Planning Committee - Meeting Minutes

Monday 17th August 2026

Introduction
Agenda Items
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2
NOTED APPENDIX 3

Introduction

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING ON MONDAY 17 AUGUST 2026 AT 7.30PM IN THE DEBBIE TOWART ROOM AT THE VILLAGE CENTRE, ROGERS LANE, STOKE POGES, SL2 4LP.

Present: Cllr Carter (Chair), Cllr Bassi, Cllr Finan & Cllr Wilson.

In Attendance: Mrs J Simmonds (Clerk/Legal & Financial Officer)

Also Present: 17 Members of public.

Agenda Items

041/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.

17 members of public attended to discuss the Plough Lane application and the imminent Wexham Golf Course applications and the imminent Pinewood Nurseries application. Cllr Carter updated every one and all agreed to bring forward on the agenda the Plough Lane application as the first.

042/PL/26 Apologies for Absence and Acceptance.

APOLOGIES were received and accepted from Cllr Crocker and Mr Harris.

043/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.

None

044/PL/26 Minutes

RESOLVED to approve the Minutes of the Planning Meeting held on 20 July 2026, which were signed by the Chairman.

045/PL/26 Planning Applications

(i) RESOLVED to approve delegated decisions submitted for Planning Applications for which the response date was prior to this Committee Meeting. See Appendix 1.

(ii) RESOLVED to consider and formulate a response to new Planning Applications received. See Appendix 2. Plus, amended plans for information only.

046/PL/26 NOTED Planning Decisions, Enforcements and Appeals.

District Decisions made since the last Planning Committee Meeting. See Appendix 3.

047/PL/26 Councillors/Members Update

Cllr Wilson reported that nothing has happened at 41 Vine Road. 61 Vine Road is possibly concluding to an amicable end.

Cllr Carter reported that we are working on comments for the regulation 19 of the draft local plan with our consultants. AGREED by all to pay for this work out of CIL money and ratify at Full Council at the next meeting. Also AGREED by all to get the consultants to work of the Wexham Golf Course applications and the Pinewood Nurseries application out of CIL money, to be ratified by Full Council at the next meeting.

048/PL/26 Buckinghamshire Council Complaints Procedure

Cllr Bassi circulated the details this evening, to be read by all and brought back to September meeting.

049/PL/26 Correspondence.

None.

050/PL/26 Exclusion of the Press & Public

Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 RESOLVED 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.

051/PL/26 Outstanding Enforcements See Appendix 4.

NOTED Letter circulated regarding an enforcement item.

052/PL/26 NOTED Next meeting date: 21 September 2026

Meeting ended at 9.50pm.

APPENDIX 1

DELEGATED COMMENTS

APPENDIX 2

NEW PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED

PL/26/05530/FA Orchard House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4ND

Single storey extension of garage incorporating a replacement roof with dormers and rooflights to facilitate habitable roof space and a two-storey side link extension to main house together with a rear garden room outbuilding.

Parish Comments: Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this planning application.

The Parish Council acknowledges that the applicant has engaged with Buckinghamshire Council through the pre application process and has sought to respond to the concerns raised. The Parish Council also recognises that the original proposal for a five bay garage has been reduced to a four bay arrangement.

However, the Parish Council considers that the revised scheme does not go sufficiently far enough to address the fundamental planning and design concerns identified through the pre application process.

The revised development remains excessive in scale and massing, insufficiently subordinate to the existing dwelling, too prominent and too close to the highway, and incongruous within the established street scene of West End Lane.

The Parish Council considers that the proposal conflicts with the Development Plan, including the saved South Bucks Local Plan, its Appendix 8 design guidance, the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan and its Design Code, together with the design objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework. We also note that for a building of this size there is no ecology report which we feel is a fundamental requirement.

The application should therefore be refused.

POLICY EP3 – SCALE, SITING AND CHARACTER:

Saved South Bucks Local Plan Policy EP3 requires development to be in scale with its surroundings and provides that development should not adversely affect the character or amenities of nearby properties or the locality in general. The Policy also requires the siting of buildings to avoid adverse effects upon the character and amenities of the locality. The Parish Council considers that this application fails to recognise these requirements. The principal concern is the combined effect of the proposal's scale, massing, siting and visual prominence. The proposed four bay garage is not a modest ancillary structure. It represents a substantial increase in built form and, because of its position towards the front of the property, would have a significant visual presence when experienced from the public highway. The building would appear bulky, over-scaled and visually intrusive. The reduction from five bays to four does not sufficiently alter this relationship. The proposal would increase the prominence of built development at the front of the site and diminish the visual contribution made by the landscaped and vegetated frontage. It would consequently fail to respect the established scale and character of the locality. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy EP3.

POLICY H11 – RESIDENTIAL EXTENSIONS:

Saved South Bucks Local Plan Policy H11 requires residential extensions to be integral to the dwelling and to harmonise with the existing building in terms of scale, height form and design. The Parish Council considers that the proposal fails these requirements. The issue is not simply whether the proposed development is physically connected to the dwelling. An extension must also be appropriately proportioned and visually subordinate to the original building. The scale and extent of the proposed garage and associated development create an extensive addition which risks competing visually with the original dwelling. The original building should remain clearly dominant within the composition of the property. The Parish Council considers that the scale and prominence of the proposed development fail to achieve that necessary hierarchy. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H11.

POLICY H13 – ANCILLARY BUILDINGS:

Policy H13 is directly relevant to the proposed garage. The Policy requires ancillary buildings to be very subordinate in scale to the existing dwelling” and also requires consideration of the proportion of the site remaining free from buildings and the effect of the proposal upon the character and amenities of the landscape, nearby properties and the locality. The Parish Council considers that the proposed four-bay garage cannot reasonably be regarded as very subordinate in scale. Its width, massing and overall presence, combined with its prominent position towards the highway, give it a substantial visual significance in its own right. The issue is therefore not just the amount of floorspace proposed. The visual impact arises from the combination of width, height, depth, roof form, overall massing, forward siting and visibility from the street scene. We believe this resulting structure would materially increase the perceived amount of built form at the front of the property and diminish the established balance between dwelling, landscaping and open frontage. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy H13.

APPENDIX 8 – HOUSE EXTENSIONS DESIGN GUIDANCE:

Appendix 8 of the South Bucks Local Plan provides locally specific guidance concerning the appropriate design of house extensions. We believe this is particularly relevant to this application because the pre application response expressly relied upon Appendix 8 when identifying concerns regarding the roof form and relationship of the proposed extension to the original dwelling. The guidance recognises the importance of extensions respecting the form, proportions and roof scape of the original building. The pre application response specifically advised that where the original building has a pitched roof, two storey extensions should generally be constructed with a pitched roof and that flat roofs would normally be unacceptable. The Parish Council considers that the principles behind this advice remain directly relevant to the revised scheme. The assessment should not be reduced to whether an individual roof detail has been altered. The development must be considered as a whole, including its scale, proportions, massing, form, roof scape and relationship with the original dwelling. The revised proposal remains too substantial and visually prominent to be regarded as a sympathetic and subordinate addition. The proposal therefore remains contrary to the principles and guidance contained within Appendix 8.

STOKE POGES NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN – POLICY SP6:

The Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan is a made Neighbourhood Plan and forms part of the statutory Development Plan. Policy SP6 – Design Code: Parish Wide, requires development proposals within Stoke Poges and Wexham Street to have full regard to the Stoke Poges Design Code, taking account of the location, scale and nature of the development. We believe this is directly applicable to this application. The Design Code provides locally specific requirements for ensuring that development responds appropriately to the established character of Stoke Poges. The Parish Council considers that the proposal does not demonstrate sufficient regard to those requirements, particularly those concerning, Scale, massing, roof scape, extensions, subordination to the original building and relationship with the streetscape.

DESIGN CODE LB03 – SCALE, MASSING AND ROOF SCAPE:

The Stoke Poges Design Code seeks development which responds appropriately to the established local vernacular, including scale, massing and roof scape. The Parish Council considers that the proposal conflicts with these principles. The proposed garage and associated extensions introduce a substantial and visually prominent built form which does not sufficiently reflect the established scale and proportions of the property or its surroundings. The problem is compounded by the location of the garage towards the front of the site. A building of this scale in such a prominent position has a significantly greater impact upon the street scene than an equivalent building located further back within the site. The proposal would consequently appear as an over scaled and bulky element within the street scene, rather than a sympathetic and subordinate addition. This conflicts with LB03.

DESIGN CODE LB04 – EXTENSIONS, CONVERSIONS AND INFILL:

LB04 is particularly relevant to the proposal. The Design Code requires the original building to remain the dominant element of the property in terms of scale and form, irrespective of the number of extensions. It also requires extensions to be appropriate to the scale, massing and character of the main building and to complement the streetscape and village setting. The Parish Council considers that this application fails these requirements. The four bay garage remains sufficiently large and prominent that it competes with the original dwelling rather than remaining clearly subordinate to it. Its forward position is particularly significant. The development would not simply be an alteration whose principal visual effect is contained within the private rear of the property. It would become a substantial and conspicuous component of the public street scene. The proposal therefore fails to maintain the necessary hierarchy between the original dwelling and subsequent additions. This is a fundamental conflict with LB04 and is not resolved merely by reducing the garage from five bays to four.

