Planning Committee - Meeting Agenda
Monday 16th November 2026
Table Of Contents
Introduction
AGENDA
YOU ARE SUMMONED TO ATTEND THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING ON MONDAY 16 NOVEMBER 2026 AT 7.30PM IN THE LIONEL RIGBY ROOM AT THE VILLAGE CENTRE, ROGERS LANE, STOKE POGES, SL2 4LP.
Julie Simmonds
Clerk
10 November 2026
Agenda Items
076/PL/26 Items by Members of Public Present.
The meeting is open to the public and press, and the first 15 minutes will be reserved, if required, for public comment on items on this agenda only.
077/PL/26 Apologies for Absence and Acceptance.
078/PL/26 Declarations of Interest
Members to declare any personal interest in any item of business as defined in the Code of Conduct 2007. If that interest is a prejudicial interest as defined in the Code, the member should withdraw from the meeting for that item.
079/PL/26 Minutes
Approval of the Minutes of the Planning Meeting held on 19 October 2026.
080/PC/26 Co-option
To resolve to agree to co-opt a new member onto the planning committee and to ratify at the December Full Council meeting.
081/PL/26 Planning Applications
(i) To approve delegated decisions submitted for Planning Applications for which the response date was prior to this Committee Meeting. See Appendix 1.
(ii)To consider and formulate a response to new Planning Applications received. See Appendix 2. Plus, amended plans for information only.
082/PL/26 Planning Decisions, Enforcements and Appeals.
District Decisions made since the last Planning Committee Meeting. See Appendix 3.
083/PL/26 Councillors/Members Update
084/PL/26 Correspondence.
085/PL/26 Exclusion of the Press & Public
Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 To resolve to exclude the press and public from the following business because publicity would prejudice the public interest by reason of the confidential nature of the business. Part two items: To discuss any possible unlawful buildings or business’s which have not been granted enforcement notices and therefore are not public.
086/PL/26 Outstanding Enforcements See Appendix 4.
087/PL/26 Next meeting date: 14 December 2026
APPENDIX 1
DELEGATED COMMENTS
APPENDIX 2
NEW PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
PL/26/08054/FA Annexe, White Cottage, Fir Tree Avenue, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire
Change of use of ancillary annexe to single family dwelling.
PL/26/08220/FA Glenwood, Fir Tree Avenue, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4NN
Householder application for the construction of a rear outbuilding ancillary to the main dwellinghouse.
PL/26/08139/FA Autumn Rise, Duffield Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4AH.
Householder application for demolition of existing garden sheds and construction of an ancillary outbuilding.
PL/26/08558/FA 40 Vine Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DP.
Householder application for the construction of a single storey rear extension.
PL/26/08421/HB The Red Lion, Stoke Green, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4HN.
Listed building consent for external alterations comprising installation of illuminated double sided post sign header to replace existing and illuminated sign writing text and graphics direct to wall to replace existing.
PL/26/08513/FA 8 Elderfield Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DE.
Householder application for single side and rear extension plus part double rear extension with a reduction in outbuilding size.
PL/26/08549/FA 9 Plough Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4JR.
Householder application for demolition of five existing outbuildings and a shed, erection of a part single-storey, part two-storey rear extension and relocation of the stairs to the detached loft annexe above the garage.
AMENDED PLANS
PL/25/4894/FA NOTIFICATION OF AMENDED APPLICATION Town and Country Planning Act 1990 6 November 2026 Land North Of, Templewood Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.
Proposal for a residential development comprising 18 dwellings served by two vehicular accesses together with parking, amenity and open space.
Revisions to house types received on 5 November 2026.
PLANS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
TREE PRESEERVATION ORDERS
APPENDIX 3
PLANNING DECISIONS
PL/26/02946/FA The Starlings, 29A Decies Way, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EF
Retention of detached garage building.
Parish Comments:
The Parish Council object to application PA/26/02946/FA seeking retention of the outbuilding associated with the back land dwelling. The original permission under application PA/18/2849/FA included a condition requiring removal of this structure, and that formed part of the basis upon which planning permission was granted. The current proposal therefore conflicts with the intent of the approved scheme and undermines the original planning decision.
The removal of the outbuilding was clearly necessary to make the back land development acceptable in planning terms. Retaining the structure now results in excessive built form within a confined rear plot and creates an overdeveloped and cramped form of development that is out of character with the surrounding area. The cumulative impact of the dwelling together with the retained outbuilding erodes the openness that was previously considered important.
