitigate the risks associated with climate change by storing carbon and improving drainage and water quality as well as reducing heat island effect. Green roofs and walls help insulate buildings, reducing energy demand. They also support biodiversity, help reduce flood risk, and help improve air quality.

Current natural environment Planning Practice Guidance is that planning proposals should incorporate green infrastructure in line with local and neighbourhood plan policies and site specific considerations. As a component of sustainable development, green infrastructure should be considered at an early stage of a planning proposal. The UK National Ecosystem assessment highlights the importance of green infrastructure/natural capital in urban areas for society’s health and wellbeing. The Natural Capital Committee has shown there is a very good economic case for investing in green infrastructure.

I have reviewed the plans and it would appear that any tree planting along the frontage will be within a 3.5 metre wide strip with 2 metre wide pavement (estimate as working from screen). So any trees planted would have to have a canopy spread not exceeding 3 metres after 25 years.

I do not think it is practical to plant a evergreen tree as shown on the illustrative drawing even though the soil volume should be sufficient. The images below show pleached/topiary shaped trees which could be planted but obviously a maintenance cost associated with maintaining them to any shape (public art).

District Landscape Officer: I would suggest that some space could be set aside for planting on the west and east site boundaries. The west boundary is shown as a ‘New Footpath’ of about 3 metres wide so there would potentially be some space for tree and shrub planting here. The east boundary is more limited due to the substation access but consideration should be given to some planting on the east boundary if possible. A good landscape maintenance regime will be required to make sure all the new planting is healthy and survives.

District Building Control: In respect to the Building Regulations 2010 and associated legislation, I am satisfied with the disabled and access issues on the project. The concerns in respect of the unprotected area and fire safety issues on the side of the previous scheme appear to have been addressed by the enclose. No comments or observations regarding the planning application with respect to the Building Regulations 2010 and associated legislation.

Network Rail: The applicant will need to liaise with Network Rail for this proposal to prevent the works on site and as a permanent arrangement from impacting upon the safe operation and integrity of the railway infrastructure including the tunnel. Network Rail will require further information on the works over and adjacent to the existing railway tunnel. The construction form of the tunnel makes it vulnerable to changes in ground conditions so these areas must be agreed with Network Rail.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 51 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL OFFICER NOTE – Network Rails comments have been forwarded to the applicant’s agent, matters relating to the construction and impact on the adjoining land, outside of the application site are civil matters for the applicant and Network Rail to resolve as appropriate and not material to the planning merits of the development as proposed. An informative is recommended.

TVP Architectural Liaison Officer: No comments received to date.

Environment Agency: No comment.

POLICIES National Planning Policy Framework (Revised July 2018)(NPPF)

National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

South Bucks Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted February 2011: Saved Policies CP6, CP7, CP8, CP11, CP12 and CP13.

South Bucks District Local Plan - Adopted March 1999 Consolidated September 2007 and February 2011: Saved Policies S1, TC1, EP3, EP4, EP5, EP6, TC1 and TR5.

EVALUATION 1.0 Principle of development 1.1 The site, which currently comprises a local authority owned surface car park, is located within the Town Centre of Gerrards Cross, a Principal Settlement as identified in para 2.2.2 of the South Bucks Core Strategy and just on the edge of the Secondary Shopping Frontage, shown on the Proposals Map of the South Bucks District Local Plan. As such, the car park’s re-development for improved and enhanced parking facilities is therefore considered acceptable in principle..

1.2 The size and scale of the development is based on the predicated need to provide additional car parking spaces in Gerrards Cross.

1.3 In terms of the proposed expansion of car parking facilities on this site, Para 2.2.16 of the Core Strategy notes “Gerrards Cross has good road and rail links with other surrounding areas and relatively good public transport access. However, there are issues with the availability of parking for rail users”. Further, the Chiltern District Council and South Bucks District Council Joint Business Plan 2016 – 2020 Stronger in Partnership states in its priorities of promoting local communities its objective to provide increased off street parking in Beaconsfield and Gerrards Cross to meet future needs There is car parking at the railway station, and reference has been made by objectors to the improvement/expansion of the Railway Car-Park, however that option is not before the Council as the Local Planning Authority and the expansion of this car park at 0.2miles could be beneficial on both accounts. Improving and enhancing parking facilities which can serve to enhance and promote the vitality and viability of the centre as well as potentially contributing to parking for some rail users.

1.4 The NPPF was first published in March 2012, replacing previous Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes and, since the submission of this application; in July 2018 the NPPF has itself been revised. In terms of the weight to be attached to existing local policies that form part of the development plan, the revised NPPF confirms that the weight to be given to these existing local policies will be dependent on their degree of consistency with the NPPF. Therefore, the closer the policies in the development plan are to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 52 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL 1.5 The fundamental aim of the NPPF as revised is in promoting sustainable development, however the presumption in favour of sustainable development does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. The NPPF adopts a clear pro-growth stance and. It identifies that planning should proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local place the country needs.

1.6 In terms of Promoting sustainable transport, Section 9, Para 106 of the Revised NPPF states that “In town centres, local authorities should seek to improve the quality of parking so that it is convenient, safe and secure, alongside measures to promote accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists.” In principle therefore there is, as stated above, no objection, and indeed there is an acknowledgment in policies of the need to improve parking in Gerrards Cross.

1.7 Both saved policy TC1 of the Local Plan and Core Policy CP11 of the Core Strategy seek to ensure that proposals enhance the vitality and viability of the town centres within the District including that of Gerrards Cross. This proposal would facilitate the protection and the ability to strengthen both the retail and employment functions of the town centre.

1.8 It is recognised that Core Policy CP7 seeks, inter-alia, to support the re-balancing of the transport system in favour of more sustainable modes of transport. It does however recognise that in rural parts of the District, the car will remain the primary mode of travel. The proposed car park does include provision for bicycle and motorcycle parking and also incorporates electric charging points. Realistically, whilst providing these facilities, the proposed car park would also enable access to Gerrards Cross from its rural surrounds, thereby providing the infrastructure to support its vitality and viability in accordance with Local Plan policy TC1 and Core Strategy Policy CP11.

1.09 The need for additional parking was established from the results of a Car Parking Study for Gerrards Cross undertaken in January 2014 by YES Engineering Group Ltd on behalf of South Bucks District Council. One of the overarching aims of South Bucks District Council as stated in its Business Plan’s Priorities and Goals, to provide increased off street parking in Beaconsfield and Gerrards Cross to meet future needs. Subsequently a further study was undertaken by Peter Brett Associates in May 2017. Where previously the car park was put forward with a design life up to 2033, the application now proposes to extend the design life of the car park to 2053. These studies have been assessed by the County Highway Officer who gives a detailed analysis above taking into account a counter report submitted by objectors. The assumptions made in the exercises have been found to be robust and reasonable, demonstrating a clear need for additional parking in Gerrards Cross for both now, and to account for future growth in the area up until 2053.

1.10 In summary, the site currently operates as a town centre car park and therefore the principle of a car park use on the site is already established. The need for additional car parking provision at the site is demonstrated in planning policy and supporting documents. It is advanced that the development, by virtue of its location and design, would also provide additional local economic benefits to support the role of the town centre and local businesses. The facility will encourage sustainable transport use for commuters and encourage visitors to the town centre, thereby improving the vitality and viability of the area, in accordance with the NPPF.

2.0 Design/character & appearance - landscaping 2.1 It is clear that this proposed development represents a significant change in the street scene from the open surface-level car park currently provided on this site. To set it in the context of the street scene, the adjacent development to the North West of the application site comprises a three-storey building with the library on the ground floor and offices above; opposite the site is the four-storey Waitrose building (Oakridge House), Waitrose occupying the ground floor with flats above, a single-storey telephone exchange and the four-storey flatted development of Maple Court and Portland House. The adjacent site at Marsham House, is currently being redeveloped with flatted developments of five/six storeys. The illustrative plans indicate that the fourth floor of the proposed multi-storey car park building with balustrade on top would be commensurate with the height of the flat roof of the fifth floor element of the new building under

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 53 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL construction at Marsham House. Consequently, it is not considered that a five-storey building would, in principle, appear out of place in this location.

2.2 This is a multi-storey car park and has been designed as such, no attempt has been made to disguise its appearance. It is modern and functional in design, departing from the traditional brick or concrete construction of adjacent developments. The development utilises a mix of feature, bespoke, perforated bronze metal cladding and solid silver-grey flat metal cladding on the frontage and solid bronze metal cladding on the sides and a mix of perforated and solid silver grey metal cladding. The choice of colouring is to compliment the more traditional brick buildings in the area. This does make the building distinctive but as indicated follows its design follows its function. Indeed Marsham House development is a modern flatted development, designed with a flat roof, the sixth floor being inset from the fifth. The car park is such that and given the frontage of the buildings set back 3m from the back edge of the pavement. The development reads as a modern town centre car park, the height respects adjacent development under construction, subject to confirmation of slab levels to ensure that the fourth floor of the car park incorporating balcony is commensurate with fifth storey of the new residential building. Overall it is not considered objections could be sustained in terms of visual impact in the street scene.

2.3 The illustrative plans indicate hedge and tree planting along the street frontage and comments of the tree and landscape officer are noted in this respect. It is considered that the precise details of landscaping should be covered by condition.