IMPACT UPON THE STREET SCENE OF WEST END LANE:

The Parish Council's principal concern is the effect of the development when viewed from West End Lane. The garage is too close to the highway and too substantial in scale for its particular location. Its size, combined with its forward position, would cause it to appear disproportionately prominent. Therefore the proposal would:

substantially increase built form towards the highway;
reduce the perception of openness and landscaped frontage;
introduce an over-scaled and bulky element into the street scene;
fail to respect the established proportions of development;
compete visually with the original dwelling;
adversely affect the relationship between built form and existing vegetation; and
create an incongruous and visually intrusive appearance.

The Parish Council considers that these impacts would cause identifiable harm to the character and appearance of the locality. This harm is avoidable and is contrary to the requirements of the Development Plan.

TREES AND VEGETATION:

The pre application response expressly identified vegetation and trees as an important consideration. The Parish Council remains concerned that the revised proposal does not sufficiently respond to this issue. Existing vegetation contributes materially to the character of the site and assists in maintaining an appropriate landscaped relationship between the property and West End Lane. The planning solution should not be to rely upon existing or proposed vegetation simply to screen an otherwise over scaled building. The building itself should be appropriately sited, scaled and designed so that it sits comfortably within its landscape setting. The Parish Council therefore considers that the scheme requires a more fundamental reduction in scale and visual prominence rather than reliance upon planting as mitigation.

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK:

The proposal is also contrary to the design objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework. The NPPF places significant emphasis upon the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable places and makes clear that good design is fundamental to the planning and development process. Paragraph 135 requires development to:

function well and add to the overall quality of the area;
be visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping;
be sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting; and
create places with a high standard of amenity.

The Parish Council considers that the proposal fails these requirements. The scale, massing and siting of the development would result in a visually intrusive addition which would not respond sympathetically to the established character of the street. Paragraph 139 is also particularly relevant. It establishes that development which is not well designed should be refused, especially where it fails to reflect local design policies and government guidance. That principle has particular force in this case because there is an extensive and detailed local design framework applicable to the site. The proposal fails to respond adequately to these locally specific design requirements. National and local policy therefore point towards the same conclusion: the proposal is not sufficiently well designed and should be refused.

This includes:

South Bucks Local Plan Policy EP3;
Policy H11;
Policy H13;
Appendix 8;
South Bucks design guidance;
Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP6;
Design Code LB03; and
Design Code LB04.

PRECEDENT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACT UPON WEST END LANE:

The Parish Council is also concerned about the precedent that approval of this application could establish for other properties within West End Lane and the surrounding area. The character of West End Lane is derived in part from the established relationship between substantial dwellings, landscaped frontages, vegetation and the relatively spacious appearance of individual plots. That character could be materially altered if large ancillary buildings and substantial forward extensions of the type proposed were progressively introduced to other properties. However, the approval of this application would be capable of being relied upon by future applicants as an example of the scale and form of development considered acceptable within this part of West End Lane. That is particularly important given the prominent forward position and substantial mass of the proposed garage. If a similar approach were subsequently replicated elsewhere, even incrementally, the cumulative effect could be significant. Over time, this could result in progressively larger garages and ancillary buildings, more substantial forward extensions, increased built form close to the highway, loss of landscaped and open frontage which is not typical to West End Lane, erosion of the spacious character of individual plots and a significant change in the visual character and appearance of West End Lane. The Parish Council is therefore concerned that approval could become a precursor to further applications which, cumulatively, could significantly change the established style, appearance and character of the road. The Council should avoid establishing an inappropriate design precedent which could contribute to the incremental intensification and urbanisation of the street. The potential cumulative effect provides an additional reason why the proposal should not be permitted in its current form.

PL/26/05526/TP The Nonsense House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Bucks SL2 4NE

11 x oak - fell due annual infestations.

Parish Comments: No objection subject to the Tree Officer report.

PL/26/05441/HB The Old Cottage, Wexham Street, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL3 6NB

Listed Building application for replacement of three attic windows (two in existing dormers and one in the gable).

Parish Comments: No Comment.

PL/26/05614/FA Home Farm Barn , School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4QA

Erection of 2 x detached dwellinghouses with associated engineering operations.

Parish Comments: In preparing this objection, the Parish Council has had particular regard to:

the applicant’s Planning, Design and Access Statement dated 9 June 2026;
Outline planning permission refused PL/20/2457/FA
Buckinghamshire Council’s delegated officer report for PL/25/0834/FA;
the Planning Inspector’s decision in APP/N0410/W/22/3300021;
the National Planning Policy Framework;
the South Bucks District Local Plan;
the South Bucks Core Strategy; and
the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan 2020–2042.

The Parish Council acknowledges that planning permission PL/25/0834/FA was granted for one self-build dwellinghouse with detached garage, gate and fencing, and that this represents a material fallback position. The Parish Council also acknowledges that the site has been assessed as falling within an area identified as provisional grey belt, and that Buckinghamshire Council relied upon that position when determining the previous application. However, neither the existence of the one dwelling permission nor the identification of the site as grey belt establishes that the present proposal for two dwellings is acceptable. The current application is materially different and must be assessed on its own planning merits.

Grey belt status is not the end of the planning assessment:

The previous officer report records that the application site falls within Buckinghamshire Green Belt Assessment area SP002 and that this area was found to make no notable contribution to Green Belt purposes (a), (b) and (d). The assessment described the area as provisional grey belt. The Parish Council therefore does not base its objection on an assertion that the site cannot be grey belt. Instead, the Parish Council submits that grey belt status is a starting point, not a conclusion. NPPF paragraph 155 requires the Local Planning Authority to consider whether the development proposed satisfies all relevant requirements. That means the current two-dwelling scheme must be considered afresh. The previous planning decision related to one dwelling only. The present application proposes two. The applicant’s own statement confirms that:

the northern dwelling is positioned broadly within the footprint of the approved permission; and
the second dwelling is located further south.

The applicant also expressly acknowledges that:

the current proposal results in a reduction in the extent of the meadow previously approved under PL/25/0834/FA.

Accordingly, the current proposal changes the extent, intensity and relationship of residential development with the open land to the south. The Parish Council considers that these changes require a fresh assessment under the NPPF, the Development Plan and the made Neighbourhood Plan. The grey belt assessment relied upon was provisional The previous officer report is important because it did not identify the site as an unconditional housing allocation. The Buckinghamshire Green Belt Assessment was expressly described as unadopted, although capable of carrying some weight. The site was described as provisional grey belt, and the officer report noted that further site-specific consideration was required in relation to biodiversity and the historic environment. The Parish Council therefore considers it inappropriate for the applicant to treat the earlier grey belt conclusion as effectively determining the current application. The current scheme must still demonstrate that its particular scale, layout and effects are acceptable.

The current proposal is materially more intensive than the fallback The fallback permission is for one dwelling. The current proposal is for two. The proper planning comparison is therefore not between:

no development; and
two dwellings.

It is between:

one permitted dwelling; and
two proposed dwellings.

The net housing benefit over the fallback is therefore effectively one additional dwelling. The Council’s own officer report for PL/25/0834/FA concluded that the housing benefit from a single dwelling should attract only limited weight. That is highly relevant to the planning balance for this application.

Southward extension of built development The location of the second dwelling is a central concern. The applicant describes the dwellings as being arranged in a linear form extending southwards from Home Farm Barn, with the second dwelling located further south than the permitted dwelling. This means the second dwelling is not simply an alternative treatment within the already-approved position. It represents an extension of permanent residential development further south.

That additional development brings with it:

an additional two-storey building;
additional residential curtilage;
parking and turning areas;
another access;
1.8 metre gates;
1.8 metre close-boarded fencing;
lighting;
garden structures;
domestic paraphernalia; and
additional residential activity.

The applicant confirms that both dwellings would be two-storey, four-bedroom houses of approximately 173 sqm GIA. The Parish Council considers that this materially intensifies and consolidates development along a sensitive Green Belt edge.

Green Belt openness remains relevant even if the site is grey belt Grey belt status does not make Green Belt openness irrelevant. The Planning Inspector previously considered the physical effects of residential development at this location and found that a two-storey dwelling, parking, domestic curtilage and associated paraphernalia would harm Green Belt openness in both visual and spatial terms. Those physical effects remain relevant. The present proposal introduces more built form and more domestic activity than the permitted fallback. The Parish Council therefore considers that the current proposal would cause a greater degree of spatial and visual domestication than the one-dwelling permission.

Previous Inspector findings on the character of Keens Acre. The previous Inspector’s site-specific findings remain highly material. The Inspector described:

detached properties on spacious plots;
a sporadic development pattern;
open countryside to the south;
a semi rural character and appearance; and
Keens Acre as an isolated pocket of dwellings.

The Inspector also found that open green spaces created a physical and visual distinction between Keens Acre and the main settlement. These findings were based on the physical character of the locality. That character has not ceased to exist because national policy now recognises grey belt. The Parish Council considers that extending development further south with an additional dwelling would erode precisely the spacious, sporadic and semi-rural qualities previously identified by the Inspector.

Reduction of the previously protected meadow. The treatment of the meadow is one of the strongest material distinctions between the fallback permission and the current application. The Council imposed conditions on PL/25/0834/FA requiring:

a Landscape and Management Plan;
native meadow planting;
future maintenance;
removal of hardstanding; and
permanent retention of the meadow.

The reasons for those conditions expressly included safeguarding Green Belt openness and improving biodiversity. The Council also required the meadow beyond the residential curtilage to remain permanently open and devoid of structures, buildings, paraphernalia and stored items. The meadow was therefore not incidental landscaping. It was part of the planning mitigation that made the one-dwelling scheme acceptable. To date this condition has not been satisfied by the applicant. The applicant now proposes to reduce that meadow. The current applicant expressly admits that the meadow area would be reduced compared with the approved scheme. At the same time, the applicant relies on the remaining meadow as providing:

visual relief;
ecological benefit;
a transition to the open setting; and
a sense of openness within the Green Belt.