The proposal is contrary to the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), particularly those requiring development to achieve a high standard of design, respond appropriately to local character, and create places with a high standard of amenity for existing and future occupants. The NPPF also makes clear that planning decisions should ensure developments are sympathetic to local character and maintain a strong sense of place.
The proposal further conflicts with South Bucks Local Plan Policy H9 relating to residential layout and design. Policy H9 states that back land or tandem development can give rise to unacceptable relationships between existing and proposed dwellings and that the Council will resist proposals where unacceptable impacts on neighbouring amenity or local character would arise. The retained outbuilding contributes to an overdeveloped appearance and harms the character and amenities of the locality.
Furthermore, permitting retention of a structure that was specifically required to be demolished weakens confidence in the planning process and sets an undesirable precedent. The applicant benefited from the grant of permission on the understanding that the outbuilding would be removed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions.
Hereby Refuse Permission
PL/25/4442/FA Stoke Park Golf Club, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4PG
Installation of 2 polytunnels and administration marquee for a period of three years (part retrospective).
Parish Comments: Object, there are never ending temporary works applications for this site which are applied for retrospectively and there is not enough information given on the requests. Why is there not a sitewide masterplan for this address?
We know this information/guidance of polytunnels in the Green Belt which we believe should be followed:
Polytunnels are generally allowed in the Green Belt for agricultural and horticultural purposes
as they are often not considered "inappropriate development". However, they still require planning permission if they are large, commercial, or have a more permanent structure, and must be assessed against Green Belt policy, especially concerning their impact on visual amenities and openness.
Key considerations
- Agricultural and horticultural use: Polytunnels for growing crops are generally accepted as a form of agricultural development.
- Impact on Green Belt: Even if agricultural, the polytunnel must still comply with Green Belt policy. It cannot negatively impact the visual amenities or openness of the Green Belt.
- Structure and permanence: Polytunnels with more permanent structures, such as solid bases, can be more contentious and may be treated differently than temporary structures.
- Scale and use: Large commercial polytunnels, or those used for more than simple horticulture, are more likely to require specific planning permission.
- Local restrictions: Special rules may apply in areas like National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, or where there are listed buildings or ancient woodlands nearby.
We also know this guidance for Marquees in the Green Belt; this guidance should be adhered to:
marquees in the Green Belt which would need to demonstrate “very special circumstances” to be allowed:
Marquees are generally not allowed in the Green Belt without a formal planning application or specific permission because of its protected status. Building in the Green Belt is restricted, and temporary structures are only allowed under strict conditions, such as for pubs and restaurants under specific 'permitted development' rights for temporary use (no more than 28 days for private use), but these don't apply to public Green Belt land.
Key considerations
- Protected status: The Green Belt is a protected area, and any development is restricted to protect openness and prevent urban sprawl.
- Permission: You will almost certainly need approval from the local council to put up a marquee on Green Belt land, even for short-term or private use.
- Public use: Using a marquee for commercial or public-facing activities (like a wedding venue or festival) is considered a change of land use and will likely require planning permission.
- Temporary structures: Even with the general allowance for temporary structures for pubs and restaurants (under 28 days), this rule doesn't typically apply to public land in the Green Belt.
- Special circumstances: There are rare cases where a temporary marquee might be allowed in the Green Belt if it can be argued that it serves "very special circumstances," but this is a high bar to meet.
- Landowner permission: You must get permission from the landowner, even if you are on private property.
WITHDRAWN
PL/26/07158/FA 3 Hazell Way, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4BN
Householder application for conversion of roof space into habitable room with roof lights.
Parish Comments: No Comment
Hereby Refuse Permission
PL/26/06472/TP Holly Tree House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LZ
T1 Robinia - Crown Reduction - Reduce height by up to 3m and lateral spread on all sides by up to 2m, to finished crown dimensions of 12m height and 6m lateral spread. Remove major deadwood. Reason - To manage the size of the tree and reduce stresses on stem which has a lean to the south.
Parish Comments: No comment subject to the Tree Officer report.