2.4 The rear of the structure would also be visible from the Marsham Lane railway bridge and also from and across the Tesco's car park. This elevation would be viewed in the context and against the background of the surrounding existing and proposed developments of a similar height in Station Road and its lower levels would be screened to some extent by the existing landscaping within the Tesco's site. The proposed structure, whilst representing a significant change from the existing situation, would therefore not appear unacceptably obtrusive when viewed from the rear.

2.5 In terms of the choice of materials, samples have been requested, but the supporting information explains that the elevations of the proposed car park structure have been developed to express the structure and incorporate solid and bespoke perforated flat metal cladding panels. Solid opaque balustrade is also proposed to mitigate the potential impact of lighting. It is considered that the proposed building is both functional in design and form and would not adversely affect the character or amenities of the locality in accordance with policy EP3 of the Local Plan.

3.0 Residential amenity 3.1 With regard to the propensity for the proposal to impact on the amenities of the occupants of residential properties in the vicinity of the site the primary concerns are twofold. First, the physical impact of the structure on the amenities of the occupants of the flats on the opposite side of Station Road and those within the developments under construction adjacent at Marsham House and secondly, any impact from increased traffic generation from vehicles accessing the proposed car park.

3.2 There is no doubt that the proposed construction of a multi-storey car park on the site of an existing surface-level car park is bound to appear more obtrusive and impact on views currently had over the site to the rear gardens of the dwellinghouses across the Tesco's car park in Marsham Way. However, whilst development should provide for adequate daylight, and where possible sunlight, to reach into spaces around and between buildings and should not result in a significant loss of daylight or sunlight to adjacent buildings or land, there is no right to a view. With regard to the propensity to impact on the flats opposite the site, the layout is such that the single storey telephone exchange building takes up a significant proportion of the frontage to the centre of the site and only a limited number of existing flats would directly face the proposed building. The building would be located across Station Road, would not be dissimilar in height to the buildings existing and proposed to either side and would be sited some 3.0m back from the footway with semi-mature trees planted along the frontage. It is considered that such a relationship is not uncommon in a town centre location and that the development could not be resisted on these grounds in accordance with policies EP3 and EP5 of the Local Plan.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 54 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

3.3 In support of this conclusion the applicants have applied the guidance contained in the document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight - A Guide to Good Practice (published by BRE Press 2011). They have concluded that the proposed development would not impact to an unacceptable degree on the light ingress to any of the existing/proposed surrounding residential or commercial properties/premises.

3.4 With regard to the propensity of the proposed development to impact on the development under construction at Marsham House, no windows are proposed in the end elevation of the proposed Marsham House scheme which would directly face the car park building. There would be some impact on the roof-top amenity spaces for the flats proposed on level five of the Marsham House scheme but again, this level of impact is not considered unusual in a town centre location.

3.5 The adjacent property to the North West, No. 38 Station Road contains the library on the ground floor with offices above. It is configured with a blank gable end facing the proposed car park building on the road frontage and then has an outshot to the rear with five first and second floor windows facing the site and set off the boundary by a gap of approximately 2.0m. The rear-facing elevation contains a stairwell. The proposed building would be located some 3.2m off the North West boundary. Whilst the presence of the proposed building would be bound to result in a loss of light to the first and second floor windows in the south east elevation of 38 Station Road, such a juxtaposition with a commercial property is not unusual in a town centre location and again it is not considered that the scheme could be resisted on these grounds. Having regard to the space about the building, some softening of the development by extending some landscaping along the boundary with the flats as under construction would be beneficial. Again this can be covered under the landscaping condition.

3.6 In terms of potential traffic generation, the comments of the County Highway Officer are again noted. It is considered that this scheme could not be resisted on the grounds of any impact on residential amenities from increased traffic generation.

4.0 Parking/Highway implications 4.1 A comprehensive Transport Assessment has been submitted in support of this application and this again has been reviewed by the County Highway Officers and the response is set out in detail above so it is not intended to reiterate the comments. There is not significant change to the access arrangements to the car park from Station Road, however directly opposite the proposed car park access which will be wider than the existing, there are designated short term stay on-street parking bays. Having consulted Buckinghamshire County Council’s Parking team who manage these bays, the County Council as Highway Authority may need to make adjustments which are dependent on the impact of the additional parking. The applicant will therefore be required to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions resulting from the increased use of Station Road and also the required works. A contribution of £15,000 would need to be secured either by way of a Unilateral Undertaking or a bi-party Legal Agreement between Buckinghamshire County Council and the Applicant before planning permission is granted. The applicant has indicated a willingness to provide such a contribution and it is understood a Unilateral Undertaking is being drafted to address this.

4.2 Given the scale of the proposed development a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CMP) would need to be prepared and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority to mitigate the impact. It is noted that this is not only recommended by the Highway Authority but also by the Strategic Environmental Health Teams in terms of also addressing noise and disturbance.

5.0 Sustainability. 5.1 The site is in a sustainable location only a short walking distance from Gerrards Cross town centre and the railway station. The application proposes 12 bicycle stands as detailed in the supporting statement, submitted plans show these located at the entrance to the car park and parking for motorcycles within the equivalent of 2 car parking spaces – which it is stated provides 6 spaces. This is broadly in line with the overarching aim of the NPPF to promote sustainable development. However, Transport for Bucks Highways Officers have pointed out that Buckinghamshire Countywide Parking Guidance which was adopted on

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 55 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL September 2015 provides up-to-date guidance relating to recommended parking provision. In relation to motorcycle parking this guidance states that "The Department for Transport provides vehicle licensing statistics for motorcycles based on postcode (DfT 2013), and this guidance has used this data to calculate the recommended standards. The motorcycle licensing statistics indicate that Buckinghamshire has approximately a ratio of 30:1 car ownership to motorcycle ownership." In view of this, the guidance recommends that for non-residential developments, 1 space is provided per 30 parking spaces. As the application proposes 422 car parking spaces, this equates to 15 motorcycles spaces.

5.2 There is no set guidance for cycle parking for this type of development, and therefore it should be assessed on a case by case basis. The BCC parking guidance does however state that "Safe and secure cycle parking is an important component in encouraging cycling. For new developments, BCC aims to ensure that developers make efficient use of land and promote sustainable travel choices." Given the sustainable location of the site and the opportunity to encourage people to make journeys by bicycle instead of the private car, it is considered that a higher provision of cycle parking should be proposed.

5.3 The applicant’s agent has been asked to consider if the internal layout can accommodate such an increase in cycle and motorcycle parking.

6.0 Air Quality. 6.1 There have been considerable concerns raised by local residents that the application has not been accompanied by a full Air Quality Assessment, and objectors refer to Government guidance which states that an air quality assessment should be conducted if a planning application involves increased traffic congestion/volume. In response to such assertions the applicant has submitted information to address the concerns raised. The site is not in an area covered by an AQMA (Air Quality Management Area) which only covers the M25 corridor. The potential traffic generation from the increase in the car parking capacity of the car park by 320 is of course material, however overall the traffic generation would not be so significant to generate a requirement for a full air quality assessment and an objection on such grounds cannot be sustained. The District Council’s Environmental Health Officer has carefully reviewed all information and confirmed that an air quality assessment is not required for this scheme.

7.0 Drainage. 7.1 Buckinghamshire County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) has reviewed the information provided in the Surface Water Drainage Strategy (38693/2002 – Rev A, 23rd May 2018, Peter Brett Associates). The LLFA is satisfied that the development is acceptable subject to pre-commencement conditions being imposed.

8.0 Designing to Reduce Crime. 8.1 Policy EP6 of the Local Plan makes it clear that development should be designed and laid out to reduce the opportunity for crime against both people and property. In particular it states that developments should ensure that areas to which the public have easy access are overlooked for security reasons and incorporate the provision of facilities which would discourage crime. Core Strategy policy CP8 states that development proposals will be expected to accord with Secured by Design principles to achieve crime prevention, reduce the fear of crime and improve other aspects of community safety. The supporting Planning Statement does confirm that in developing the design of the car park, reference was made to the "Park Mark Safer Parking" guidelines for new build car parks and other design guides.

9.0 Sustainable Energy. 9.1 Core Policy CP12 of the Core Strategy requires, inter-alia, that all developments of 1,000sqm or more should secure at least 10% of their energy from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon sources, unless demonstrated that it is not viable or feasible. In response to this requirement the applicants agent has established that the annual energy demand for the car park would be approximately 300,000 kWh/year and, in order to meet the 10% policy requirement the renewable/low carbon sources would need to provide 30,000 kWh/year. The agent has concluded that the only feasible energy option would be the provision of photo voltaic (PV) panels and that these could only feasibly be provided on the roofs of the stairwells, which would only result in 15sqm of PV panels providing less than 9% of the renewables target. Consequently, in

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 56 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL light of the above assessment and due to the form and construction of the proposed car park building, it is not considered practical or feasible in this instance to install the PV panels on the proposed structure.