The Parish Council considers there is an obvious tension in that case. If the meadow performs an important landscape and openness function, reducing its extent necessarily weakens that function. The proposal therefore represents a material erosion of mitigation specifically required under the earlier permission.

Policy GB1 remains part of the Development Plan. The applicant itself acknowledges that the proposed two-dwelling development would not comply with Policy GB1, particularly in light of the previous appeal decision regarding limited infilling. The Parish Council accepts that current national policy must be given appropriate weight where there is inconsistency. However, Policy GB1 remains relevant insofar as its underlying objectives seek to protect Green Belt character, openness and amenity. The current proposal’s greater extent, southward spread and meadow reduction weigh against those objectives.

Character and appearance – Policy EP3 and Core Policy CP8. Policy EP3 requires development to respect the character of the site and surrounding area in terms of:

scale;
layout;
height;
design; and
materials.

The applicant itself accepts that EP3 requires development to be compatible with the character and amenities of the locality. Core Policy CP8 similarly seeks development that respects and enhances local character and distinctiveness. The Parish Council considers that the key issue is not merely the architectural treatment of the two houses. The pattern and extent of development are themselves important components of local character. The current proposal would convert a more sporadic arrangement into a more consolidated residential frontage extending southwards.

Previous appeal findings on design and character:

The Planning Inspector previously found the earlier dwelling proposal to be bulky, dominant, incongruous and obtrusive. The Inspector concluded that it would harm the character and appearance of the area and conflict with Policy EP3 and Core Policy CP8. The Parish Council recognises that the subsequently approved one-dwelling scheme was redesigned and reduced in scale. However, that does not establish that two substantial dwellings are acceptable. The issue here is the cumulative effect of two houses and associated domestic development on the character of the locality.

Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan:

SP6:The Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan 2020–2042 was made in August 2025 and forms part of the Development Plan. Policy SP6 is directly relevant. Buckinghamshire Council itself relied upon SP6 when determining the previous one dwelling application. The Parish Council considers that the following Design Code principles are particularly relevant:

LB01 – Pattern of Development: New development should respond to and reinforce the established development pattern. The Inspector identified this area as sporadic, spacious and semi-rural. The second dwelling would consolidate development and push the built edge further south.

LB03 – Local Vernacular and Context: Compliance cannot be reduced to the use of brick, pitched roofs or traditional detailing. Overall siting, massing, scale and relationship with the surrounding landscape are equally important.

LS01 – Green Infrastructure: The previously approved meadow forms part of the site’s green infrastructure and landscape transition. Its reduction should carry significant weight.

LS02 – Wildlife and Biodiversity: The meadow had a specific biodiversity function and was protected by conditions under the earlier permission.

LS03 – Development Edges in the Rural Landscape: This is especially relevant. The present meadow forms the transition between residential development and the more open land to the south. The second dwelling moves the residential edge further into that transition.

SF02 – Water Management and SuDS: Given the additional dwelling, engineering operations, parking and hardstanding, proper drainage and SuDS information should be assessed.

Sustainability under NPPF paragraph 155(c):

If the proposal is to rely on grey-belt provisions, it must also satisfy the requirement to be in a sustainable location. The previous officer assessment concluded that one dwelling was acceptable in sustainability terms. However, that finding related to the earlier scheme and should not simply be carried forward without scrutiny. The current proposal is more intensive and should be assessed afresh.

Walking accessibility and pedestrian infrastructure:

The previous officer report recorded that the site is approximately 440 metres from the School Lane/Hollybush Hill junction and considered some facilities accessible on foot. However, it also acknowledged that the initial part of the journey is along the private access road. The School in School Lane is no longer used as a mainstream village school, it is now an independent special needs school. The School located in Hollybush Hill is a faith based secondary school mainly serving children from West London and Slough. Keens Acre is unadopted and private. The Parish Council considers that sustainability must be assessed by reference to the quality and usability of the route, not distance alone. There are locations on relevant routes where pedestrian footway provision is absent or discontinuous and are unlit.

This is important for:

children;
older people;
people with limited mobility;
people using wheelchairs or pushchairs; and
pedestrians travelling in poor weather or darkness.

Likely reliance on private cars: The proposed dwellings are substantial four-bedroom family homes.The applicant provides dedicated parking and turning areas for both. The Parish Council considers that occupants are likely to rely significantly upon private cars for many day to day journeys. This weakens the applicant’s claim that the site represents a particularly sustainable location. Adequate parking provision is not the same as sustainable accessibility.

Wider cumulative development pressure: The current application should also be considered in the context of significant development pressure in and around Stoke Poges. The Parish Council does not suggest that this application alone would overwhelm local infrastructure. The concern is cumulative. Repeated small and large development proposals generate increasing demand upon:

roads;
pedestrian infrastructure;
public transport;
schools;
healthcare;
drainage;
utilities; and
community facilities.

The Parish Council considers that these pressures should form part of the planning balance.

Housing and data-centre development pressure: There are substantial residential proposals and major non residential developments being promoted or considered in the wider Stoke Poges area. These include significant housing proposals and data-centre developments. The Parish Council’s concern is that substantial development pressure is occurring without equivalent strategic investment in local infrastructure. The present application should therefore not be viewed in complete isolation from the cumulative effect of surrounding development.

Please note near by planning applications which will have a calmative affect: PL/26/01820/OA for 317 dwellings. PL/25/6431/OA for 50 dwellings and a perspective application for warehousing and or a data centre at Pinewood Nurseries Wexham Street. PL/26/06177/OA and PL/26/06178/OA for a combined 680 dwellings. We note that development has not been earmarked in Buckinghamshire Councils Draft Local Plan Reg 19 for any identified development in Stoke Poges or Wexham. Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan did identify suitable sites for modest development with in the vicinity of any limited infrastructure.

Existing infrastructure has not increased proportionately: The Parish Council is concerned that development pressure has not been matched by equivalent improvements to:

pavements and pedestrian routes;
cycling infrastructure;
bus services;
healthcare provision;
local schools;
road capacity;
drainage;
utilities; and
other village infrastructure.

The Parish Council considers that this context reinforces the importance of applying sustainability and Green Belt edge policies carefully.

Access and highway considerations: The proposal would be accessed from Keens Acre, which is unadopted. The Highway Authority raised no objection to the previous one-dwelling scheme, but its comments also made clear that Keens Acre is outside the Authority’s maintenance jurisdiction. The absence of a Highway Authority objection therefore does not establish that pedestrian conditions are satisfactory or that the private access is well suited to further intensification. The second dwelling would add another access and further vehicle movements.

Drainage and associated engineering operations: The application includes associated engineering operations. The Parish Council considers that this is a material issue because additional development would involve:

more built footprint;
parking and hardstanding;
access works; and
surface-water management requirements.

The applicant proposes that drainage details could be dealt with by condition. The Parish Council considers that a detailed drainage and SuDS strategy should be available before determination, particularly given local concerns regarding drainage and the requirements of Neighbourhood Plan Design Code SF02.

Ecology and biodiversity: The applicant argues that the hardstanding has limited ecological value. However, the key issue is not simply the ecological baseline of the hardstanding.

The Council previously required:

meadow creation;
native landscaping;
bird and bat boxes;
hedgehog permeability; and
ecological enhancements.

The current proposal would reduce the meadow that formed part of those measures. The Parish Council considers that this reduction should be properly justified.

Burnham Beeches SAC: The site lies within the 5.6 km Zone of Influence of Burnham Beeches SAC. The previous officer report records Natural England’s concern that new residential development within this zone can increase recreational pressure and requires Habitats Regulations assessment and mitigation. The previous appropriate assessment found that, without mitigation, the development would be likely to have a significant effect on the integrity of the SAC. The applicant states that it is willing to enter into a legal agreement for the required SAMMS contribution. The Parish Council considers that permission should not be issued unless the necessary Habitats Regulations assessment has been completed and all required mitigation has been legally secured.

Housing land supply: The Parish Council acknowledges Buckinghamshire Council’s housing land supply shortfall. However, this should not be treated as overriding all other considerations. One dwelling is already capable of being delivered through PL/25/0834/FA. The net additional benefit of the present scheme is therefore one dwelling. The Council has previously concluded that the benefit of one dwelling should receive only limited weight.

The planning balance: The Parish Council considers that the limited additional benefit of one dwelling must be weighed against:

the second two-storey dwelling;
southward extension of built development;
additional residential curtilage;
additional parking and turning areas;
an additional access;
additional gates and close-boarded fencing;
greater domestic paraphernalia and lighting;
reduction of the previously protected meadow;
increased visual and spatial domestication;
consolidation of the existing sporadic development pattern;
weakening of the semi-rural transition;
increased car reliance;
pedestrian infrastructure limitations;
additional cumulative infrastructure pressure; and
the need for further SAC mitigation.

Taken together, the Parish Council considers that the harm outweighs the limited incremental benefit.

Incremental erosion of the Green Belt edge: The Parish Council considers there is also a significant cumulative planning concern. A one-dwelling permission has only recently been granted. A new application now seeks two dwellings and a reduced meadow. If each subsequent intensification is accepted because the individual increment appears modest, the result is the progressive erosion of the Green Belt edge. The current application should therefore be judged not only by the appearance of each dwelling individually, but by the cumulative change in the character and openness of this part of Keens Acre.