Hereby Grants Consent
PL/26/06637/TP 4 Glenfields, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LS
T1 Silver birch (Betula pendula) Section dismantle tree to near ground level as tree is dead, G1 (numerous stumps - Grind out the stump to a depth of approx. 200mm to remove stumps, T2 Thuja - Section dismantle and grind out stump to a depth of approx. 200mm as tree is showing minimal vitality. Removal to eliminate risk of future failures, G2 Privet x2 and tree leaning on fence - Fell and grind out stump to a depth of approx. 200mm as hedge that has become unmanaged, removal to make room for new hedge to be planted. T3 Oak - Reduce lowest lateral over client’s garden by removing approx 3m. Crown lift to ensure approx 3m ground clearance. Reason - to reduce encroachment in client’s garden. Cherry - Dismantle and grind out stump as tree is dead.
Parish Comments: No comment subject to the Tree Officer report.
Hereby Grants Consent
PL/26/06515/FA 10 Rogers Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LD
Single storey front, side and rear extension, front roof dormer, two storey part rear extension.
Parish Comments: No Comment.
Hereby Permits
PL/25/6386/FA 61 Vine Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DW.
Demolition and replacement with a new dwelling (part retrospective) (alternative scheme to approval PL/23/3562/FA).
The Parish Council objects to the proposal as Policies EP3, H9 and H11 apply, together with Neighbourhood Plan Design Codes LB03 and LB04 and Policy SB6.
The proposed replacement dwelling, by virtue of its overall scale, massing, oversized dormer and deep flank elevations, would fail to reflect the scale and proportions of the surrounding modest semi-detached dwellings along Vine Road, unbalance the visual coherence of the attached property, and fail to integrate appropriately with the prevailing built form therefore constitutes poor design contrary to the NPPF (Section 12), the National Design Guide, the South Bucks Residential Design Guide, the Townscape Character Study, and adopted Local Plan policies.
In addition, the proposal is contrary to the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan objective of maintaining a balanced and appropriate housing stock within the village, as the scale, design and form of the development would contribute to excessive intensification rather than supporting the Plan’s aim of ensuring development remains proportionate to local character and community needs.
The proposal would also represent overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a bulky and intrusive form with excessive depth and unrelieved flank elevations, harming the street scene and local character. Furthermore, the site lies within the South Bucks Heaths and Parklands Biodiversity Opportunity Area, and insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate compliance with biodiversity net gain requirements under Core Policy CP9, the NPPF, Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and the Environment Act 2021.
The Parish Council also notes the planning history and previous enforcement concerns, which are material considerations in assessing the cumulative impact of the current proposal as reported in the national press.
Hereby Permits
PL/26/03967/FA 10 Sefton Close, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LJ
Proposed Single Storey Side/Rear Extension and Proposed Rear Dormer.
Parish Comments: - No Comment
Hereby Permits
PL/26/06925/TP 15 Freemans Close, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4ER
T1 Catalpa - Crown reduction of 3.5m as touching house and may cause damage.
Parish Comments: No comment subject to the Tree Officer report.
Hereby Grants Consent.
PL/26/06948/FA The Ledgers , Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4PG
Demolish the existing roof in order to create a new first floor and accommodation in the loft space and creation of a ground floor rear extension.
Parish Comments: Object
GREEN BELT – FUNDAMENTAL POLICY CONSIDERATION
The application site lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt. This is a fundamental consideration in the determination of this application.
The Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan confirms that while the main settlement of Stoke Poges is inset from the Green Belt, the built-up areas of Park Road (B416) are washed over by the Green Belt. The application must therefore be assessed not simply as a householder design proposal, but against the statutory Development Plan and national policies controlling development within the Green Belt.The 50% rule must be considered. The proposal is substantial. It involves demolition of the existing roof in order to create a new first floor, further accommodation within the loft space and a ground floor rear extension. This is a split plot that is narrow in shape. The correct assessment must consider the cumulative effect of all of those works upon the size, scale, height, massing and spatial and visual openness of the Green Belt, especially when taking into account the property known as The Annex.
Saved South Bucks Local Plan Policy GB1 – Control of Development in the Green Belt
GB1 establishes the general control over development within the Green Belt and identifies limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings as a category of development which may be acceptable, subject to the detailed requirements of the Plan. Importantly, GB1 does not provide an unrestricted permission for enlargement of an existing dwelling merely because residential development already exists on the site.