10. CONCLUSION 10.1 The application has been assessed against the NPPF, (Revised July 2018) NPPG and Development Plan and whether the proposals deliver sustainable development. Fundamentally the application is to extend and existing car park in a Town Centre where studies indicate that there is a need for additional car parking to be provided. The principle of the car park’s re-development for improved and enhanced parking facilities is not therefore considered to be objectionable. . Improving and enhancing parking facilities which can serve to enhance and promote the vitality and viability of the town centre is consistent with local and nation policy as well as potentially contributing to parking for some rail users. The inclusion of cycling and motorcycle secure parking within the scheme would equally promote more sustainable modes of transport. Para 106 of The revised NPPF states at paragraph 106 that “In town centres, local authorities should seek to improve the quality of parking so that it is convenient, safe and secure, alongside measures to promote accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists.” The proposed car park also promotes sustainable travel by the inclusion of cycle parking and electric charging point bays.

10.2 Bucks County Council Highways have no objection to the development, the Revised NPPF does place greater emphasis on highway reasons for refusal, however in this instance the development is acceptable subject to conditions and a legal agreement either a unilateral undertaking or s106 legal agreement having regard to the provision of a financial contribution to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions resulting from the increased use of Station Road and also the required works.

10.3 In terms of the design and scale of the development and its impact in the street scene and amenities of neighbouring residents. This is undoubtedly a large building, but its form and design is functional, it appears as a car park and is in the town centre where such development is not unexpected. The design has taken on board the need to mitigate light spillage from cars to minimise impact on residents, The scale and heights respect the scale and design of adjacent development and landscaping as required to be provided by condition will assist in the appearance in the street scene and amenity of neighbouring residential.

10.4 In terms of the impact on air quality, has been considered and the Environmental Health satisfied no objections raised in this respect. There have been no other objections raised to the development. It is noted that objectors have questioned the motives behind the submission of this application, however these are not material to the planning consideration of the application.

10.5 Whilst it is acknowledged that there are nearby residential flats who will to some degree be impacted by the development, this is a Town Centre location where such relationships are to be expected. It is considered that a fair balance would be struck between the interests of the community and the human rights of individuals in the event of planning permission being granted in this instance, subject to conditions as details and also

Working with the applicant In accordance with Section 4 National Planning Policy Framework, the Council, in dealing with this application, has worked in a positive and proactive way with the Applicant / Agent and has focused on seeking solutions to the issues arising from the development proposal. South Bucks District Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by; - offering a pre-application advice service, - updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application as appropriate and, where possible and appropriate, suggesting solutions. In this case, South Bucks District Council has considered the details as submitted which were considered acceptable. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 57 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

RECOMMENDATION: Defer-minded to approve subject to the prior completion of Legal Agreement (either unilateral or section 106) relating to the provision of a financial contribution to fund a public consultation for the review and change to existing waiting, loading and parking restrictions resulting from the increased use of Station Road and also the required works. Decision delegated to Head of Planning & Economic Development.

In the event that a signed Legal Agreement is received prior to the Planning Committee, the recommendation will be for Conditional Permission.

Subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions, to enable the Local Planning Authority to review the suitability of the development in the light of altered circumstances and to comply with the provisions of Section 91 (1) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990, as amended.

2. Prior to commencement of the development a Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. The Plan shall include details of:

- Details of construction phasing, including timescales; - Details of where public parking lost during construction will take place; - Details of public notices to be displayed in advance of works - Construction access; - Management and timing of deliveries; - Routing of construction traffic; - Vehicle parking for site operatives and visitors; - Loading/off-loading and turning areas; - Site compound; - Storage of materials; - Proposed mitigation for dust - Proposed mitigation for noise; - Recording of complaints and measure to identify cause and to take appropriate measure to reduce emissions - How compliance with be monitored, including site inspections and there recording of compliance matters - Precautions to prevent the deposit of mud and debris on the adjacent highway.

The development hereby permitted shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan.

Reason: To minimise danger and inconvenience to highway users and having regard to the amenity of residents.

3. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, details shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority of the fixed datum point, normally located outside the application site, and ground floor slab level of the multi-storey car park which will form the basis for the finished floor levels shown on the Proposed Elevation Plan P(04)01 Rev P2 and P(05)04 Rev P4 and Proposed Section Plan P(04)01 RevP2, Thereafter the development shall not be constructed other than as approved in relation to the fixed datum point.

Reason: To protect, as far as is possible, the character of the locality.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 58 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL

4. Prior to the commencement of any works a Surface Water Drainage Scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro-geological context of the development, together with a "whole-life" maintenance plan has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consolation with the Lead Local Flood Authority.

The Surface Water Drainage Scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details in accordance with the timeframe set out in the approved Scheme.

The Scheme shall also include:

- Assessment of compliance with the SuDS hierarchy (See Informative relating to this matter attached to decision notice) - Demonstrate that water quality, ecological and amenity benefits have been considered - Existing and proposed discharge rates and volumes for the 1 in 1 year, 1 in 30 year, and the 1 in 100 year events. - SuDS components agreed in the outline application - Full construction details of all SuDS and drainage components - Detailed drainage layout with pipe numbers, gradients and pipe sizes complete, together with storage volumes of all SuDS components - Calculations to demonstrate that the proposed drainage system can contain up to the 1 in 30 storm event without flooding. Any onsite flooding between the 1 in 30 and the 1 in 100 plus 40% climate change storm event should be safely contained on site. - Details of proposed overland flood flow routes in the event of system exceedance or failure, with demonstration that such flows can be appropriately managed on site without increasing flood risk to occupants, or to adjacent or downstream sites. - Flow depth - Flow volume - Flow velocity - Flow direction

The "whole-life" maintenance plan for the site shall set out how and when to maintain the full drainage system (e.g. a maintenance schedule for each drainage/SuDS component) during and following construction, with details of who is to be responsible for carrying out the maintenance. The plan shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that a sustainable drainage strategy has been agreed prior to construction in accordance with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework to ensure that there is a satisfactory solution to managing flood risk.

5. Prior to the multi-storey car park hereby permitted being first brought into use, a Verification Report carried out by a qualified drainage engineer must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the Sustainable Urban Drainage System has been constructed in accordance with the approved Report.

Reason: The reason for this pre-occupation condition is to ensure the Sustainable Drainage System is designed to the technical standards

6. The external elevations of the Multi-storey car park hereby permitted shall be constructed in accordance with the schedule of materials as submitted and materials indicated on the Proposed Elevation plans P(04)01 Rev P2 and P(05)04 Rev P4 hereby approved.

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 59 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the locality. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

7. Prior to the ground floor slab level being laid for the multi-storey car park hereby permitted a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning including details, of proposed planting heights, spacing and species. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To maintain the visual amenity of the area. (Policy EP4 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers) and having regard to amenity of nearby residential properties.

8. The scheme for parking and manoeuvring as indicated on the submitted plans shall be laid out in accordance with the approved details and that area shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose.

Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway. (Policy TR7 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers).

9. Prior to the multi-storey car park hereby permitted being brought into use provision shall be made for at least 15 cycle parking spaces and 15 motorcycles spaces in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. The cycle and motorcycle parking shall thereafter be permanently maintained in accordance with the approved details

Reason: In order to influence modal choice and to reduce single occupancy private car journeys and comply with national and local transport policy.

10. Prior to the multi-storey car park hereby permitted being brought shall not be brought into use until the existing means of vehicular and pedestrian access onto Station Road has been altered in accordance with the approved drawing no. P(03)01 Rev 2 and constructed in accordance with Buckinghamshire County Council's guide note "Commercial Vehicular Access Within Highway Limits" 2013.

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

11. Within one month of the altered accesses being brought into use all other existing access points not incorporated in the development hereby permitted shall be stopped up by raising the existing dropped kerb or removing the existing bellmouth and reinstating the footway and highway boundary to the same line, level and detail as the adjoining footway and highway boundary.

Reason: To limit the number of access points along the site boundary for the safety and convenience of the highway user.

12. No floodlighting or other form of external and internal lighting shall be installed unless it is in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include location, height, type and direction of light sources and intensity of illumination. Any lighting which is so installed shall not thereafter be altered without the prior

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 60 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL consent in writing of the Local Planning Authority other than for routine maintenance which does not change its details.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity of the adjacent occupiers.

13 Notwithstanding the information submitted in the Ground Condition Assessment prepared by Peter Brett Associates, in the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

14. This permission relates to the details shown on the approved plans as listed below:

LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

Plan Reference Date received by District Planning Authority P(02)02 P1 15.06.2018

P(02)01 P2 15.06.2018

P(03)01 P5 15.06.2018

P(03)02 P3 15.06.2018

P(03)03 2 15.06.2018

P(03)04 2 15.06.2018

P(03)05 15.06.2018

2P(03)06 P3 15.06.2018

P(05)01 P4 15.06.2018

P(05)02 P4 15.06.2018

P(05)03 P3 15.06.2018

P(05)04 P4 15.06.2018

and in accordance with any other conditions imposed by this planning permission.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the details considered by the Local Planning Authority

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 61 Appendix Classification: OFFICIAL INFORMATIVES:

1. INFORMATIVE - It is drawn to the developers attention that in respect of compliance with condition 4, having regard to the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) the aim should be to discharge surface run off as high up the following hierarchy of drainage options as reasonably practicable: - into the ground (infiltration); - to a surface water body; - to a surface water sewer, highway drain, or another drainage system; - to a combined sewer.