Conclusion: Stoke Poges Parish Council requests that application PL/26/05614/FA be REFUSED. The Parish Council does not rely on a contention that grey-belt status automatically prevents development. Instead, the Parish Council’s case is that even accepting that the site may qualify as grey belt, this particular two dwelling proposal is materially more intensive than the approved fallback and causes additional site specific harm. The applicant itself establishes the critical differences:

the northern dwelling broadly occupies the permitted position;
the second dwelling extends further south; and
the approved meadow is reduced.

The previous Planning Inspector independently identified this location as:

spacious;
sporadically developed;
semi-rural; and
sensitive to the visual and spatial effects of residential development.

The Parish Council considers that the present application would materially intensify precisely those effects. The limited benefit of one additional dwelling does not outweigh the resulting harm to character, landscape transition, openness, sustainability and cumulative infrastructure pressure.

Even accepting that the site may constitute grey belt for the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework, the proposed development, by reason of the introduction of a second substantial dwelling extending residential development further south, together with its associated residential curtilage, parking, access, boundary treatments, domestic paraphernalia and reduction in the extent of the previously approved meadow, would result in an unacceptable intensification and consolidation of residential development at this sensitive Green Belt edge. The proposal would erode the spacious, sporadic and semi-rural character of the locality, weaken the landscaped transition to open land and result in additional spatial and visual domestication. The limited benefit arising from one additional dwelling over and above the extant permitted fallback would not outweigh the identified harm. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies GB1, EP3 and EP4 of the South Bucks District Local Plan, Core Policies CP8 and CP9 of the South Bucks Core Strategy, Policy SP6 and relevant Design Codes of the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, and the relevant objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The applicant has failed adequately to demonstrate that the materially intensified two-dwelling development occupies a suitably sustainable location having regard to the site’s access via the private and unadopted Keens Acre, limitations and discontinuities in pedestrian infrastructure on relevant routes and the consequent practical reliance upon private vehicles. The proposal has therefore not demonstrated compliance with the sustainable-location requirement applicable to grey-belt residential development under paragraph 155(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework and conflicts with the sustainable transport objectives of the Framework and Policy SP6 of the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan.

In the absence of a completed Habitats Regulations assessment demonstrating no adverse effect upon the integrity of Burnham Beeches Special Area of Conservation and a completed legal obligation securing the necessary Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy mitigation contribution, the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the development would avoid or adequately mitigate increased recreational pressure upon the SAC. The proposal would therefore conflict with Core Policy CP9 of the South Bucks Core Strategy, the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the relevant provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Should officers nevertheless be minded to recommend approval, the Parish Council requests that the application be referred to the appropriate Planning Committee for determination because of:

the site’s Green Belt/grey-belt context;
the material intensification from one dwelling to two;
the southward extension of built development;
the reduction of the previously protected meadow;
the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan;
the previous Planning Inspector’s site-specific findings;
questions concerning sustainable accessibility and car dependency;
cumulative infrastructure pressures; and
Burnham Beeches SAC requirements.

PL/26/05646/VRC Land Adjacent Jasmine Lodge, School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission ref: PL/25/2164/FA (Retention of the change of use of the existing cabin and the retention of the converted haybarn to form a single residential dwelling and residential annexe to provide ancillary accommodation with an associated area of outdoor recreational space (retrospective)) to allow for the retention of the existing veranda attached to the front of the dwelling.

Parish Comments: Stoke Poges Parish Council objects.

The Parish Council has considered the proposal having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework, including the current national policy relating to Grey Belt, the relevant saved policies of the South Bucks District Local Plan, the South Bucks Core Strategy, the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, the planning and enforcement history of the site and the emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan 2045 Regulation 19 Publication Version.

Grey Belt and the National Planning Policy Framework:

The Parish Council acknowledges the change to national Green Belt policy following the introduction of the concept of Grey Belt. For the purposes of this representation, the Parish Council accepts that the application should be considered against the current NPPF definition and policy tests applying to Grey Belt land. However, Grey Belt status does not create an automatic presumption that development should be permitted. Grey Belt remains land within the Green Belt unless and until Green Belt boundaries are altered through the statutory plan-making process. The identification of land as Grey Belt does not amount to an allocation for development, nor does it displace the requirement to assess a proposal against the Development Plan and all other material planning considerations. The relevant question is therefore not simply whether this land may qualify as Grey Belt. The question is whether the proposal satisfies all of the relevant requirements of the NPPF and the Development Plan.

Under NPPF paragraph 155, development on Grey Belt land is not to be regarded as inappropriate development only where the applicable criteria are satisfied. These include the requirement that the development would not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the remaining Green Belt across the area, that there is a demonstrable unmet need for the type of development proposed, that the development is in a sustainable location and, where applicable, that the Golden Rules are satisfied. The Parish Council considers the sustainable location requirement to be of particular importance in this case.

Unsustainable Location and Poor Pedestrian Connectivity:

School Lane is a semi rural lane with limited pedestrian infrastructure. There is no continuous footway or pavement serving the site and surrounding area, and there is little or no street lighting. Pedestrian connectivity is poor and residents are consequently heavily dependent upon private motor vehicles for access to shops, schools, services, employment and public transport. These characteristics are directly relevant to the sustainable-location test within paragraph 155 of the NPPF.

Theoretical walking distances should not be treated as equivalent to safe, convenient and attractive pedestrian accessibility. A route without continuous footways and street lighting is materially less accessible, particularly for children, elderly residents, people with reduced mobility and those travelling during darkness or poor weather. The proposal would therefore reinforce car dependency rather than contribute towards a pattern of development which supports sustainable transport.

The absence of street lighting also forms part of the established semi-rural character of Stoke Poges. Introducing further residential development can create additional pressure for external domestic lighting, highway lighting, security lighting and associated infrastructure. This would result in further suburbanisation and erosion of the dark-skies character which the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan seeks to protect. The Parish Council therefore considers that the proposal fails to demonstrate that this is a sustainable location for additional residential development.

Planning History:

The planning history of this land is a material consideration and should be given appropriate weight. The site has been the subject of previous applications, refusals, appeal proceedings, retrospective development and enforcement involvement.

Application 14/00839/FUL concerned the retrospective erection of an agricultural building and associated yard. That application was refused and the subsequent appeal was dismissed.

More recently, PL/25/2164/FA sought retrospective retention of the change of use of the existing cabin and converted haybarn to form a residential dwelling and residential annexe with associated outdoor recreational space.

The Parish Council previously objected to that application and raised concern regarding the incremental establishment and intensification of residential use on land within the Green Belt. The planning history is therefore important in understanding the cumulative evolution of development at this location.

The introduction of Grey Belt policy does not wipe that history clean. Previous planning decisions, appeal findings, conditions, enforcement matters and the reasons why earlier development was considered unacceptable remain material where relevant to the present proposal. The Council should consider whether the current variation would further intensify or consolidate residential development at the site and whether the cumulative effect would materially alter the character and planning status of the land. If the proposed variation would result in a materially different development from that previously permitted, a fresh planning application should be required rather than seeking to secure such changes through a variation of condition.

Cumulative Impact of Nearby Development:

The Parish Council is particularly concerned that the application cannot properly be considered in isolation. There are a number of substantial development proposals within the surrounding area which, if permitted either individually or cumulatively, would place significant additional pressure on local roads, services, infrastructure and the rural character of Stoke Poges and Wexham.

These include:

PL/26/01820/OA for approximately 317 dwellings;
PL/25/6431/OA for approximately 50 dwellings;
PL/26/06177/OA and PL/26/06178/OA for a combined total of approximately 680 dwellings; and
the prospect of a further major commercial proposal at Pinewood Nurseries, Wexham Street, potentially involving warehousing and/or data-centre development.

These proposals represent, collectively, a very substantial potential increase in development within and around an area which already has constrained highway capacity, limited pedestrian infrastructure and limited local facilities. The cumulative effect of these schemes must be taken into account when considering whether further development at Jasmine Lodge represents sustainable development. The Parish Council is concerned that incremental approvals on individual Grey Belt sites could result in a pattern of unplanned strategic growth without the infrastructure, transport planning or spatial strategy normally required to support development of this scale. That would be contrary to a plan led approach.

The correct assessment is not simply whether each application might be capable of being accommodated when viewed in isolation, but whether the combined effect of existing commitments, pending applications and reasonably foreseeable development would result in unacceptable pressure upon the local highway network, pedestrian safety, local services, landscape character and Green Belt function. The Parish Council asks Buckinghamshire Council to undertake an explicit cumulative impact assessment before determining this application.

Buckinghamshire Local Plan 2045 Regulation 19 Publication Version:

The Parish Council notes that the emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan 2045 Regulation 19 Publication Version does not identify Stoke Poges or Wexham as locations for the scale of development now being promoted through a series of individual planning applications. This is highly relevant. The emerging Local Plan represents Buckinghamshire Council's current strategic approach to the distribution of growth across the authority area. The Parish Council is concerned that permitting substantial development through a succession of individual planning applications on Green Belt or Grey Belt land would risk circumventing the plan-making process and creating strategic growth in locations which have not been selected for such development through the Local Plan. The cumulative effect of the applications currently being promoted in and around Stoke Poges and Wexham is potentially very substantial.

PL/26/01820/OA, PL/25/6431/OA, PL/26/06177/OA and PL/26/06178/OA alone amount to approximately 1,047 dwellings, before taking account of any additional development at Pinewood Nurseries or other pending proposals. Such a scale of growth should be considered strategically through the Local Plan process rather than allowed to emerge incrementally through individual applications. The absence of strategic allocation for this scale of development is therefore a significant material consideration.

Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan:

The made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan forms part of the statutory Development Plan and must be given full and proper consideration. The Neighbourhood Plan was prepared by the local community to identify an appropriate and sustainable pattern of development for Stoke Poges. Importantly, the Neighbourhood Plan did identify sites considered suitable for modest development, particularly where development could be accommodated in locations with reasonable access to the village's limited infrastructure and services. That approach demonstrates that the Parish Council and local community are not opposed to development in principle. Rather, the Neighbourhood Plan seeks to ensure that development is proportionate, properly located and related to available infrastructure. This is an important distinction. The present pattern of speculative development proposals risks undermining that plan-led approach by introducing substantial additional housing in locations which were not identified through the Neighbourhood Plan process as suitable for such growth.

The Neighbourhood Plan also seeks to protect the distinctive semi rural character of Stoke Poges, encourage sustainable movement, reduce unnecessary reliance upon private cars, protect important landscape characteristics and retain the village's dark skies environment. Development at a location without continuous pavements, street lighting or strong access to local services does not sit comfortably with those objectives. The Parish Council therefore considers that the proposal conflicts with the spatial strategy and sustainable-development objectives of the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan.

Saved South Bucks Policies and Core Strategy:

The application must also be considered against the relevant saved policies of the South Bucks District Local Plan and the South Bucks Core Strategy. The revised NPPF treatment of Grey Belt does not remove the statutory requirement under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 to determine planning applications in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The relevant local policies concerning Green Belt, character, landscape, housing, transport, accessibility and sustainable development therefore remain part of the decision-making framework to the extent that they are consistent with current national policy. The Parish Council asks the case officer to identify expressly within the officer report the relevant saved South Bucks policies and Core Strategy policies and to assess the proposal against those policies rather than treating Grey Belt status as determinative.

Incremental Urbanisation:

The Parish Council is concerned about the incremental urbanisation of this part of Stoke Poges. The cumulative introduction of dwellings, residential gardens, vehicles, hardstanding, lighting, domestic paraphernalia, boundary treatments and associated activity can materially change the character of land even where individual applications appear limited in scale. This is particularly relevant where development occurs through a sequence of retrospective applications, variations of condition and incremental changes of use. Such development can gradually transform the character of a site and its surroundings without the strategic assessment that would accompany a properly planned allocation. The Council should therefore assess the real cumulative effect of the development rather than viewing each individual element in isolation.

Section 73 and Variation of Condition:

The Parish Council recognises that PL/26/05646/VRC is an application seeking variation or removal of condition rather than a completely new planning application. However, a permission granted under Section 73 constitutes a new planning permission. Buckinghamshire Council must therefore consider the Development Plan and all material planning considerations relevant to the variation being sought. The Council should examine carefully why the original condition was imposed and whether the proposal would undermine the planning purpose which that condition was intended to secure. In particular, the Council should consider whether the variation would increase the permanence or intensity of residential use, increase built form or hardstanding, increase traffic or vehicle movements, introduce additional lighting or domestic activity, weaken controls protecting rural character or Green Belt openness, or otherwise result in a materially different development. A condition which was necessary to make a development acceptable should not be removed or weakened without clear and compelling planning justification.

Plan-Led Development:

The Parish Council considers that the wider context is particularly important. Stoke Poges has a made Neighbourhood Plan which provides a locally supported framework for modest and proportionate development. Buckinghamshire Council has also now published its Regulation 19 Local Plan, setting out the authority's strategic approach to future growth. Neither process has identified Stoke Poges or Wexham for the scale of development represented by the current cluster of applications. The Parish Council is therefore concerned that speculative applications are effectively seeking to establish a new growth strategy outside the statutory plan-making process. That approach risks creating development first and addressing infrastructure consequences afterwards creating great strain on existing infrastructure. Such an outcome would be contrary to the plan led principles at the heart of the planning system.

Conclusion:

Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this variation of condition and requests that the application be refused. The Parish Council acknowledges that the land may fall within the current national definition of Grey Belt. However, Grey Belt status is not determinative and does not create an automatic entitlement to residential development. The proposal must satisfy the full requirements of the NPPF, including the requirement for development to be in a sustainable location. The lack of continuous pavements, limited street lighting, poor pedestrian connectivity and consequent dependency upon private motor vehicles weigh heavily against the sustainability of this location. The site's planning and enforcement history is also material and demonstrates the need to consider carefully the cumulative and incremental establishment of residential development. The proposal must further be considered in the context of the significant number of major applications now being promoted in the wider Stoke Poges and Wexham area.

PL/26/01820/OA, PL/25/6431/OA, PL/26/06177/OA and PL/26/06178/OA collectively propose approximately 1,047 dwellings, with further potential commercial development at Pinewood Nurseries, Wexham Street. The cumulative impact of these proposals would be substantial and cannot properly be ignored.

The emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan Regulation 19 Publication Version does not identify Stoke Poges or Wexham for development on this scale, while the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan has already identified an appropriate approach to modest development in locations related to the village's limited infrastructure.

The Parish Council therefore considers that permitting further speculative development at this location would undermine the plan-led approach, exacerbate existing infrastructure deficiencies and contribute towards the incremental urbanisation of the Green Belt.

For these reasons, Stoke Poges Parish Council requests that Buckinghamshire Council refuse PL/26/05646/VRC.

If officers are minded to approve the application contrary to the Parish Council's objection, the Parish Council requests that the application be referred to Planning Committee so that the Grey Belt tests, sustainable location assessment, planning history, cumulative development pressures and relationship with the Development Plan can be considered transparently by elected Members.

PL/26/05546/FA The Fox & Pheasant , Gerrards Cross Road, Stoke Poges, Bucks SL2 4EZ

Formation of a vehicular crossover.

Parish Comments: Object.

The Parish Council considers that the application should not be approved on the basis of the information presently before the Local Planning Authority. There are material and unresolved concerns regarding the adequacy and accuracy of the ecological information submitted, the site's exceptionally close relationship with Stoke Common Site of Special Scientific Interest, the potential effect upon adjacent priority habitat, the proposed access arrangements, highway safety in the vicinity of the Collum Green Road junction, and the effect of the development upon the character and sensitive setting of Stoke Common and the Fox and Pheasant.

The Parish Council attaches significant weight to the consultation response of the City of London Corporation, which acts as sole trustee of the Burnham Beeches and Stoke Common Charity and manages the southern part of Burnham Beeches SAC/SSSI and Stoke Common SSSI. Its Conservation Officer confirms that the application site lies approximately 15 metres from Stoke Common SSSI, which is described as an extremely valuable habitat locally.

Of particular concern is the Conservation Officer's statement that the Ecology and Tree Checklist submitted with the application contains false information and appears to have been completed without adequate investigation. The City of London Corporation specifically identifies multiple clearly marked ponds within 250 metres of the site and designated priority habitat adjacent to it.

The Parish Council does not seek to determine how or why inaccurate information may have been provided. That is a matter for the Local Planning Authority. The planning consequence is, however, significant. Where the ecological information accompanying an application has been specifically challenged by the organisation responsible for managing the neighbouring SSSI, and identifiable factual deficiencies have been raised, the Local Planning Authority cannot safely rely upon that information without further investigation.

Given the site's proximity to Stoke Common SSSI and adjacent priority habitat, the Parish Council considers that appropriate and competent ecological assessment should be undertaken before the application is determined. This should establish the ecological baseline and properly consider any potential effects upon the SSSI, priority habitat and protected or priority species, including those potentially associated with the identified ponds.

The assessment should also consider the potential effects arising from construction activity, external lighting, drainage and surface-water run-off, vegetation or habitat disturbance, access works and additional vehicle activity. These are particularly important considerations where development is proposed in such close proximity to a nationally designated nature conservation site.

The Parish Council does not consider that potentially necessary ecological assessment should simply be deferred by planning condition. Where ecological information is required to establish whether development is acceptable in principle and whether significant effects can be avoided or adequately mitigated, that information should be available to the decision maker before planning permission is granted.

The Parish Council also has significant concerns regarding the proposed vehicular access arrangements. The revised block plan identifies the established access at the northern part of the frontage as “Existing Crossover”, while showing a further proposed access onto the highway further south. The proposed access is accompanied by visibility splays annotated on the drawing at approximately 64 metres and 80 metres.

Importantly, the revised block plan does not identify the existing crossover as being closed, stopped up or removed, nor does it show the frontage at that location being permanently reinstated. On the face of the submitted plan, the proposal therefore appears to introduce an additional vehicular access while retaining the existing crossover.

The Parish Council considers that the highway implications must consequently be assessed on the basis of the access arrangements actually shown, rather than considering the visibility from the proposed new access in isolation. If both accesses are intended to remain operational, the applicant should demonstrate why two access points are necessary and that their combined operation would not result in unacceptable highway or pedestrian safety consequences. If the existing crossover is intended to be closed, this should be clearly shown on an amended plan, together with details of its physical closure and permanent reinstatement.

This issue is of particular concern because of the site's proximity to the Collum Green Road junction and the traffic lights at the junction with Templewood Lane, which are both locally regarded as a highway safety black spots. The introduction of a further access, alongside the apparently retained existing crossover and the nearby junction, has the potential to increase turning movements and vehicle conflict points within an already sensitive part of the highway network.

The Parish Council therefore requests that the Local Highway Authority specifically considers the recorded collision history and existing highway safety conditions in the vicinity of the Collum Green Road junction. The assessment should consider the cumulative interaction between vehicles entering and leaving the application site, vehicles approaching and leaving the junction, pedestrian and other vulnerable road-user movements, and the operation of the existing and proposed accesses.