The policy requires, amongst other matters, that:
- development should not adversely affect the character or amenities of the Green Belt;
- the scale, height, layout, siting, form and design of development should not adversely affect the character or amenities of the Green Belt or locality;
- extensions to existing buildings should harmonise with the scale, height, form and design of the original building; and
- proposals must comply with the other relevant policies of the Development Plan.
Those requirements are particularly important in the present case.
The proposal does not simply comprise a modest ground floor addition to the existing dwelling. It involves removing the existing roof, introducing an entirely new first floor and then providing further accommodation within a substantial replacement roof.
The Council should therefore assess whether the resulting development can properly be characterised as a limited and proportionate alteration or extension to the existing dwelling when its cumulative increase in floorspace, volume, height and apparent mass is considered.
Effect upon Green Belt openness
The assessment of Green Belt impact should not be confined to additional footprint.
The existing dwelling is a chalet bungalow. Its relatively low built form is relevant to its existing effect upon Green Belt openness.
The proposed development would substantially alter that relationship by raising the building to create an additional first floor and then introducing further accommodation within a substantial replacement roof.
Accordingly, even where part of the additional accommodation occupies approximately the same footprint as the existing dwelling, the increase in three dimensional built volume, height and mass may materially increase the building's impact upon openness.
The Council should therefore assess both the spatial and visual dimensions of openness, including:
- the increase in overall building height;
- the increase in built volume;
- the increase in upper floor mass;
- the scale and volume of the replacement roof;
- the visibility of the enlarged dwelling from Park Road and surrounding land;
- the degree to which the existing low chalet-bungalow form would be replaced by a substantially taller and more imposing building; and
- the cumulative effect of the first-floor, loft and rear extensions rather than assessing each component separately.
This is particularly important because the Green Belt designation applies to the site itself.
Scale of the original dwelling
For the Green Belt assessment, the Council should clearly identify the original building and quantify the proposed enlargement against it. The officer's assessment should provide, or verify from the submitted plans:
the original dwelling's gross external floorspace;
its existing floorspace;
the proposed floorspace;
the original building volume;
the proposed building volume;
the original ridge and eaves heights;
the proposed ridge and eaves heights;
the percentage increase in floorspace over the original dwelling;
the percentage increase in built volume over the original dwelling; and
any previous extensions which have already increased the dwelling beyond its original form.
This exercise is important because the Green Belt assessment should not simply compare the proposal with the dwelling as it happens to exist today if that dwelling has itself previously been enlarged. The cumulative enlargement of the original building is the relevant planning consideration. Without this information it is difficult to reach a properly evidenced conclusion that the proposed development constitutes a limited or proportionate enlargement appropriate to its Green Belt location.
Relationship with Policy EP3 and Policy H11
Policy EP3 requires the scale, layout, siting, height, design and external appearance of development to be compatible with the character of the site, adjoining development and locality.
Policy H11 requires alterations and extensions to harmonise with the existing dwelling in terms of scale, height, form and design.
The proposal involves the fundamental alteration of the dwelling's vertical proportions.
A chalet bungalow is characterised in significant part by its low eaves and accommodation contained within or closely associated with its roof form.
Removing that roof, constructing an additional first floor and then introducing further accommodation within a new roof represents a substantial alteration to that established architectural form.
The issue is therefore not simply whether the replacement roof is attractively detailed.
The Council must consider whether the cumulative height, massing and complicated roofscape produce an enlarged dwelling which remains genuinely subordinate and harmonious with the original building and appropriate to its Green Belt setting.
Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan – Policy SP6 and Design Code
Policy SP6 and the accompanying Parish-wide Design Code are directly relevant to the design assessment. In particular, Design Code LB03 addresses local vernacular, scale, massing and roof scape. The proposed development should therefore demonstrate that its substantially increased upper-floor mass and replacement roof respond positively to the established character and proportions of the dwelling and its surroundings. The complicated roofscape is important in this respect.
The combination of an additional first floor and further accommodation within the roof risks producing a top-heavy and visually dominant building in place of the existing lower chalet bungalow form. The design assessment should consider the composition as a whole rather than determining that individual roof elements are acceptable when considered separately.
National Planning Policy Framework 2026 – Green Belt
The application site lies within the Green Belt and the proposal must therefore be assessed against the national Green Belt policies contained within Chapter 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework, August 2026.