2. INFORMATIVE The applicant is advised that the off-site works will need to be constructed under a Section 184 of the Highways Act legal agreement. This Small Works Agreement must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway. A minimum period of 3 weeks is required to process the agreement following the receipt by the Highway Authority of a written request. Please contact Development Management at the following address for information:-

Highways Development Management 6th Floor, County Hall Walton Street, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UY Telephone 0845 230 2882

3. INFORMATIVE The applicant is advised that the permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to obstruct the public highway by the erection of scaffolding, hoarding, skip or any other device or apparatus for which a licence must be sought from the Highway Authority. A period of 10 days must be allowed for the issuing of the licence, please contact the Streetworks team at the following address for information. Streetworks 10th Floor, New County Offices Walton Street, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UY Telephone 0845 2302882 https://www.buckscc.gov.uk/services/transport-and-roads/licences-and-permits/

4. INFORMATIVE - It is the responsibility of the developer/applicant to ensure that the development proceeds in accordance with the approved details and in compliance with any conditions on the planning permission. The condition(s) on this planning permission that appear in bold text are known as conditions precedent. These are conditions which require compliance before any development whatsoever starts on site. Where conditions precedent have not been complied with any development purporting to benefit from the planning permission may be unauthorised and a breach of planning control. The Development Control section will not normally approve details required by a condition precedent retrospectively. A new planning application will usually be required under these circumstances.

Conditions precedent must be formally confirmed as being complied with by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of work. Formal discharge/compliance may also be required for other conditions. Any requests for the discharge/compliance of conditions must be submitted to the District Planning Authority in writing. Each such written request to discharge/compliance any conditions will require payment of a separate fee. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3rd August 2018 Head of Planning and Economic Development

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 62 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00390/FUL Beaconsfield Mr Angelo Russo 1A Station Parade Single storey front extension. Conditional 06.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr D Russell Penn Road Permission Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire HP9 2PB

18/00479/FUL Beaconsfield Mulberry Estates 177 Cherry Tree Road Erection of a pair of chalet style semi-detached Withdrawn 11.07.18 Town Council C/o Robert Clarke Beaconsfield dwellings with integral garages following Buckinghamshire demolition of the existing dwelling and garage. HP9 1BA Page 63 Page 18/00638/CLOP Beaconsfield Mr J Wakefield 27 Wattleton Road Application for certificate of Lawfulness for Cert of law 05.07.18 ED Town Council Beaconsfield proposed : Electric gate. proposed Buckinghamshire dev or use HP9 1SE issued

18/00796/FUL Beaconsfield Mr Jon Furneaux Land At 36 And 38 Erection of two detached houses with integral Conditional 13.07.18 Town Council The Spinney garages and a new vehicular access. Permission Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire HP9 1SB

18/00807/FUL Beaconsfield Hall Barn Estates 16 - 20 Windsor End Two storey rear extension. Conversion into two Conditional 27.07.18 Town Council C/o Garrett McKee Beaconsfield separate dwellings. Permission Appendix Architects Buckinghamshire HP9 2JW

1 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00854/FUL Beaconsfield Mr & Mrs Darren Cambridge House Extended porch and new garage door to enlarged Conditional 05.07.18 Town Council Baggett 10 Cambridge Road opening. Permission C/o Mr Jonathan Beaconsfield Heighway Buckinghamshire HP9 1HW

18/00868/LBC Beaconsfield Mr Arun Sandhu 24 London End Change of Use of ground and first floor from B1(a) Withdrawn 24.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr George Martin Beaconsfield Office to D1 Cosmetic Surgery / Dentistry Buckinghamshire HP9 2JH Page 64 Page 18/00871/FUL Beaconsfield Mrs Jacqueline Trisk 8 Burnham Avenue Single Storey Side Extension Conditional 16.07.18 Town Council C/o Mrs Kayleigh Harp Beaconsfield Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 2JA

18/00890/FUL Beaconsfield Mr & Mrs G Telfer 6 One Tree Lane Single storey and first floor extensions Conditional 20.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr D Russell Beaconsfield Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 2BU

18/00894/RVC Beaconsfield DP Architects Brambleside Variation of Conditions 2 to Planning Permission Conditional 13.07.18 Town Council C/o DP Architects 81 Burkes Road 18/00287/FUL to allow: erection of fireplace, Permission Beaconsfield chimney breast and stack on side elevation, Appendix Buckinghamshire changes to fenestration and insertion of HP9 1EE rooflights.

2 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00902/FUL Beaconsfield Mr & Mrs Mill 125 Holtspur Top Lane Front porch, bay window, roof alterations and Conditional 17.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Simon Day Holtspur external landscaping works Permission Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire HP9 1BW

18/00920/FUL Beaconsfield Mr Keith Twining 10 Reynolds Road Single storey rear extension incorporating roof Conditional 13.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Metcalf Beaconsfield lanterns. Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 2NJ Page 65 Page 18/00933/FUL Beaconsfield Mr Jaspal Louis 35 Reynolds Road Single storey rear extension, ground floor window Conditional 27.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Owen Francis Beaconsfield to side elevation. Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 2NJ

18/00940/FUL Beaconsfield Mr Jaswinder Dulay 147 Amersham Road Two storey front, part single/part two storey rear Conditional 16.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Sunny Bahia Beaconsfield extensions incorporating roof lantern and juliet Permission Buckinghamshire balcony, loft conversion incorporating front and HP9 2EH rear roof lights.

18/00954/TPO Beaconsfield Mr Ben Griffiths 25 Grove Road TI - Silver Birch reduce in height and overlong side Conditional 13.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr John Clark Beaconsfield branches by approx 2-3 metres. T2 - Elm fell. Permission Buckinghamshire (SBDC TPO 21,1995) Appendix HP9 1UR

3 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2013/FA Beaconsfield Mr and Mrs Mike and 22 Mayflower Way Front porch, part single/part two storey rear, first Conditional 17.07.18 Town Council Julia South Beaconsfield floor front/side/rear extensions incorporating Permission C/o Mr Bob Padley Buckinghamshire rooflignts and conversion of garage into habitable HP9 1UE space

PL/18/2015/FA Beaconsfield Mr D Lafferty The Knoll Detached garage Conditional 16.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr J Gilder 24 Burgess Wood Permission Road South Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire HP9 1EX Page 66 Page

PL/18/2022/SA Beaconsfield Mr Wilkinson 59 Baring Road Loft Conversion and insertion of rooflights. Cert of law 18.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Mark Darby Beaconsfield proposed Buckinghamshire dev or use HP9 2NF issued

PL/18/2068/NM Beaconsfield Mr Andrew Cartwright Wheatsheaf Non material amendment to planning permission Accepted 26.07.18 A Town Council C/o Mr Clive Baldwin Farm Lane 17/01121/FUL (Erection of a single storey side Jordans extension) to allow omission of porch, Buckinghamshire introduction of new windows, rooflights and HP9 2UP increase size of bi-fold doors. Appendix

4 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2069/FA Beaconsfield Mr Iqbal 14 Wooburn Green Outbuilding in front garden. Conditional 24.07.18 Town Council Lane Permission Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire HP9 1XE

PL/18/2070/HB Beaconsfield Mr Andrew Cartwright Wheatsheaf Erection of a single storey side extension and Conditional 27.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Clive Baldwin Farm Lane retention of replacement casements consent Jordans Buckinghamshire HP9 2UP Page 67 Page

PL/18/2091/FA Beaconsfield Mr K Whild 63 Shepherds Lane Single storey side extension Conditional 27.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr P Mackrory Beaconsfield Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 2DU

PL/18/2111/TP Beaconsfield Mr Ronald King 15 Somerford Place Purple Sycamore -Fell. (SBDC TPO no 40. 1995). Conditional 31.07.18 Town Council Beaconsfield Permission Buckinghamshire HP9 1AZ

PL/18/2141/FA Beaconsfield Mr Simon Pearce 2 Owlsears Close Two storey front and first floor side extensions Conditional 27.07.18 Town Council C/o Mr Owen Francis Beaconsfield Permission Appendix Buckinghamshire HP9 1SS

5 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2157/TP Beaconsfield De Blanc Ninfield T1 Horse chestnut - Crown Reduction (2m from Trees 31.07.18 Town Council C/o Mrs Kirstie Harvey 36 Burkes Road height and 1-1.5m from sides to shape), Crown Allowed In Beaconsfield Thinning by 15% and Crown Lift to 4 metres. T2 Part Buckinghamshire Cypress - Crown Reduction by approx 2.0-2.5m HP9 1PN from height only. (SBDC TPO 19, 1995)

PL/18/2208/NM Beaconsfield Mr & Mrs H Simpson Bannatyne Non-material amendment to planning permission Accepted 05.07.18 A Town Council C/o Mr Nick Coder 21 Furzefield Road 17/02325/RVC to allow: Addition of bay window Beaconsfield in the flank wall of the drawing room of plot 2. Buckinghamshire

Page 68 Page HP9 1PG

18/00612/FUL Burnham Mrs Zoe Gardner 240 Windsor Lane Change of use to house in multiple occupation Conditional 06.07.18 Parish C/o Robert Hillier Burnham (Use Class C4) Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL1 7HN

18/00672/FUL Burnham Ramash And Joanne Garden Cottage Part single/ part two storey side extensions of Conditional 27.07.18 Parish Ram And Hodgson East Burnham Lane Garden Cottage following with demolition of Permission Council C/o Mr Robert Clarke Burnham existing buildings. Erection of two detached Buckinghamshire dwellings with new vehicular access. SL2 3TL Appendix

6 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00751/FUL Burnham Dr Asiya Kaiser 14 Winch's Meadow Roof alteration and loft conversion incorporating Conditional 05.07.18 Parish Burnham front rooflights and rear dormer. Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL1 8FA

18/00761/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs Jason Wright 9 Bredward Close Single storey side/rear extension incorporating Conditional 13.07.18 Parish C/o Christopher Hunt Burnham roof lantern and conversion of loft to habitable Permission Council Buckinghamshire accommodation incorporating front and rear SL1 7DL dormers.