The Parish Council recognises that the description of the Collum Green Road junction as a highway safety black spot reflects local knowledge and concern. The Parish Council therefore asks the Local Highway Authority, which holds the relevant collision and highway records, to establish the objective collision history and take that evidence into account in its assessment of this application.

In the absence of evidence demonstrating that the proposed additional access, either individually or cumulatively with the existing crossover and nearby junction, would not exacerbate highway safety risks, the Parish Council does not consider that the proposed access arrangements have presently been demonstrated to be acceptable.

The physical consequences of creating the additional access also require consideration. The highway frontage contributes to the setting of the Fox and Pheasant and the immediate environment adjoining Stoke Common. Any removal or alteration of roadside vegetation, boundary treatment or landscaping required to construct the access or maintain its visibility splays should therefore be assessed for its effects upon both the character of the locality and the adjoining sensitive ecological environment.

The Fox and Pheasant has an established relationship with Stoke Common and forms a recognisable element of the local street scene and community. Development affecting its grounds, parking arrangements, boundaries and access should respond sensitively to that context. The Parish Council considers that the proposal must therefore be assessed cumulatively rather than treating the access, landscaping, ecological and character impacts as unrelated matters.

The Parish Council is particularly concerned by the combination of the deficiencies identified in the ecological information and the uncertainty surrounding the access arrangements. Both concern matters fundamental to establishing the acceptability of the development and should be resolved before a decision is made.

Accordingly, Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this application and requests that planning permission be refused on the information presently submitted, or that determination is deferred until the Local Planning Authority has sufficient robust evidence to establish that the proposal is acceptable.

In particular, the Parish Council requests appropriate ecological assessment addressing Stoke Common SSSI, adjacent priority habitat, the identified ponds and any consequent protected or priority species considerations; appropriate consultation upon that ecological evidence; clarification of whether the existing crossover is to remain operational or be permanently stopped up; and a specific assessment by the Local Highway Authority of the proposed access arrangements having regard to the existing crossover, the proximity of the Collum Green Road junction and Templewood Lane junction and the recorded collision history in this location.

Until these matters have been satisfactorily addressed, the Parish Council considers that the applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal would avoid unacceptable effects upon the ecological interests and sensitive setting of Stoke Common or that safe and appropriate access arrangements can be achieved.

Stoke Poges Parish Council therefore maintains its objection to application PL/26/05546/FA.

PL/25/6431/OA Land Adjacent To Plough Lane and Farthing Green Lane, Plough Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4JP.

Outline planning application for up to 50 residential dwellings (Use Class C3), associated layout and access together with car parking to be determined with scale, appearance, and landscaping reserved.

Parish Comments: Stoke Poges Parish Council strongly objects to application PL/25/6431/OA for outline planning permission for up to 50 residential dwellings at Plough Lane, Stoke Poges.

The Parish Council considers that the proposal conflicts with the statutory development plan when read as a whole, including the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, the adopted South Bucks Core Strategy and relevant saved policies of the South Bucks District Local Plan. Buckinghamshire Council continues to identify the South Bucks Core Strategy and saved South Bucks Local Plan as operative development plan documents for the former South Bucks area, while made neighbourhood plans also form part of the Buckinghamshire Development Plan.

The Parish Council also relies upon the National Planning Policy Framework published on 17 August 2026 as a material consideration. References in this objection to policies prefixed GB, TR, DP, HO and DM are references to national decision making policies contained within that Framework and are not Buckinghamshire Local Plan policy references.

The emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan is considered separately and afforded only such weight as is appropriate having regard to its stage of preparation, unresolved objections and consistency with national policy.

The proposal would introduce substantial residential development onto presently open land in a sensitive settlement edge location. Its effects cannot properly be assessed simply by reference to a numerical provision of up to 50 dwellings. The development would introduce a new estate road and principal vehicular access together with internal highways, hardstanding, parking, traffic movements, servicing, lighting, gardens, boundary treatments, pedestrian and cycle movements and the general domestic activity associated with a residential estate. The cumulative effect of those changes would materially alter the character, appearance, openness and function of the site and its relationship with Plough Lane and the surrounding countryside.

Settlement Hierarchy, Location and Sustainability:

Stoke Poges is a large village rather than a higher order settlement with a comprehensive range of services, employment opportunities and transport connections. The Parish Council’s evidence prepared in connection with the emerging Buckinghamshire Local Plan identifies significant limitations in sustainable transport provision. Stoke Poges has no railway station and residents requiring rail services must travel outside the village, principally towards Slough or Gerrards Cross. Bus services and pedestrian and cycle connections do not provide the level of choice or convenience available in larger settlements. This context is directly relevant to national NPPF Policy TR3 concerning the location of development in sustainable locations. The Parish Council considers that the sustainability of the application cannot properly be demonstrated simply by identifying destinations which are theoretically within walking, cycling or public transport distance. The practical quality of those alternatives is material. This includes the frequency and hours of public transport, the continuity and safety of pedestrian routes, the availability and quality of cycle infrastructure and whether those alternatives constitute realistic choices for ordinary daily journeys. Future residents would need to travel for employment, rail services, healthcare, education, shopping and other facilities outside the immediate locality. In those circumstances, a development of up to 50 dwellings is likely to generate a significant degree of private car dependency unless substantial improvements in sustainable transport provision are demonstrated and secured. This concern is consistent with South Bucks Core Strategy Core Policy 7, Accessibility and Transport. Buckinghamshire Council itself identifies Core Policy 7 as the relevant South Bucks policy for Transport Assessments and Travel Plans.

The Parish Council therefore relies upon national Policy TR3 and South Bucks Core Policy 7 in submitting that the location, scale and accessibility of the proposal must be considered together rather than assessing the development solely in terms of whether additional vehicle movements can theoretically be accommodated on the highway network.

Green Belt:

The application site lies within the Green Belt and the proposal must be assessed rigorously against the current national Green Belt policies. The Parish Council relies upon national NPPF Policies GB6, GB7 and GB8. The Parish Council recognises that the current national policy framework contains circumstances in which development may not constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, including provisions concerning grey belt. It is therefore not the Parish Council’s case that the proposal should automatically be treated as inappropriate simply because it comprises housing development in the Green Belt. However, if the applicant relies upon Policy GB7, all elements of the relevant policy test must be satisfied. The categorisation of land as grey belt does not establish that development is automatically acceptable. The sustainability of the location remains particularly important because the current national policy framework links Green Belt development with the sustainable location requirements of national Policy TR3.

The development would introduce the physical and visual characteristics of a residential estate onto presently open land. The consequences for openness are not confined to the footprints of buildings. They include roads, hardstanding, parked and moving vehicles, lighting, gardens, domestic boundaries, street furniture, domestic paraphernalia and a substantial increase in residential activity. The effect would be materially urbanising. The Parish Council also considers the wider Green Belt function of the land to be important. Stoke Poges lies close to the substantial urban area of Slough and the open countryside surrounding the village contributes to maintaining physical and perceptual separation between settlements and to resisting the outward extension of urban form. Development should therefore be assessed not only in terms of the visibility of individual buildings but also in terms of the site’s contribution to openness, countryside protection and settlement separation. The Parish Council additionally relies upon saved South Bucks Local Plan Policy GB1. Buckinghamshire Council’s current development-plan mapping continues to identify GB1 amongst the saved Green Belt policies.

Golden Rules and Infrastructure:

As this is a proposal for major housing development in the Green Belt, national Policy GB8 concerning the Golden Rules is material. The Parish Council considers that the Council should be satisfied before granting permission that the development complies with all applicable national requirements concerning affordable housing, infrastructure and accessible green space. This issue is directly related to the Parish Council’s wider concern regarding infrastructure capacity. South Bucks Core Strategy Core Policy 6 concerns Local Infrastructure Needs and remains relevant to the additional demand generated by development. The question is not simply whether financial contributions can be collected. It is whether infrastructure necessary to make the development acceptable has been identified, whether sufficient capacity exists, whether improvements are deliverable and whether they can be provided when the additional demand arises. The cumulative demands generated by substantial residential development upon highways, public transport, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities, recreation and community facilities should therefore be understood before permission is granted.

Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan:

The Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan is a made neighbourhood plan and forms part of the statutory development plan. Buckinghamshire Council formally lists Stoke Poges amongst the made neighbourhood plans for the South Planning Area. The Plan was made in 2025 and should therefore be treated as a statutory development plan document rather than as a peripheral or merely emerging consideration. The Parish Council relies upon the applicable policies and objectives of the Neighbourhood Plan concerning appropriate design, green infrastructure, sustainable development, village character and the protection of the night time environment. With in the plan the Parish Council identified suitable areas for small scale development within the built area of village infrastructure.

Policy SP9 concerning Green Infrastructure is particularly relevant to the effects of development upon the network of open land, vegetation, hedgerows, habitat connections and landscape features surrounding the village.

Policy SP12 concerning Dark Skies is also relevant because the proposal would introduce street lighting, domestic illumination, vehicle headlights and additional night-time activity into an area which presently contributes to the rural night time environment.

The Neighbourhood Plan reflects a locally developed approach to accommodating appropriate growth while respecting the particular character, Green Belt setting and infrastructure limitations of Stoke Poges. The Parish Council is not objecting to housing provision as a matter of principle. Its objection concerns the scale, location and effects of this particular proposal and whether substantial development on open settlement edge land is consistent with the statutory planning framework established for the village.