Policy GB6 – Control of Development in the Green Belt
Policy GB6 establishes the national approach to inappropriate development within the Green Belt. Where development constitutes inappropriate development, substantial weight is to be given to the resulting Green Belt harm and permission should not be granted unless very special circumstances exist sufficient to clearly outweigh that harm together with any other identified harm.
Policy GB7 – Development which is not inappropriate in the Green Belt
Policy GB7 is particularly relevant to this application because it addresses the extension, alteration and replacement of existing buildings within the Green Belt.
For an extension or alteration to fall within the category of development which is not inappropriate, it must not result in a disproportionate increase in size over and above the size of the original building.
This test requires careful consideration in the present case.
The proposal involves substantially more than a conventional modest extension to the existing chalet bungalow. It involves demolition of the existing roof, construction of a new first floor, further accommodation within the replacement roof and an additional rear extension.
The Local Planning Authority should therefore establish clearly:
the size and form of the original building for the purposes of Policy GB7;
all subsequent extensions and enlargements which have already occurred;
the cumulative increase in floorspace over the original building;
the cumulative increase in building volume;
the increase in footprint;
the increase in ridge and eaves height; and
the overall change in the three-dimensional scale and mass of the dwelling.
The assessment should not be confined to the additional ground floor footprint. The proposed new first floor and enlarged roof represent substantial additional built volume and materially change the scale and vertical proportions of the existing chalet bungalow.
The relevant question under Policy GB7 is whether the cumulative proposal results in a disproportionate increase in size over and above the size of the original building.
Heritage – Setting only
For accuracy, the objection does not contend that the application site lies within a Conservation Area. The Council's statutory notice nevertheless identifies application PL/26/06948/FA as affecting the setting of a Conservation Area and a Listed Building. That distinction is important.
The relevant heritage consideration is therefore the effect of the proposed development upon the setting and significance of those designated heritage assets, rather than a claim that the property itself is situated within a Conservation Area. The substantial increase in the height, mass and roofscape of the dwelling should consequently be assessed for its effect upon the contribution which its site and surroundings make to the setting of the identified heritage assets.
Cumulative planning assessment
The proposal should ultimately be assessed as one cumulative development. The starting point is a chalet bungalow within the Green Belt.
The proposal would:
- demolish its existing roof;
- create a new first floor;
- introduce further accommodation within a replacement roof;
- materially alter its vertical proportions and roofscape; and
- provide an additional rear extension.
The planning question is therefore not simply whether an existing dwelling may, in principle, be extended. The relevant question is whether the total resultant development, having regard to its increase over the original building, remains a limited and proportionate enlargement which preserves Green Belt openness and character and achieves the high standard of locally responsive design required by the Development Plan. The Council is respectfully requested to establish the original building baseline and undertake a transparent assessment of the percentage increases in floorspace, volume, footprint and height before determining the application. If that assessment demonstrates that the development amounts to a disproportionate enlargement of the original building, or that its additional height, volume and mass causes material harm to Green Belt openness, that harm should be given the weight required by national Green Belt policy.
Conclusion
The principal objections are therefore:
Green Belt: the substantial cumulative enlargement, additional storey, increased height and roof volume and their effect upon openness;
Scale and massing: the transformation of a relatively low chalet bungalow into a substantially taller and more imposing dwelling;
Roofscape: an unnecessarily complicated and visually dominant roof composition;
Design: failure to respect adequately the scale, proportions and architectural form of the existing dwelling and its context; and
Heritage setting: the effect of the substantially enlarged built form upon the setting and significance of the Conservation Area and Listed Building identified in the Council's statutory notice.
The proposal should be assessed against Saved South Bucks Local Plan Policies GB1, EP3 and H11, South Bucks Core Strategy CP8, Policy SP6 and the Design Code of the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, together with the relevant Green Belt, design and heritage provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant policies of the emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan.
We respectfully request that planning permission is refused unless the applicant can demonstrate, through a properly quantified Green Belt and design assessment, that the cumulative development represents an acceptable enlargement of the original dwelling, preserves Green Belt openness and character, complies with the locally adopted design requirements and avoids harm to the significance and setting of the affected heritage assets.
Hereby Refuse Permission
PL/26/07178/TP Lashbrook, Lakeside Drive, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LX
Crown reduction in height by maximum of 2m and laterals by maximum 1.5m to a finished height of 17m and crown spread of 16m of Oak (T1) to keep the tree in scale with the surroundings.