18/00768/RVC Burnham Mr & Mrs A Connor 8 Pink Lane Variation of condition to application number: Refuse 06.07.18 Page 69 Page Parish C/o Mr Shorne Tilbey Burnham 18/00092/FUL to allow casement window to open Permission Council Buckinghamshire to prevent loss of amenity. SL1 8JU Condition Number(s): 6

Conditions(s) Removal:

In order to comply with The Building Control Act Casement window to first floor window within south elevation to have opening casement left hung to prevent loss of amenity to 10 Pink Lane

18/00862/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs Beurier Longmead Cottage Side canopy, single storey rear extension and first Conditional 13.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Luke Geeves Dorney Wood Road floor side extension incorporating dormer. Permission

Council Burnham Alterations to fenestration and pitched roof to Appendix Buckinghamshire both existing attached annexe and detached store SL1 8EQ outbuilding. Erection of outbuilding.

7 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00873/CLOP Burnham Francois Strydom 9 Wendover Road Certificate of Lawfulness for proposed: Hip to Cert of law 06.07.18 ED Parish C/o Mr George Kain Burnham gable roof extension, rear dormer and front proposed Council Buckinghamshire rooflights. dev or use SL1 7ND issued

18/00896/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs C. Gillard 18 Hamilton Gardens Single storey side/rear extension Conditional 09.07.18 Parish C/o Declan Minoli Burnham Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL1 7AA

18/00897/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs C. Gillard 18 Hamilton Gardens Replacement detached garage with ancillary Refuse 09.07.18 Page 70 Page Parish C/o Declan Minoli Burnham accommodation in the roofspace. Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL1 7AA

18/00900/FUL Burnham Mr Leslie Stuart 31 St Peters Close Single storey front extension Conditional 09.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Paul Davey Burnham Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL1 7HS

18/00921/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs Downie 29 Oxford Avenue Single storey rear extension Conditional 13.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Roger Burnham Permission Council Farquharson Buckinghamshire SL1 8HR Appendix

8 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00929/FUL Burnham Mr & Mrs John Smith Pumpkin Hill Cottage Erection of detached outbuilding Conditional 16.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Richard James Pumpkin Hill Permission Council Burnham Beeches Buckinghamshire SL1 8QB

18/00942/FUL Burnham Mr Hoshiar Randhawa 20 Hatchgate Gardens Construction of additional vehicular access with Conditional 18.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Ehsan UL-HAQ Burnham associated hardstanding and widening of existing Permission Council Buckinghamshire access. SL1 8DD Page 71 Page PL/18/2325/PN Burnham Mr A Buckley 38 Orchardville Notification under The Town and Country Prior 16.07.18 E Parish C/o Mr N Walford Burnham Planning (General Permitted Development) Order Approval Not Council Buckinghamshire 2015 Part 1 of Schedule 2 Class A 4 for single Required SL1 7BD storey rear extension (Dimensions D 3.32m, MH 3.0m, EH 3.0m).

18/00227/RVC Denham Mr M Jarrett 30 Willow Crescent Variation of condition of planning permission Conditional 20.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Prabh Singh East 15/00873/FUL (Two storey front extension, single Permission Council New Denham storey side extension, construction of new roof Buckinghamshire and creation of first floor incorporating front and UB9 4AR rear dormer windows.) to allow widening right hand front dormer.

18/00532/FUL Denham Mr Nnamal Trees Double storey side and rear extensions Withdrawn 10.07.18

Parish Abhayawickrama Broken Gate Lane Appendix Council C/o Mr Keith Dunford Denham Buckinghamshire UB9 4LA

9 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00824/FUL Denham Mr & Mrs Smith Newsteads Part two storey, part single storey side and rear Conditional 12.07.18 Parish C/o Mr S Dodd Denham Green Lane extensions, loft conversion incorporating front and Permission Council Denham rear dormers and detached carport. Buckinghamshire UB9 5LG

18/00838/FUL Denham Mr Ben Spencer Rosslyn Proposed two storey side & single storey rear Conditional 18.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Kamal Panesar Broken Gate Lane extensions, new porch and mono pitched roof Permission Council Denham above existing bay window Buckinghamshire UB9 4LB Page 72 Page

18/00898/RVC Denham Mr B Gill 109 Tilehouse Way Variation of condition 3 of planning permission Conditional 10.07.18 Parish Denham Green 17/01143/FUL (Part two storey, part single front, Permission Council Buckinghamshire side and rear extensions) to allow external UB9 5JA material alterations.

PL/18/2169/PN Denham Mr Sivapalan Stow Bank Notification of proposed single storey rear Prior 09.07.18 E Parish C/o Mr Manpreet Bakers Wood extension. Depth extending from the original rear Approval Not Council Matharoo Denham wall of 8 metres, a maximum height of 4 metres Required Buckinghamshire and a maximum eaves height of 3 metres. UB9 4LG Appendix

10 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00944/CLOP Dorney Mr David Sando Rivermead Erection of a two storey rear in-fill extension Cert of law 18.07.18 ED Parish C/o Mr Lee Norris 19 Meadow Way proposed Council Dorney Reach dev or use Buckinghamshire issued SL6 0DR

18/00340/RVC Farnham Mr S Bowyer Dippingwell Variation of Condition 2 of Planning Permission Conditional 27.07.18 Royal Parish C/o Mrs Amanda Walker Beaconsfield Road 17/02081/FUL (Redevelopment of site to include Permission Council Farnham Common the provision of 3 detached dwellings with carport Buckinghamshire and surface parking) to allow alterations to design SL2 3PU of dwellings. Page 73 Page

18/00753/FUL Farnham Living Word Methodist Church Hall Three storey front extension, creation of second Conditional 31.07.18 Royal Parish International Church Beaconsfield Road floor and remodelling of church. Permission Council C/o Cyril Pitcher Farnham Common Buckinghamshire SL2 3QQ

18/00786/FUL Farnham Mr & Mrs Randhawa Benavon Replacement dwelling with detached garage Refuse 10.07.18 Royal Parish C/o Mr Mark Longworth Egypt Lane Permission Council Farnham Common Buckinghamshire SL2 3LF Appendix

11 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00859/GPDE Farnham Mr & Mrs Lyndon 1 Lodge Cottages Notification under The Town and Country Withdrawn 10.07.18 Royal Parish C/o Mr Robert Hillier Beaconsfield Road Planning (General Permitted Development) Order Council Farnham Royal 2015, Part 1 of Schedule 2 Class A 4 for a single Buckinghamshire storey rear extension (Dimensions D 6.0m, MH SL2 3DF 2.91m, EH 2.91m).

18/00907/RVC Farnham Redsky Wholesalers Ltd. Site Of Scopello Variation of conditions 2 and 13 of Planning Conditional 11.07.18 Royal Parish C/o Danks Badnell Beeches Road Permission 16/01405/FUL to allow: Insertion of Permission Council Architects Ltd. Farnham Common rooflights to the front side and rear elevations of Buckinghamshire the three approved houses. SL2 3PR Page 74 Page 18/00936/FUL Farnham Mr & Mrs Toby & 1 Hill Place Single storey rear extension Conditional 18.07.18 Royal Parish Lindsay Offen Farnham Royal Permission Council C/o Mr Richard James Buckinghamshire SL2 3EW

PL/18/2119/TP Farnham Mr Stephen Jackson 28 Home Meadow Sycamore (T1) - raise crown by 3 metres, Horse Conditional 31.07.18 Royal Parish Farnham Royal Chestnut (T2) - raise crown by 3 metres (SBDC Permission Council Buckinghamshire TPO 12, 1951) SL2 3BR

PL/18/2134/TP Farnham Mrs Marion Raeburn- Wells House Horse Chestnut (T1) - Fell (SBDC TPO 2, 1960) Consent not 20.07.18 Royal Parish James Parsonage Lane needed

Council Farnham Common Appendix Buckinghamshire SL2 3PA

12 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2217/NM Farnham Mr R Sekhar 6 Rectory Close Non-material amendment to planning permission Not 11.07.18 A Royal Parish C/o Mr Johan Truter Farnham Royal 18/00140/FUL (Part single/part two storey rear Accepted Council Buckinghamshire extension incorporating juliette balcony and single SL2 3BG storey front infill extension) to allow for : alterations to roof and external doors/windows, additional rooflights and internal layout changes.

