Stoke Poges Parish Council

Planning Committee - Meeting Minutes

Monday 20th July 2026

Table Of Contents

Introduction

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING ON MONDAY 20 JULY 2026 AT 7.30PM IN THE LIONEL RIGBY ROOM AT THE VILLAGE CENTRE, ROGERS LANE, STOKE POGES, SL2 4LP.

Present: Cllr Carter (Chair), Cllr Bassi, Cllr Crocker, Cllr Finan, Mr Harris and Cllr Wilson.

In Attendance: Mrs J Simmonds (Clerk)

Agenda Items

027/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.

None

028/PL/26 Apologies for Absence and Acceptance.

None

029/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

030/PL/26 Minutes

RESOLVED to Approve the Minutes of the Planning Meeting held on 15 June 2026 which were signed by the Chair.

031/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.

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

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

033/PL/26 Councillors/Members Update

Cllr Bassi joined the Local Plan webinar last week and will circulate notes.

Park Road residents have contacted the Chair about ongoing issues with Stoke Park and also a Church Lane residents who also has issues.

Cllr’s Carter and Crocker met with the agent and developer for Pinewood Nurseries and an update was given.

034/PL/26 Buckinghamshire Council Complaints Procedure

Copy of the report from Cllr Bassi to be circulated to all, to report back and to Decide! Bring back to August meeting.

035/PC/26 Purcell/Stoke Park/Stoke Green Scoping

Proposal fee letter circulated. Cllr Bassi proposed to have the work carried out at £1800.00 to be taken from CIL money or planning budget, this was seconded by Cllr Wilson, RESOLVED to agree all in favour. To be ratified at next Parish Council meeting.

036/PC/26 – Slough Local Plan 2026-2046

NOTED Have your say Regulation 19. Circulated.

037/PL/26 Correspondence.

None.

038/PL/26 Exclusion of the Press & Public

Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 RESOLVEDto 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.

039/PL/26 NOTED Outstanding Enforcements See Appendix 4.

NOTED Letter circulated regarding an enforcement item.

040/PL/26 NOTED Next meeting date: 17 August 2026

Meeting ended at 9.18pm.

Signed/Chair Dated

APPENDIX 1

DELEGATED COMMENTS

APPENDIX 2

NEW PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED

PL/26/03913/FA Woodside, Duffield Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4AH

Construction of porch, ground and first floor rear extension, internal alterations including removal of chimney, loft conversion and alteration of roof to include rooflights to the front, rear and side planes.

Parish Comments: No Comment

PL/26/04692/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Installation of new plant and associated acoustic screen.

Parish Comments: Object:

The proposed development is located within one of the country's most important historic landscapes, comprising the Grade II Listed Stoke Park House, the Grade I Registered Park and Garden, and the Stoke Poges Conservation Area. Given the exceptional heritage significance of the site, together with its Green Belt designation, the Parish Council considers that the application fails to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal would preserve these nationally important heritage assets, protect biodiversity or avoid unacceptable impacts arising from noise, visual intrusion and cumulative development.

The Local Planning Authority has statutory duties under Sections 66(1) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to give special regard to preserving the setting of listed buildings and special attention to preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of Conservation Areas. These duties are reinforced by Core Policy 8 of the South Bucks Core Strategy and Chapter 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which requires great weight to be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets.

The Parish Council considers that the submitted Design and Access Statement does not adequately address these statutory requirements. It repeatedly concludes that there will be no heritage harm, yet provides little objective evidence to support that conclusion.

The Parish Council is also concerned that the supporting documents are internally inconsistent regarding the purpose of the proposed development. The Design and Access Statement repeatedly states that the plant is essential to support the operation of the golf club, hotel, spa and leisure facilities. In contrast, the accompanying Cass Allen acoustic report is almost entirely concerned with the operation of the cinema, including cinema sound levels of up to 120 dB, cinema partitions, projector rooms, lobby spaces and cinema sound insulation. These documents therefore describe different purposes for the proposed plant. This inconsistency makes it difficult for the Local Planning Authority to properly assess the planning balance, the claimed public benefits or whether the proposal is genuinely ancillary to the lawful operation of the existing buildings or is, in reality, enabling infrastructure required to facilitate the separate retrospective cinema development.