Highway Safety and Proposed Access:

The Parish Council has substantial concerns regarding the safety and suitability of the proposed principal vehicular access onto Plough Lane. Those concerns arise from the combination of the highway geometry, the bend, available visibility, existing traffic movements and the existing residential driveway directly opposite the proposed development junction. Plough Lane is a constrained road whose physical characteristics are materially different from those of a highway designed to serve a substantial residential estate. The proposal would introduce repeated entering, emerging and turning movements associated with up to 50 dwellings together with refuse vehicles, deliveries, servicing vehicles, visitors and emergency service movements.

National NPPF Policy TR6 concerning the assessment of transport impacts is therefore particularly important. The transport evidence should assess the practical operation of the proposed junction using actual site conditions and appropriate evidence rather than relying solely upon theoretical visibility dimensions or the posted speed limit. The assessment should address measured or otherwise robustly evidenced traffic speeds, forward visibility around the bend, visibility available to vehicles emerging from the development, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive and react to vehicles slowing or waiting to turn and interactions with pedestrians, cyclists and existing accesses.

South Bucks Core Policy 7 is directly relevant to accessibility and transport, while saved South Bucks Local Plan Policies TR5 and TR7 remain material to highway safety and access. Buckinghamshire Council continued to rely expressly upon TR5, TR7 and Core Policy 7 in a South Buckinghamshire Area Planning Committee decision as recently as December 2024 in relation to highway safety and car-dependent development. The Parish Council considers that the proposed access should therefore be assessed against national Policies TR3 and TR6, South Bucks Core Policy 7 and saved South Bucks Local Plan Policies TR5 and TR7.

Existing Driveway Directly Opposite the Proposed Access:

The relationship between the proposed junction and the existing residential driveway at No. 38 Plough Lane is a particularly important site specific highway consideration. The Parish Council understands from the occupiers’ representation that this existing driveway is directly opposite the proposed development access and is not shown on the submitted access plans. If that remains the position in the material before the Council, it is a material omission. The safety of a new junction serving up to 50 dwellings cannot properly be assessed without taking account of an existing residential vehicular access directly opposite and the interaction between vehicles using both accesses. The occupiers’ representation states that the applicant’s swept path analysis shows refuse vehicles and cars undertaking turning movements across or immediately adjacent to the frontage of No. 38 and that no equivalent assessment has been undertaken of vehicles emerging from that driveway. The Parish Council considers that the Local Highway Authority should therefore require appropriate vehicle tracking analysis demonstrating the simultaneous operation of both accesses. The assessment should include vehicles entering and leaving No. 38, vehicles entering and emerging from the development, vehicles slowing or waiting to turn into the development, refuse and delivery vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists and approaching traffic negotiating the bend. The occupiers also identify submitted visibility splays of approximately 4.3 metres by 44 metres and 1.5 metres by 33 metres but state that these are assessed from the proposed development access and do not assess sight lines from the existing driveway opposite or fully reflect the bend and existing vegetation. The Parish Council considers that this requires specific examination by Buckinghamshire Highways.

The relevant highway-safety question is not merely whether the development access itself can demonstrate a prescribed visibility splay. It is whether the complete arrangement, including the existing opposing driveway, can operate safely under realistic conditions. This issue is strengthened by the evidence that Buckinghamshire Highways has already approved an H-bar access protection marking at No. 38 under reference 976132. The Parish Council does not suggest that an H-bar and proposed double yellow line restrictions are legally equivalent highway measures. However, the existence and purpose of the existing access protection measure are plainly relevant to understanding the operational characteristics of this driveway.

The Local Highway Authority should therefore explain how the proposed waiting restrictions, junction geometry and existing H-bar arrangement interact and whether the proposed development would reduce or otherwise alter the manoeuvring space available to the existing property. Unless the proposed and existing accesses have been assessed together using realistic traffic and vehicle movements, the Parish Council considers that the Council cannot safely conclude that the development would avoid an unacceptable impact upon highway safety.

Pedestrian and Cycle Safety:

A development of this scale must also provide safe, attractive and practical access for pedestrians, people with reduced mobility and cyclists. The relevant assessment should not be confined to whether a route physically exists. The quality of the route, continuity of footways, crossing opportunities, visibility, lighting, traffic conditions and accessibility for children, older residents, wheelchair and mobility-aid users and people with push chairs are material. The limitations of the surrounding highway network reinforce the Parish Council’s concern that future residents would remain substantially dependent upon private vehicles. This issue engages national Policy TR3, national Policy TR6 and South Bucks Core Policy 7.

Cumulative Highway Effects:

The cumulative development position should be treated as a significant material consideration. The application should not be assessed as though the 50 proposed dwellings would necessarily exist in isolation. There are other substantial development proposals within the surrounding area capable of placing additional traffic upon the same road network. The Parish Council considers that the current planning status and scale of those proposals should be verified at the date of determination and that relevant developments should be incorporated into reasonable future transport scenarios where required by national Policy TR6 and accepted transport-assessment methodology. The transport evidence should identify transparently which developments have been incorporated within the assessment and explain why any significant development capable of affecting Plough Lane, Farthing Green Lane, Wexham Street or connected junctions has been included or excluded. A materially incomplete or outdated traffic baseline would not provide a reliable basis upon which to determine cumulative network effects. The Parish Council’s concern is not that all potential development should automatically be treated as committed. It is that the decision maker should understand and assess the realistic cumulative development context rather than considering this application within an artificially narrow baseline.

Green Infrastructure, Ecology and Biodiversity:

The Parish Council relies upon Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP9 and South Bucks Core Strategy Core Policy 9 concerning the Natural Environment. Buckinghamshire Council continues expressly to identify South Bucks Core Policy 9 as the relevant development plan policy concerning biodiversity. Open land, hedgerows, field boundaries and vegetation around Stoke Poges collectively perform ecological and landscape functions extending beyond the boundaries of individual habitat parcels. These include wildlife movement and habitat connectivity, landscape structure, carbon storage, soil protection and surface water interception. The development should therefore be assessed for its effect upon the wider green-infrastructure network rather than simply whether particular individual landscape features are retained within the application boundary. The private representation also records concerns attributed to the Council’s ecological consultation response relating to reptiles, receptor arrangements and application of the mitigation hierarchy. The Parish Council considers that the application should be determined using the latest ecological consultation response and the most recent validated ecological evidence. The representation further identifies concerns regarding the submitted Biodiversity Net Gain metric, including a stated net loss in habitat units, trading rule issues and the absence at that stage of secured off-site compensation. Because BNG evidence may change during the application process, the Parish Council does not rely upon historic figures where they have subsequently been superseded. The determining authority should instead be satisfied, by reference to the latest validated information, that the statutory BNG requirements are capable of being met and secured.

Drainage and Water Infrastructure:

The Parish Council remains concerned regarding drainage and wider infrastructure capacity. Parts of Stoke Poges experience surface water drainage pressures and development of this scale would increase the importance of demonstrating that a technically satisfactory and deliverable drainage strategy exists. South Bucks Core Policy 13 concerning Environmental and Resource Management and the relevant current national flood-risk and sustainable-drainage policies are material. The private representation records concerns arising from the Lead Local Flood Authority response concerning discharge arrangements, sewer ownership, attenuation calculations, the drainage hierarchy and the deliverability of off site works. The Parish Council considers that any outstanding technical objection from the Lead Local Flood Authority should be resolved on the basis of satisfactory evidence before permission is granted where it concerns matters fundamental to the deliverability of the development. Where drainage depends upon land, connections or infrastructure outside the applicant’s control, the Council should require sufficient evidence that those works can actually be delivered. We also note that there is an open stream through the plots which flows during the winder months taking excess water away.

Dark Skies and Lighting:

The proposal would introduce substantial additional artificial illumination into a presently open settlement-edge environment. The Parish Council relies upon Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP12 concerning Dark Skies. Potential sources include street lighting, junction lighting, pedestrian route lighting, domestic external lighting and vehicle headlights. The proposed access is particularly important because vehicles emerging from the development would face towards the existing residential frontage and driveway opposite. The residents’ representation specifically identifies concern about headlights shining towards the property and affecting drivers leaving the existing driveway. The lighting effects should therefore be assessed both in terms of residential amenity and the rural night-time character of the locality. A lighting strategy should demonstrate that any illumination is necessary, appropriately located and capable of avoiding or minimising unnecessary spill, glare and effects upon neighbouring residents and nocturnal wildlife and not conflict with policy SP12.

Character, Appearance and Residential Amenity:

The proposal would cause a marked change in the character of this part of Stoke Poges. Plough Lane derives part of its character from its rural alignment, adjoining open land, vegetation and its role in the transition between the village and countryside. A residential estate of up to 50 dwellings would introduce an urbanising influence extending substantially beyond the buildings themselves.

The junction, road widening and engineering, hard surfacing, footways, cycle infrastructure, signage, road markings, parked vehicles, street lighting, domestic boundaries and general residential activity would all contribute to that change.

The Parish Council relies upon saved South Bucks Local Plan Policy EP3, which requires development to be compatible with the character and amenities of the site, adjoining development and the locality and specifically addresses scale, layout and siting. The Parish Council also relies upon saved Policy H9, which requires residential development to be compatible with the character of its surroundings in terms including density, layout, design, height, scale and form and to avoid unacceptable effects upon nearby properties and the locality. These policies are particularly relevant because landscaping cannot remove the fundamental change in use and intensity represented by the introduction of a residential estate and its associated highway infrastructure onto open land. The Parish Council considers that the resulting effect upon character and appearance weighs materially against the proposal.