PL/18/2307/TP Farnham Mr Pete Birch 15 Montague Close T1 Norway Maple - 6m Crown lift over garden, Conditional 31.07.18 Royal Parish C/o Mr Colin Dry Farnham Royal 10% Crown Thin, Reduce upper canopy by 3 Permission Council Buckinghamshire metres. (SBDC TPO No 35, 2000) SL2 3DW Page 75 Page PL/18/2326/PN Farnham Mrs Savina Cisotto 31 Montague Close Notification of a proposed single storey rear Withdrawn 18.07.18 E Royal Parish C/o Mr Jose-Maria Farnham Royal extension Council Moya-Montoya Buckinghamshire SL2 3DW

PL/18/2331/NM Farnham Mr & Mrs Matthew 20 Lawkland Non Material Amendment to planning permission Withdrawn 24.07.18 A Royal Parish Ketteley Farnham Royal 18/00231/FUL to allow: Additional windows Council C/o Mr Dylan Morris Buckinghamshire SL2 3AN

PL/18/2412/VR Fulmer Parish Mr Clifford and Mrs Dunrobin Variation of condition 2 of planning permissions Withdrawn 23.07.18 C Council Pamela Saunders Stoke Common Road 18/00634/RVC and 17/01970/FUL (Replacement

C/o Mr Robert Clarke Fulmer dwelling with replacement entrance gates and Appendix Buckinghamshire fence) to allow: Replacement of stable building SL3 6HA with outbuilding.

13 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

17/02045/FUL Gerrards Mr Robin Timbury Woodhill Farm Construction of agricultural storage barn and Conditional 13.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Innes Gray Oxford Road agricultural livestock building. Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 7AZ

18/00335/FUL Gerrards Mr T Cove Drummond Two storey front/side/rear extension incorporating Conditional 16.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Neil Dowlman 36 Beech Waye integral garage with side dormers. Construction of Permission Council Gerrards Cross basement and increase in ridge height Buckinghamshire incorporating front dormers. SL9 8BL Page 76 Page

18/00692/FUL Gerrards Mr Peter Bhachu Wits End Part first floor, part two storey front extensions, Conditional 19.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Gurprit Benning 10 Birchdale first floor rear extension, insertion of first floor Permission Council Gerrards Cross flank windows and replacement roof incorporating Buckinghamshire increase in ridge height and front and rear SL9 7JA dormers.

18/00708/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs T Webb Camelot Construction of front entance gate, railings and Conditional 23.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Paul Lugard 16 Woodhill Avenue brick piers. Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 8DW Appendix

14 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00744/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs P Fincham Homewood Part single, part two storey side extension; single Conditional 05.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Paul Lugard 6 Cheyne Close storey side and rear extension, alterations to roof Permission Council Gerrards Cross profile to existing single storey front projection; Buckinghamshire the addition of a porch canopy; conversion of the SL9 7LG existing integral garage to habitable accommodation and widening of the existing vehicular crossover.

18/00784/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs Palmiero Jordans End Single storey front and rear extensions. Conditional 16.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Stephen Varney Oxford Road Permission Council Associates Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire

Page 77 Page SL9 7DL

18/00853/FUL Gerrards Mr B. Hamilton Truscon House Removal of existing roof, construction of a new Conditional 31.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Mark Hall 11 Station Road floor and roof with accommodation in the Permission Council Gerrards Cross roofspace, incorporating windows and Juliette Buckinghamshire balconies. SL9 8ES

18/00869/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs Reel 9 Dale Side Front and side two storey extension. Conditional 16.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mrs Agnieszka Gerrards Cross Permission Council Debicka Buckinghamshire SL9 7JE Appendix

15 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00899/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs D. Reynolds Elm House Erection of front porch. Single storey rear Conditional 10.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Declan Minoli Miller Place extension. Loft conversion to provide habitable Permission Council Gerrards Cross accommodation incorporating front and rear Buckinghamshire dormer windows and side/rear roof lights. SL9 7QQ

18/00912/RVC Gerrards Mr Basra 32 Dale Side Variation of condition 2 of planning permission Conditional 13.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Vinay Mistry Gerrards Cross 18/00300/FUL (Redevelopment of site to provide Permission Council Buckinghamshire two dwellings and associated landscaping) to SL9 7JE allow: Extension of rear element of both houses at single storey level and minor changes to position

Page 78 Page of windows in flank elevations.

18/00939/FUL Gerrards Mr & Mrs O'Shea Yarrimba Revision of first floor balcony to rear elevation Conditional 18.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Peter Norman 31 Howards Thicket Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 7NT

18/00941/FUL Gerrards Ms Brinda Nicholson Thornbury House Part demolition of existing single garage and Conditional 31.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Hyeongsoon 16 Woodlands construction of a new double garage with room Permission Council Choi Gerrards Cross over Buckinghamshire SL9 8DD Appendix

16 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00948/RVC Gerrards Mr Syd Dosanjh The Priory Variation of condition 2 of planning permission Withdrawn 27.07.18 Cross Parish 57 High Beeches 16/00703/FUL (Redevelopment of site to provide Council Gerrards Cross detached dwelling with attached garage. Front Buckinghamshire boundary wall, entrance gates, brick piers and SL9 7HY associated landscaping. Amendment to planning permission ref. 15/02220/FUL) to allow replacement of front dormer with gable end, alterations of fenestration and construction of side dormers.

PL/18/2010/TP Gerrards Mrs Wendy Smith 35 Camp Road T1 Birch - fell, T2 Birch - Reduce by 3 metres, T3 Conditional 31.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Paul Morris Gerrards Cross Oak - 15% Crown reshape/reduction. (SBDC TPO Permission

Page 79 Page Council Buckinghamshire 31, 1995) SL9 7PG

PL/18/2011/TP Gerrards Mr Peter Dodd Hawthorns T1 Ash - fell. (SBDC TPO 10, 1995) Conditional 18.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Paul Morris Miller Place Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 7QQ

PL/18/2125/FA Gerrards Mr Charlie Reed Grafton House Single storey rear extension Conditional 24.07.18 Cross Parish C/o Mr Ian Bird 31 Camp Road Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire

SL9 7PG Appendix

17 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2146/FA Gerrards Mr & Mrs Andrew Ashlea House Gable-end roof over existing attached side garage Conditional 30.07.18 Cross Parish Pennington Havard & 46 Bulstrode Way and increase in ridge height of existing single Permission Council Michele Hunter Gerrards Cross storey side projection incorporating a rear dormer C/o Mr John Broderick Buckinghamshire and single storey rear extension (Retrospective). SL9 7QU

PL/18/2300/KA Gerrards Mr Anu Sekhri Selwyn Douglas Fir - Fell, Copper Beech - Fell. (Gerrards TPO shall not 20.07.18 Cross Parish 119 Packhorse Road Cross Centenary Conservation Area) be made Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 8JD Page 80 Page

PL/18/2314/VR Gerrards Mr Syd Dosanjh The Priory Variation of condition 2 of planning permission Conditional 27.07.18 C Cross Parish 57 High Beeches 16/00703/FUL to allow a gable ended window Permission Council Gerrards Cross Buckinghamshire SL9 7HY

PL/18/2334/NM Gerrards Mr Ken Turner 61 Howards Wood Non Material Amendment to planning permission Withdrawn 24.07.18 A Cross Parish Drive 13/01705/FUL (Front porch and part two Council Gerrards Cross storey/part single storey rear extension, including Buckinghamshire rear gables and dormers in roof gable features) to SL9 7HS allow alterations to fenestration. Appendix

18 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

17/02055/FUL Hedgerley Mr Jason Randall 4 Elkins Road Construction of vehicular access and associated Conditional 10.07.18 Parish Hedgerley hard standing. Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL2 3YH

17/02370/FUL Hedgerley Extra MSA Beaconsfield Beaconsfield Services Construction of Drive-Thru coffee shop (A3 and Conditional 05.07.18 Parish Limited Windsor Road A5 use) with associated car parking and access. Permission Council C/o Ms Nikki Sills Beaconsfield Buckinghamshire Page 81 Page 18/00943/FUL Hedgerley Ms H Besisira Westside First floor extension above existing garage, with Conditional 31.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Tom Stroud Robert Road new pitch roof. Loft conversion with rear facing Permission Council Hedgerley dormer, skylight to front and rear elevations, Buckinghamshire skylights over existing kitchen area and flat roof SL2 3XS

18/00955/GPDE Hedgerley Mr & Mrs Andrew 4 Hill View Notification of proposed single storey rear Prior 12.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Alistair LLoyd Village Lane extension. Depth extending from the original rear Approval Council Hedgerley wall of 6 metres, a maximum height of 3.3 metres Given Buckinghamshire and a maximum eaves height of 3 metres SL2 3UZ Appendix

19 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2299/AG Hedgerley Mr Norman Grundon Land at Tara Stud Notification of agricultural or forestry No objection 18.07.18 N Parish C/o Mrs Veronique Colley Hill Lane development under Schedule 2, Part 6 of the - conditional Council Bensadou Hedgerley Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Buckinghamshire Development) Order 2015 for: Agricultural barn SL2 4AT for the storage of fodder and storage of farming equipment including tractor.