Furthermore, the applicant repeatedly describes the proposal as "essential" to the long-term operation and viability of Stoke Park. However, no operational or financial evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that the estate, hotel, golf club or spa cannot continue to operate without this development. In the absence of such evidence, the Parish Council considers that this claimed public benefit should be afforded limited weight in the planning balance.

The Parish Council also considers that the submitted acoustic evidence is inadequate. Whilst the Planning Statement refers to a Noise Impact Assessment, the principal document prepared by Cass Allen is primarily an acoustic design report rather than a comprehensive environmental noise assessment. It focuses on the theoretical performance of the cinema's internal acoustic construction and repeatedly acknowledges significant limitations, including that the required acoustic performance may not be achievable due to the lightweight construction and structural constraints of the building, that low frequency sound insulation is particularly difficult to achieve, and that even if the proposed design criteria are met, cinema noise will not be inaudible outside the cinema. These admissions do not provide confidence that the proposal can operate without causing harm.

The Design and Access Statement also states that the assessment has considered only the adjacent courtyard as the nearest noise sensitive receptor. This is an unreasonably narrow assessment for development within a Grade I Registered Park and Garden and Conservation Area. No meaningful assessment has been undertaken of the likely effects on the wider historic parkland, the tranquillity of the estate, neighbouring properties, visitors to Stoke Park, or users of the nearby public padel courts and sporting facilities. The repeated assertion that plant noise will remain below existing background noise levels is similarly unsupported by evidence demonstrating how background noise has been assessed across different operating periods, particularly during evening and night-time conditions when ambient noise levels are significantly lower. Nor has sufficient evidence been provided to demonstrate that cumulative noise from the cinema and the external plant has been fully assessed.

The Parish Council is further concerned that the proposal is being considered in isolation. The application forms part of a series of recent planning proposals relating to the temporary Air Dome, cinema and associated infrastructure. The proposed plant and acoustic screen are not insignificant ancillary works but enabling infrastructure required to facilitate those developments. Considered together, these proposals represent a continuing intensification of development within the Green Belt and within a nationally important heritage landscape. No comprehensive masterplan or cumulative assessment has been submitted demonstrating the overall effect on openness, heritage significance, landscape character, tranquillity or biodiversity.

The application is also deficient in ecological information. No bat survey has been submitted despite the presence of mature trees, historic buildings and extensive parkland that are well known to provide suitable habitat for bats and other protected species. The installation of rooftop plant, associated infrastructure and any additional lighting has the potential to affect bat roosts and commuting routes. Without appropriate ecological surveys the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that protected species would not be harmed or properly discharge its statutory duties.

Finally, the Parish Council notes that the Planning Statement refers only to Policy SP6 (Design Code) of the adopted Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan. This does not reflect the full statutory Development Plan. The proposal should also be assessed against the wider objectives and policies of the Neighbourhood Plan relating to heritage, landscape character, biodiversity, environmental quality and the protection of the parish's distinctive character. The Parish Council considers that these policies are directly relevant to a proposal of this nature and have not been properly addressed by the applicant.

For all of these reasons, Stoke Poges Parish Council considers that the applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework, the South Bucks Development Plan and the adopted Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan. The application lacks sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal would preserve designated heritage assets, protect biodiversity or avoid unacceptable environmental impacts. Accordingly, Stoke Poges Parish Council respectfully requests that this application is refused.

PL/26/04702/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Erection of an external fixed access ladder to provide maintenance access.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

PL/26/04729/FA Polish Club, Church Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4NZ

Construction of six padel courts with canopy, refurbishment of existing changing room facilities, and associated external works.

Parish Comments: Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to Planning Application PL/26/04729/FA.

Whilst the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) recognises that outdoor sports and recreation facilities may, in principle, constitute appropriate development within the Green Belt, this is only where such development preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it (NPPF paragraph 154(b)). The Parish Council considers that this proposal fails to satisfy that test.

