Chiltern DC Delivery Development Plan Document – Public Participation

Suggested response by Parish Council

General Comments

Chartridge Parish Council notes the National Planning Policy Framework advice that Green belts boundaries should only be changed in exceptional circumstances. The Council does not consider that any exceptional circumstances exist, and therefore does not see why changes are proposed and objects in principle to those changes.

Although no such changes are proposed within Chartridge Parish, the Council objects to the proposals to take certain villages out of the Green Belt. The Council considers that such changes will weaken the Green Belt, with adverse knock-on effects for other rural areas.

With one possible exception (GB13, see below), the Council believes that existing Green Belt policies within have been successful in preserving the openness of the countryside from inappropriate development, and therefore objects to any changes which would encourage new building contrary to the key objectives of Green Belt policy.

The Council considers that rather than allow small individual developments of new housing in the existing Green belt villages, it would be more sensible to allow some of the un-used industrial sites in urban areas to be redeveloped for residential accommodation.

Over many years, however, the Council has received complaints from local residents who have felt that policy GB13 is overly restrictive. There have been many instances of proposed extensions to existing houses that have been refused permission despite any local objection. In these cases it appears that ‘policy dogma’ has replaced ‘common sense’. Chartridge Parish Council would not object to a change in policy that refused applications that were unsightly or obtrusive in the landscape, but allowed sensitive extensions irrespective of the size of the original dwelling.

Comments specific to proposals in Chartridge Parish

Bellingdon & GB4 areas

Sheet 3(a) – – Road – GB4 additions

Chartridge Parish Council objects to these proposals.

Bellingdon Road is currently ‘ribbon development’ where most of the houses front the main road. There are only a few exceptions which we would like to continue to see as exceptions, rather than backland development becoming the normal pattern.

Our objections to this proposal are - High Mead’ has a very large plot, development is likely to be more than simply ‘limited infilling’, therefore contrary to the openness of the Green Belt particularly if the whole plot is included within the GB4 area. It would be better to retain the status quo with ‘Wavell’ and ‘High Mead’ outside the GB4 area. - Further, the inclusion of the whole of the plot of ‘High Mead’ will lead to pressure to include the land at the rear of ‘Admiral’s Rest’ in the GB4 area. Infilling on that land would further erode the openness of the Green Belt.

Chartridge Parish Council suggests instead - Retain the existing GB4 area - If ‘Wavell’ and ‘High Mead’ are included then the boundary of the GB4 area should be a straight line from the south-west rear boundary of ‘Wavell’ to the south-west rear boundary of ‘The Oaks’.

Sheet 3(h) – Bellingdon – Bank Green – GB4 addition

Chartridge Parish Council objects to these proposals.

It is considered that the relatively spacious appearance of the houses in this area, specifically the gaps between the houses, contributes to the openness of the surrounding Green Belt countryside.

If the District Council is minded to include this area within the GB4 policy areas, then Chartridge Parish Council recommends that the large back garden area of ‘Beechlee’ is not included as this would have potential for backland development, contrary to the established nature of houses all fronting Bank Green, which would bring development further into the open countryside thus diminishing the openness of the Green Belt.

Sheet 3(i) – Bellingdon – Peppetts Green – GB4 additions

Chartridge Parish Council objects to these proposals.

It is considered that the relatively spacious appearance of the houses in this area, specifically the gaps between the houses, contributes to the openness of the surrounding Green Belt countryside.

The inclusion of ‘Kiln Meadow’ and ‘George’s Well’ is concerning as their frontage is not to a proper public highway. In addition, the inclusion of these properties away from the main Bellingdon Road will increase the likelihood of backland development which is contrary to the existing pattern within the village.

Further it is considered that the inclusion of this area within GB4 is inconsistent with the proposal at sheet 3(d) – Chartridge – Chartridge Lane where a similarly spacious area is not being proposed for inclusion.

Sheet 4(b) – Bellingdon – Chesham Road - Bloomfield – GB4 additions

Chartridge Parish Council supports these proposals.

It is sensible to include the land at the back of Bloomfield Cottages in the GB4 area. This is the area where new affordable housing has recently been granted planning permission (CH/2012/1122/FA).

Chartridge Parish Council welcomes the suggestion that the Village Hall be included in the GB4 area as it is clearly part of the row of developed buildings.