17/02135/FUL Iver Parish Mr S Brown Land Adjacent Detached dwelling. Conditional 27.07.18 Council C/o John Errington 2 Oak End Drive Permission Iver Heath Buckinghamshire Page 82 Page

18/00489/FUL Iver Parish Mr & Mrs Reynolds Brackenwood Two storey side / rear extensions, single storey Conditional 13.07.18 Council C/o Mr Ben Campbell Pinewood Road front, side and rear extensions to main house. Permission Iver Heath Demolition of existing garage/carport. Buckinghamshire Construction of new detached garage building. SL0 0NJ Construction of new sports pavilion following demolition of existing sports pavilion. Installation of external swimming pool.

18/00669/FUL Iver Parish Mr D O'Hara Wood Lane Farm Construction of lagoon linked to existing angling Refuse 06.07.18 Council C/o Mr M Cooper Wood Lane lake Permission Iver Heath Buckinghamshire SL0 0LD Appendix

20 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00764/FUL Iver Parish Mr Hardeep Malhi 77 Bathurst Walk Single storey side/rear infill extension. Withdrawn 11.07.18 Council Iver Buckinghamshire SL0 9EF

18/00789/GPDE Iver Parish Mr Nirmaljit Singh 40 Chequers Orchard Notification of proposed single storey rear Prior 16.07.18 Council C/o Mr Manpreet Iver extension. Depth extending from the original rear Approval Matharoo Buckinghamshire wall of 6 metres, a maximum height of 4 metres Refused SL0 9NJ and a maximum eaves height of 3 metres.

18/00803/FUL Iver Parish Mr & Mrs R Kalsi 44 Syke Ings Two storey front/side extension, part single/part Conditional 26.07.18 Page 83 Page Council C/o Mr Rodney Plummer Iver two storey side/rear extension, rear dormer and Permission Buckinghamshire roof alteration including increase in ridge height. SL0 9EU

18/00813/FUL Iver Parish Rizwan and Waleed 93 Slough Road Single storey rear/infill extension with three Conditional 31.07.18 Council Sabri Iver Heath lantern roof lights, part single/part first floor Permission C/o Mr Mark Wilkinson Buckinghamshire front/side extension and roof extension SL0 0DH incorporating increase in ridge height and two rear dormers, partial demolition of outbuilding to be rebuilt with increased roof ridge and pitch and amendments to fenestration.

18/00832/FUL Iver Parish Hamley 16 Coopers Row Demolition of two semi-detached houses., and Withdrawn 16.07.18

Council C/o Ms Sharon Ross Iver Heath erection of 4 semi-detached houses. Appendix Buckinghamshire SL0 0HW

21 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00837/FUL Iver Parish Mr & Mrs Harinder 53 Bathurst Walk Two storey rear extension, front porch extension, Conditional 17.07.18 Council Singh & Palminder Kaur Iver detached outbuilding at rear and fenestrational Permission Kang Buckinghamshire alterations C/o Mr J Singh SL0 9EE

18/00839/FUL Iver Parish Ms Wendy Angell 110 Ashford Road Proposed first floor [dormer roof] and single Conditional 23.07.18 Council C/o Leigh Tugwood Iver Heath storey side extensions to existing single storey Permission Buckinghamshire dwelling SL0 0QF

18/00875/FUL Iver Parish Mr Appelbe 11 Somerset Way Erection of replacement dwelling Conditional 06.07.18 Page 84 Page Council C/o Mr Strong Iver Permission Buckinghamshire SL0 9AG

18/00879/FUL Iver Parish Mr M Wright Pinewood Studios Demolition of existing 'North Dock' Building and Conditional 16.07.18 Council Pinewood Road Erection of replacement building. Permission Iver Heath Buckinghamshire SL0 0NH

18/00913/FUL Iver Parish Mr & Mrs Tuckwell 3 Richings Way Erection of detached dwelling following Conditional 16.07.18 Council C/o Mr Carlos Nunes Iver demolition of detached garage. Permission Buckinghamshire Appendix SL0 9DA

22 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00918/RVC Iver Parish Mr Piara Sehajpal 11 Pinewood Close Variation of conditions 2, 4, 5 and 6 of planning Withdrawn 31.07.18 Council C/o Mr Richard Taylor Iver Heath permission 17/00618/FUL (Redevelopment of site Buckinghamshire to provide three detached dwellings): to allow SL0 0QT amendments to fenestration including addition of rooflights and changes to balconies.

18/00945/GPDE Iver Parish Ms Raj Kumari Rishi 36 Syke Cluan Notification of proposed single storey rear Prior 10.07.18 Council C/o Ms Rooshika Patel Iver extension. Depth extending from the original rear Approval Not Buckinghamshire wall of 8 metres, a maximum height of 3 metres Required SL0 9EH and a maximum eaves height of 2.9 metres

Page 85 Page 18/00949/TPO Iver Parish Ms Laura Borchard Land at Bangors Road Group 5469 - Felling of an ash and coppicing of Consent not 18.07.18 Council South and two elders (SBDC TPO No 04, 1963) needed Rear Of 3 and 4 Potters Cross Iver Heath Buckinghamshire

18/00953/FUL Iver Parish Mr C Day 59 Stonecroft Avenue Single storey side extension Conditional 27.07.18 Council C/o Mr N Walford Iver Permission Buckinghamshire SL0 9QG Appendix

23 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00957/GPDE Iver Parish Mr Anh Duong Redcroft Notification of proposed single storey rear Prior 05.07.18 Council C/o Mr Matt Toovey Slough Road extension. Depth extending from the original rear Approval Not Iver Heath wall of 8 metres, a maximum height of 3 metres Required Buckinghamshire and a maximum eaves height of 2.7 metres SL0 0DZ

PL/18/2097/TP Iver Parish Mr Dunton Kingsley House T1 Sycamore - crown reduce by 1.5-2 metres and Conditional 19.07.18 Council C/o Mr Mark Knight 2 Thorney Lane North 15% crown thinning. (SBDC TPO 24,2000) Permission Iver Buckinghamshire SL0 9JY Page 86 Page

PL/18/2122/FA Iver Parish Mr T Iqbal Land To Rear Of 1 and Erection of detached dwelling with access, parking Withdrawn 19.07.18 Council C/o Mr Jake Collinge 3 St James Walk and amenity space. Iver Buckinghamshire SL0 9EN

PL/18/2128/FA Iver Parish Mr J Jhaj 18 Somerset Way Detached outbuilding to rear of garden Withdrawn 10.07.18 Council C/o Mr J Singh Iver Buckinghamshire SL0 9AF Appendix

24 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2391/PN Iver Parish Mr Chaman Lal Footsteps Notification of proposed single storey rear Withdrawn 31.07.18 E Council C/o Mr Raj Singh 19 Syke Cluan extension; depth extending from the original rear Iver wall of 8.0 metres, a maximum height of 3.0 Buckinghamshire metres and a maximum eaves height of 2.8 metres SL0 9EL

PL/18/2397/PN Iver Parish Mr K Sharma 29 Syke Ings Notification of proposed single storey rear Withdrawn 30.07.18 E Council C/o Gurveer Choda Iver extension. Depth extending from the original rear Buckinghamshire wall of 8 metres, a maximum height of 3.65 metres SL0 9ER and a maximum eaves height of 3 metres. Page 87 Page 18/00676/FUL Stoke Poges Mr Martyn Higgins Brookdale Redevelopment of site to provide 7 dwellings with Refuse 20.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Shorne Tilbey Bells Hill associated parking and access. Permission Council Stoke Poges Buckinghamshire SL2 4ED

18/00774/FUL Stoke Poges Mr And Mrs Kumar Lake View Three storey front, part two/part single storey Conditional 10.07.18 Parish C/o HAP Chartered Lakeside Drive side, single storey rear, first floor extensions, roof Permission Council Architects Ltd Stoke Poges alteration to facilitate loft conversion Buckinghamshire incorporating rear dormer. SL2 4LX Appendix

25 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00905/FUL Stoke Poges Mr Jagdev Bal Heatherset Part single, part two storey rear , first floor front Withdrawn 10.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Sikandar Ali Farthing Green Lane extensions. Council Stoke Poges Buckinghamshire SL2 4JH

18/00919/FUL Stoke Poges Mr & Mrs Briggs 1 Ash Grove Single storey side, part single/part two storey side Conditional 27.07.18 Parish C/o Miss Tina Patel Stoke Poges extensions. Permission Council Buckinghamshire SL2 4AG Page 88 Page 18/00938/RVC Stoke Poges Mr Terry Williamson 27 Broom Hill Variation of condition 2 of planning permission Conditional 26.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Peter Norman Stoke Poges 17/01678/FUL (Redevelopment of site to provide Permission Council Buckinghamshire two detached dwellings with associated vehicular SL2 4PU accesses.) to allow for the addition of obscured glazing and alterations to rooflights.