Buckinghamshire Local Plan 2045 Regulation 19 Publication Version:

Outline Nature of the Application:

The outline nature of the application does not reduce the need to resolve matters fundamental to the acceptability of the principle, scale and access at this stage. Permission for up to 50 dwellings would establish a substantial development envelope. The Council should therefore be satisfied before outline permission is granted that development of that scale can be accommodated without unacceptable harm. This is particularly important in relation to the principal vehicular access. The interaction between the proposed development junction, the bend, actual highway geometry, visibility, opposing residential driveway and pedestrian and cycle movements is fundamental to whether safe and suitable access can be achieved. A material deficiency in the location or operation of the principal access should not be deferred to later detailed design.

Planning Balance:

The Parish Council acknowledges the national objective of increasing housing supply and accepts that the provision of additional homes carries material weight in favour of the proposal under the current NPPF. That benefit does not, however, determine the application in isolation. The proposal must be considered against the statutory development plan and relevant material considerations as a whole.

The Parish Council relies particularly upon the current national NPPF policies concerning Green Belt, sustainable location, transport and highway safety; South Bucks Core Policies 6, 7, 9 and 13; saved South Bucks Local Plan Policies GB1, EP3, H9, TR5 and TR7; and the relevant policies of the made Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, including SP9 and SP12.

The highway issue carries particular significance because this is not simply a question of whether an additional quantity of traffic can be accommodated. The development would establish its principal vehicular access at a constrained location associated with a bend and directly opposite an existing residential driveway. The opposing driveway, the visibility available to its users, the existing H-bar access protection and the simultaneous operation of both accesses must therefore form an integral part of the highway-safety assessment. A finding that the development access itself achieves a prescribed visibility distance does not necessarily answer that site specific issue. The determining authority must be satisfied that the entire junction arrangement would operate safely in practice. The cumulative effects upon the highway network, sustainable transport, infrastructure, drainage, green infrastructure, landscape and settlement character must also be considered together rather than compartmentalised.

Cumulative Impact of Nearby Development:

These include:

PL/26/01820/OA for approximately 317 dwellings;
PL/25/6431/OA for approximately 50 dwellings;
PL/26/06177/OA and PL/26/06178/OA for a combined total of approximately 680 dwellings; and
the prospect of a further major commercial proposal at Pinewood Nurseries, Wexham Street, potentially involving warehousing and/or data-centre development.

Conclusion:

The proposal would introduce substantial residential development onto presently open land and would materially urbanise the site and its surroundings through buildings, estate roads, traffic, parking, lighting, highway infrastructure, gardens, boundaries and domestic activity.

Its Green Belt acceptability must be tested rigorously against the current national NPPF, including Policies GB6, GB7 and GB8, rather than assuming that a grey-belt designation would automatically render development acceptable.

The sustainability of the location must be assessed against national Policy TR3 and South Bucks Core Policy 7, having regard to the actual availability and practicality of alternatives to private-car travel.

The transport evidence must satisfy national Policy TR6 and the applicable local development plan policies, including saved South Bucks Policies TR5 and TR7. Particular attention must be given to the proposed principal access because of the bend, road geometry, available visibility and the existing residential driveway directly opposite. The opposing driveway must be explicitly incorporated into the technical assessment. The evidence should address simultaneous vehicle movements, visibility from the existing driveway, swept paths, vehicles waiting to turn, refuse and servicing vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists, existing access protection and the geometry of the bend. The Parish Council considers that theoretical compliance with a visibility splay measured solely from the proposed development access would not, without proper assessment of the existing driveway opposite, demonstrate that the complete access arrangement is safe. The development must also be assessed in its realistic cumulative context using current transport and infrastructure evidence.

The proposal would cause a substantial change to the rural settlement-edge character of Plough Lane and would introduce additional artificial lighting and activity into presently open land. These effects engage saved Policies EP3 and H9 and the relevant design, green-infrastructure and Dark Skies provisions of the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan.

The Parish Council acknowledges the housing benefits of the proposal but considers that those benefits do not outweigh the identified Green Belt, sustainability, highway-safety, infrastructure, character, landscape and environmental concerns when the development plan and material considerations are considered as a whole.

The Parish Council therefore requests that planning permission be refused. If Buckinghamshire Council is nevertheless minded to approve the application, the Parish Council requests that the application is determined by the appropriate Planning Committee rather than under delegated powers and that Members undertake a site visit before determination.

A site visit is particularly important in this case because it would allow Members to observe directly the character and geometry of Plough Lane, the position of the proposed development access in relation to the bend, the existing residential driveway directly opposite, the available visibility in both directions, pedestrian conditions and the physical constraints of the highway network.

PL/26/06010/TP 1 Sefton Paddock, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4PT

T1 Oak - Reduce by approximately 7m to main crown break, lower growth reduced by up to 2m and remove ivy from stem. Structural defects detected at several unions in the upper canopy.

Parish Comments: No objection subject to the Tree Officer report.

PL/26/06119/FA 6 Penn Meadow, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EB

Two storey side and part rear extension and single storey rear extension

Parish Comments: No Comment

AMENDED PLANS

PLANS FOR INFORMATION ONLY

TREE PRESEERVATION ORDER

NOTED APPENDIX 3

PLANNING DECISIONS

PL/26/01107/HB Flat 2 Framewood Manor, Framewood Road, Stoke Poges, SL2 4QR

Listed Building Consent application for a minor internal alteration including relocation of an existing internal doorway.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Refuse Listed Building Consent.

PL/26/01062/VRC 8 Elderfield Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DE.

Variation of condition 3 (no business use) attached to planning permission PL/22/3295/FA (Part garage conversion to living space with change to middle side window) to allow limited ancillary residential occupation of the converted garage.

Parish Council Comments: Objection

The Parish Council objects to the proposal.

It is understood that the applicant is advertising the accommodation as a separate dwelling for rent at £800 per month, and this matter has been referred to the Planning Enforcement Team. The marketing of the space in this way indicates an intention for independent residential occupation.

This would constitute a material change of use and would result in the creation of a separate planning unit, which is contrary to the approved development and in breach of Condition 3, which was imposed specifically to ensure that the accommodation remains ancillary and not capable of independent occupation.

The condition serves an important planning purpose and was applied to prevent the formation of an additional dwelling within the site. Its removal, variation, or disregard would undermine the original planning permission and result in unacceptable development.

The Parish Council therefore requests that the application be refused and that the Planning Authority give full consideration to enforcement action as appropriate.

Hereby Permits.

PL/25/2295/FA Westside, Keens Acre, School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4FB,

Retention of stables and barn for agricultural purposes.

There is a pending planning application PL/25/2164/FA seeking a change of use from an agricultural building to habitable accommodation.

If the site is no longer in active agricultural use, it is unclear on what basis the unauthorised outbuildings should be allowed to remain, as they can no longer be considered ancillary to the former piggery.

Relevant planning policies include GB1(a), GB9, EP3, and EP4, as well as Section 153 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Hereby Permits.

ENFORCEMENTS

NOTED APPEALS

Appeal Ref: APP/N0410/C/24/3347247 Land at Small Acres Farm, Stoke Common Road, Fulmer, Buckinghamshire SL3 6HA

• Enforcement reference: ES/23/00280/OPDEV

• Reason for appeal: Appeal against an Enforcement Notice alleging a material change of use of the Land, to a mixed use comprising of agricultural and residential and to facilitate the unauthorised use, the erection of a dwelling without Planning Permission.

• Decision: Appeal dismissed, Varied and Upheld

• Costs decision: Not applicable

• Planning Inspectorate Ref: APP/N0410/C/24/3347247

Planning Committee - Meeting Minutes

Monday 17th August 2026

Table Of Contents

Introduction

Agenda Items

041/PL/26 Items by Members of Public Present.

042/PL/26 Apologies for Absence and Acceptance.

043/PL/26 Declarations of Interest

044/PL/26 Minutes

045/PL/26 Planning Applications

046/PL/26 NOTED Planning Decisions, Enforcements and Appeals.

047/PL/26 Councillors/Members Update

048/PL/26 Buckinghamshire Council Complaints Procedure

049/PL/26 Correspondence.

050/PL/26 Exclusion of the Press & Public

051/PL/26 Outstanding Enforcements See Appendix 4.

052/PL/26 NOTED Next meeting date: 21 September 2026

APPENDIX 1

DELEGATED COMMENTS

APPENDIX 2

NEW PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED

PL/26/05530/FA Orchard House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4ND

PL/26/05526/TP The Nonsense House, West End Lane, Stoke Poges, Bucks SL2 4NE

PL/26/05441/HB The Old Cottage, Wexham Street, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL3 6NB

PL/26/05614/FA Home Farm Barn , School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4QA

PL/26/05546/FA The Fox & Pheasant , Gerrards Cross Road, Stoke Poges, Bucks SL2 4EZ

PL/25/6431/OA Land Adjacent To Plough Lane and Farthing Green Lane, Plough Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4JP.

PL/26/06010/TP 1 Sefton Paddock, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4PT

PL/26/06119/FA 6 Penn Meadow, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EB

AMENDED PLANS

PLANS FOR INFORMATION ONLY

TREE PRESEERVATION ORDER

NOTED APPENDIX 3

PLANNING DECISIONS

PL/26/01107/HB Flat 2 Framewood Manor, Framewood Road, Stoke Poges, SL2 4QR

PL/26/01062/VRC 8 Elderfield Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DE.

PL/25/2295/FA Westside, Keens Acre, School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4FB,

ENFORCEMENTS

NOTED APPEALS

Use of cookies