Parish Comments: No comment subject to the Tree Officer report
Hereby Permits in Part.
PL/25/6624/FA High Farm, Duffield Lane, Stoke Poges, Bucks, SL2 4AL
Demolition of existing structures. Alterations and conversion of agricultural buildings to 5 no.residential dwellings. Erection of 2 no.car ports with electric charging points.
Object
Policies: NPPF 143 A, B, C, D/ Schedule 7/ Core Policy 9/ SP NP SP12/ GB 1/ GB2
Planning Application PL/25/6624/FA
The Parish Council consider that the land is not suitable for housing. Importantly, this area is not identified for development in the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan. Development on this land would:
- Exceed the scale considered acceptable within the Parish Council’s policies.
- Result in the loss of green, undeveloped fields and open spaces
- Damage local biodiversity and wildlife corridors.
- Increase pressure on local infrastructure, including roads, parking, and GP services.
- Conflict with the objectives of the Neighbourhood Plan, including the Dark Skies and environmental policies.
The proposal is contrary to the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan (adopted 2025), which forms part of the statutory development plan and must be given full weight in decision-making under Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Plan supports proportionate small-scale infill and brownfield development within the existing settlement boundary and seeks to protect landscape character and environmental quality, including dark skies under Policy SP12. The application conflicts with these objectives by introducing additional development beyond the established settlement framework and increasing urbanisation within the Green Belt setting of the village.
For these reasons, this land should not be allocated for development, and any proposals would be contrary to the Parish Council’s and the Neighbourhood Plan’s vision for the village. The area is not served with street lighting or foot paths resulting in reliance on private car usage and limiting safe pedestrian connectivity. Bus services are infrequent, unreliable and do not provide viable alternatives for commuting, accessing healthcare, or education.
In the absence of substantial and guaranteed improvements to infrastructure, additional housing would reinforce car dependency rather than promote sustainable transport patterns. This conflicts with national planning policy objectives to reduce reliance on private vehicles and support sustainable development.
Stoke Poges is identified as a Tier 4 (Large Village) within Buckinghamshire Council’s settlement hierarchy and is not designated as a strategic growth location. The site lies wholly within the Green Belt, where the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) establishes a clear presumption against inappropriate development. Paragraph 143 (a–d) of the NPPF confirms that the fundamental purposes of the Green Belt are to check unrestricted sprawl, prevent neighbouring towns from merging, safeguard the countryside from encroachment, and preserve the setting and special character of historic towns. The proposed development would undermine these purposes by increasing built form, reducing openness, and intensifying residential development within a protected rural location. Substantial weight must be given to this harm in accordance with national policy, and no very special circumstances have been demonstrated to clearly outweigh that harm, as required by the NPPF.
Four dwellings have already been approved under Class Q permitted development rights pursuant to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015. The current proposal in terms of floor space per dwelling exceeds the limitations of Class Q and therefore falls outside the lawful fallback position. While the existing approvals establish a baseline, any fallback must be afforded limited weight and cannot justify further material intensification beyond what has been lawfully permitted. The cumulative effect of the additional dwelling would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, resulting in further harm to openness and permanence. In the absence of very special circumstances, the proposal conflicts with national policy and the development plan, including relevant Green Belt policies (GB1 and GB2) and the spatial strategy of Buckinghamshire Council. Accordingly, planning permission should be refused. The applicant has not identified any exceptional, site-specific factors capable of meeting this high bar. General housing provision, development viability, or incremental intensification beyond a permitted baseline do not constitute very special circumstances. Accordingly, the policy presumption against inappropriate development applies in full.
Hereby Permits
ENFORCEMENTS
APPEALS
PL/25/6386/FA 61 Vine Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DW.
Demolition and replacement with a new dwelling (part retrospective) (alternative scheme to approval PL/23/3562/FA)
Written Reps
PL/26/00372/TP The Nonsense House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4NE
T1 Oak - rear garden - Fell. T2 Oak rear garden - Fell. T3 Oak front garden - Fell. T4 Oak front driveway - Fell. (TPO/SBDC/1988/07).
Parish Comments: No comment subject to the tree officer report.
Consent Refused.
Appeal
Appeal Allowed.