PL/18/2237/KA Stoke Poges Mr Anthony Joyce Little Mount T1 - Sycamore Fell, T2 - Sycamore Fell, T3 - Poplar TPO shall not 31.07.18 Parish C/o Mrs Abi St Aubyn Duffield Lane Fell, T5 - Sycamore Fell, T6 - Scots Pine remove be made Council Stoke Poges storm damaged limb, hung up branch and Buckinghamshire deadwood SL2 4AA

18/00484/CLOP Taplow Mrs Rachel Grace Mee Stonecrop Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Part 05.07.18

ED Parish C/o Mr Daniel East 3 Saxon Gardens proposed: Front porch, single storey side, two approve/refu Appendix Council Taplow storey rear extension and rear dormer. se- Buckinghamshire PROPOSED SL6 0DD Cert of Law

26 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00525/CLUE Taplow Harvey Shopfitters Ltd Huntswood Golf Club Application for Certificate of Lawfulness for Cert of Law - 06.07.18 D Parish C/o Mr Emrys Williams Taplow Common Road Existing Use : Outbuilding for storage of existing use - Council Burnham machinery and use as workshop in connection to granted Buckinghamshire Huntswood Golf Club SL1 8LS

18/00526/CLUE Taplow Harvey Huntswood Golf Club Application for Certificate of Lawfulness for Certificate of 06.07.18 D Parish C/o Mr Emrys Williams Taplow Common Road Existing Use: Two containers for the storage of Lawful Council Burnham golf buggies in connection to Huntswood Golf Development Buckinghamshire Club Oper SL1 8LS Page 89 Page

18/00697/FUL Taplow Mr Duncan Leftly Priory Cottage Replacement of garage roof (from flat to pitched) Conditional 06.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Ben Keene Rectory Road Permission Council Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0ET

18/00776/FUL Taplow Raft Technologies Ltd Berry Hill Farm Erection of lattice mast and antennae including Refuse 11.07.18 Parish Doron Bar Berry Hill satellite dishes and shelter cabin. Permission Council C/o Roger Wilson Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0DA Appendix

27 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

18/00878/FUL Taplow Harvey Huntswood Golf Club Erection of groundsman's building incorporating Conditional 20.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Emrys Williams Taplow Common Road staff welfare facilities following with demolition of Permission Council Burnham existing groundman building, driving range and Buckinghamshire removal of storage containers. SL1 8LS

PL/18/2096/TP Taplow Mrs Bryant Redwood Consent is not required as they are not covered by Consent not 19.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Mark Knight Berry Hill Tree Preservation Order known as no.1, 1951. needed Council Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0DA Page 90 Page

PL/18/2098/KA Taplow Mr Stasiuk Flat 5 T1 Conifer - Fell. (Conservation Area Taplow TPO shall not 11.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Mark Knight The Nutshell Riverside) be made Council River Road Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0BB

PL/18/2142/FA Taplow Mrs Vicky Brightman Owlscote Single storey rear extension Conditional 31.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Lee Fryer Marsh Lane Permission Council Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0DF Appendix

28 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2400/KA Taplow Mr Steven Warren Maryfield Oak - Trim/Crown Lift Lower branches (Taplow TPO shall not 20.07.18 Parish High Street Village Conservation Area) be made Council Taplow Buckinghamshire SL6 0EX

17/01947/FUL Wexham Wexham Park Golf & Wexham Park Golf Part single/part two storey/part first floor Conditional 11.07.18 Parish Leisure Ltd Course front/side extensions incorporating side dormers Permission Council C/o Mr Barry Kitcherside Wexham Street and replacement driving range incorporating link Wexham to club house. Buckinghamshire

Page 91 Page SL3 6ND

18/00060/FUL Wexham Mr John Weir Wexham Park Golf Remodelling and reconfiguration of golf course, Conditional 11.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Barry Kitcherside Course addition of flood lights to driving range and Permission Council Wexham Street associated works. Wexham Buckinghamshire SL3 6ND

18/00906/CLOP Wexham Mr Daniel Newson The Ramblers Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Cert of law 11.07.18 ED Parish C/o Mr Chris Watts Wexham Street proposed: Single storey side extension. proposed Council Wexham dev or use Buckinghamshire issued

SL3 6NX Appendix

29 SOUTH BUCKS DISTRICT COUNCIL PART D SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 AUGUST 2018 Applicant / Date of App'n No Parish Site Proposal Decision Agent decision

PL/18/2023/FA Wexham Mr Daniel Newson The Ramblers Infilling of front half hip of roof to form gable end. Conditional 19.07.18 Parish C/o Mr Chris Watts Wexham Street Permission Council Wexham Buckinghamshire SL3 6NX Page 92 Page Appendix

30 Agenda Item 7 Planning Committee 15 August 2018

SUBJECT: PLANNING APPEALS

REPORT OF: Head of Planning & Economic Development Prepared by – Planning Support

Appeal Statistics for the period 1 April 2018 – 31 July 2018

Planning appeals allowed (incl enforcement)

26.7% (4 out of 15) against a target of 30%.

Total appeals allowed (Planning, enforcement trees and other appeals):

25% (4 out of 16). No target set.

Percentage of appeals allowed in accordance with officer recommendation, despite decision to refuse by Members:

100% (2 out of 2). No target set.

SCHEDULE OF OUTSTANDING MATTERS

PUBLIC INQUIRIES

DATE PREMISES

17/01126/FUL 24 BRITWELL ROAD, BURNHAM, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE SL1 8AG 30/10/18 for 3-4 days Redevelopment to form 46 retirement apartments for the elderly including communal facilities, access, car parking and landscaping.

HEARINGS

DATE PREMISES

17/01949/FUL 14 WOOBURN GREEN LANE, BEACONSFIELD, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE HP9 1XE

4/10/18 Porch with double storey side and part double storey part single storey rear extension.

17/01883/TPO 5 WOODBANK AVENUE, GERRARDS CROSS, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE SL9 7PY 14/8/18 T1 Oak: fell

Classification: OFFICIAL Page 93 Planning Committee 15 August 2018 Appeals Lodged

Planning Appeals Lodged

Date Ref Appellant Proposal Site (a) 10/07/2018 17/01437/FUL Nr Neil Jarvis Residential dwelling with two parking spaces and refuse store. Land rear of 42 Oak End Way, Gerrards Cross

(b) 13/07/2018 18/00152/FUL Mr Mumuney Construction of two detached dwellings with associated access. 24 -26 Wellesley Avenue, Iver

(c) 26/07/2018 18/00374/FUL Mr Mark Smith Single storey side extension, installation of a ground floor rear 6 & 8 Slough Road, Iver Heath window, landscaping, hardstanding and repositioning of drive gates.

(d) 31/07/2018 18/00367/FUL Dawn Groom Application for temporary period of four years for : 6 indoor Land To The North Of 1 Glebe Close, Dorney primate enclosures, 6 outdoor primate enclosures, a stable Reach

Page 94 Page block and 2 static caravans, along with a temporary access road within the site.

(e) 03/08/2018 18/00820/ Sean Reardon Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness to establish the Alpine Lodge, 3 Lower Road, Gerrards Cross CLUED commencement of the proposed development.

(f) 06/08/2018 18/00367/FUL J Thinju Replacement dwelling. 87 Slough Road , Iver Heath

Enforcement Appeals Lodged

Date Ref Appellant Alleged Breach Site (a) 11/07/2018 AP/18/2019 Mr Edwin Without Planning Permission the unauthorised erection of a ADI Eagle Eye Ltd, Land at Kingsway, Farnham Cunningham structure intended for use in connection to an unauthorised car Common wash operation in the car park to the rear of the property. Agenda Item 7

Appeal Decisions

Classification: OFFICIAL Planning Committee 15 August 2018 Planning Appeal Decisions

Date Ref Appellant Proposal Site Decision See key

(a) 10/07/2018 17/01118/FUL Mr S Henry Conversion of covered reservoir structure into a Hedgerley Reservoir, Column Appeal D residential dwelling, erection of detached garage and Green Lane, Hedgerley Dismissed associated works.

(b) 19/07/2018 17/01540/FUL Mr P Innes Redevelopment of site to provide three detached Hollybush Farm, Hollybush Appeal D dwellings. Lane, Denham Dismissed

(c) 23/07/2018 17/00971/FUL Mr S Redevelopment of site to include the provision of 6 Dippingwell, Beaconsfield Appeal CC Bowyer detached dwellings with associated parking for Road, Farnham Common Allowed existing and proposed dwellings.

Page 95 Page (d) 23/07/2018 17/00688/FUL Mrs O'Hara Conversion of outbuilding into a separate residential Wood Lane Farm, Wood Appeal D dwelling. Lane, Iver Dismissed

(e) 23/07/2018 17/01263/ Mrs O'Hara Notification under Class Q of Part 3 of Schedule 2 of Wood Lane Farm, Wood Appeal D MBNOT the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Lane, Iver Dismissed Development) Order 2015 (as amended) for: Proposed Change of Use of Agricultural Building to a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3).

(f) 31/07/2018 18/00246/FUL Dr Thanvi Detached double garage to front. 58 Howards Wood Drive Appeal D Gerrards Cross Dismissed

Note: The letter(s) shown after the decision in the above tables indicate:- Agenda Item 7

CO - Committee decision to refuse permission on officer recommendation CC - Committee decision to refuse permission contrary to officer recommendation D - Delegated officer decision to refuse permission

Classification: OFFICIAL Planning Committee 15 August 2018 ND - Appeal against non-determination of application

Officer Contacts: Jane Langston 01895 837285 [email protected] Page 96 Page Agenda Item 7

Classification: OFFICIAL