Sheet 4(c) – Bellingdon – Chesham Road - middle – GB4 additions

Chartridge Parish Council supports the inclusion of the sites as far as ‘Old Croft’ in the GB4 area.

Chartridge Parish Council objects to the inclusion of the large back garden of ‘Old Croft’ and the land in Ramscote Lane to the south-east of ‘Oakview’ in the GB4 proposals. The council considers that development is either of these areas would be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt as any new building would be expanding the existing ‘village envelope’.

Sheet 4D – Bellingdon – Chesham Road – GB4 deletion Sheet 8(a) – Asheridge – opposite Widmore Farm – GB4 deletion Sheet 8B – Asheridge – Widmore Close – GB4 deletion

Chartridge Parish Council does not object to these proposals in principle. However, if no provision for extensions (as in the existing GB4 policy) is made within the DDPD, then Chiltern DC should initiate such a policy to allow residents in defined areas that are fully developed but within the Green Belt to extend their properties in a way similar to areas fully developed but not within the Green Belt. In short, the existing GB4 / GB5 extensions policy needs to be retained

Sheet 8(d) – Bellingdon – Chesham Road – GB4 addition

Chartridge Parish Council objects to this proposal.

Given that one of the key reasons for Green Belts is to prevent urban areas merging into one another, it is ludicrous to propose a change to the GB4 area which would, if it led to new house building, halve the very small gap between Bellingdon village and Mount Nugent in suburban Chesham. The proposal is contrary to the very core of Green Belt policy and should not be accepted.

Chartridge GB4 areas

Sheet 3(b) – Chartridge – Chartridge Lane – GB4 addition

Chartridge Parish Council objects to most of this proposal.

The patch of land to the south-east of ‘Elmcroft’ was the subject of a recent planning application (CH/2009/1034/OA) which was refused for a number of reasons, not least as inappropriate development causing damage to the openness of the Green Belt. The gaps between rows of houses in Chartridge contribute to the character of the village and to the openness of the Green Belt. As such this patch of land should remain in the open Green Belt, not be part of any GB4 policy area.

The inclusion in the GB4 area of ‘The Bungalow’ and in particular its garden are to the north of the house would allow development that is ‘backland’, ie away from the pattern of ribbon development along the main road. This would allow development to encroach into the open countryside, to the detriment of the openness of the Green Belt. It should also be noted that ‘The Bungalow’ (also known locally as ‘Chapel Cottage’) is not on a proper road or made-up highway.

Chartridge Parish Council has no objection to the inclusion of Chartridge Green House, Chartridge Green Cottages or Chapel Cottages within a GB4 area.

Sheet 3(c) – Chartridge – Cogdells Lane – GB4 addition

Chartridge Parish Council objects to this proposal.

The patch of land to the west and south of ‘Oak Cottage’ (a listed building) and ‘Dell Cottage’ is not suitable for development in the Green Belt. Any new buildings would be ‘backland’, ie away from the pattern of ribbon development along the main road. This would allow development to encroach towards the open countryside, to the detriment of the openness of the Green Belt.

The Parish Council is unsure about the suggestion that Chartridge School be included in the GB4 area. Whilst the NPPF requirement for schools to expand is understood and welcomed, the inclusion of the school within a policy area designed to allow infill housing is worrying. It would be better to include schools within a separate ‘developed sites in the Green Belt’ policy which allowed extensions but not change of use.

Sheet 3(d) – Chartridge – Chartridge Lane – GB4 addition

It is confusing that the map provided suggests this area as a GB4 addition but the text on page 58 (as above) rejects this suggestion.

Chartridge Parish Council considers that the inclusion within a GB4 area of what is mostly already a developed street scene of houses appears sensible, albeit inconsistent with the suggestion 3(i) in Bellingdon.

The Parish Council is concerned, however, that the area of land to the north of ‘Marand Grange’ and the west of ‘The Spinney’ should not be included. Any new buildings would be ‘backland’, ie away from the pattern of ribbon development along the main road. This would allow development to encroach towards the open countryside, to the detriment of the openness of the Green Belt. Moreover, some of the adjacent buildings are listed and development may affect the setting of those historic buildings.

The Parish Council suggests that it may have been more sensible to include the area to the south of Chartridge Lane – ‘Grange Farm’ on the map – where the existing “turkey sheds” and allied buildings could be redeveloped for residential accommodation without any detriment to the openness of the Green Belt.