The proposed development would introduce a significant amount of built infrastructure, including enclosed padel courts, perimeter fencing, hard surfacing, floodlighting and associated operational activity. Taken together, these elements would materially reduce the openness of the Green Belt and introduce an urbanising form of development into what is currently an open and rural setting.

The proposal therefore conflicts with the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy set out in NPPF paragraph 142, which states: The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

The Parish Council also considers that the proposal conflicts with one of the five purposes of the Green Belt identified in NPPF paragraph 143, namely: to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

The cumulative impact of the courts, fencing, lighting, hardstanding, parking and associated activity would represent a clear encroachment into the countryside and erode the rural character of the site.

In accordance with NPPF paragraph 153, substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt. The Parish Council considers that the proposal would result in harm to the openness of the Green Belt and that this harm has not been outweighed by any clear planning justification.

Furthermore, the applicant has not demonstrated that there is an unmet need for additional padel courts at this location. Existing padel facilities are already available within approximately one mile of the site, providing convenient access for local residents. In the absence of evidence that existing provision is inadequate or operating at capacity, there is no compelling justification for introducing further sporting infrastructure into protected Green Belt land. The existence of nearby facilities also suggests that alternative provision is already available without the need for additional Green Belt development.

The proposal also has the potential to generate increased traffic, parking demand, noise and light pollution, particularly during evenings and weekends. Padel is recognised as a relatively noisy sport due to the repeated impact of balls against glass walls and the close proximity of players. The proposed floodlighting would further urbanise the site, extending activity into the evening and diminishing the tranquillity of the surrounding countryside.

The Parish Council is also concerned that the proposal conflicts with local planning policy, including Core Policy 9 and Saved Policy GB1, which seek to protect the openness and character of the Green Belt. It is also considered to be contrary to the adopted Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, particularly Policy SP9 (Green Infrastructure), which seeks to protect the parish's green infrastructure and landscape character, and Policy SP12 (Dark Skies), which seeks to minimise unnecessary light pollution and preserve the rural night-time environment.

The Parish Council notes that Buckinghamshire Council has recently taken a robust approach to proposals for racquet sports facilities within the Green Belt where they would introduce an incongruous and urban form of development, resulting in harm to openness and rural character. The same planning principles apply in this case.

For the reasons set out above, Stoke Poges Parish Council considers that the proposal fails to preserve the openness of the Green Belt, conflicts with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt, would result in unacceptable urbanisation of the countryside and has not been supported by sufficient evidence of need. Accordingly, the Parish Council respectfully requests that Buckinghamshire Council refuses planning permission.

PL/26/05074/FA 10 Rogers Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LD

Demolition of existing shed and construction of new single storey outbuilding in rear garden for gym and storage use.

Parish Comments: No Comment

PL/26/04701/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Erection of a single storey structure.

Parish Comments: Stoke Poges Parish Council wishes to formally object to this planning application for the erection of a new single storey wellness building adjacent to the Leisure Hall at Stoke Park.

The Parish Council recognises the importance of Stoke Park as a long established leisure and hospitality business and understands the need for investment to secure its future. However, this application must be considered in the context of the wider estate and the increasing number of new structures and developments that have been introduced in recent years.

Cumulative Impact and Lack of an Estate Masterplan:

The applicant presents this proposal as a modest, subordinate addition to the existing Leisure Hall. However, the Parish Council is concerned that this is another example of incremental development within a highly sensitive historic landscape.

Historic England has previously raised concerns regarding the cumulative impact of development at Stoke Park, stating that while individual proposals may result in “less than substantial harm” at the lowest end of the scale, when considered together with other small structures that have appeared across the grounds, they result in:

"an accretion of clutter in this very significant landscape."

Historic England further expressed concern that cumulatively these developments increase the level of harm to the significance of the landscape.

The Parish Council considers that this application must not be assessed in isolation. Recent developments and proposals, including the Air Dome, plant equipment and acoustic screening, padel courts and now this wellness facility, demonstrate a continuing pattern of additional built form across the estate.

There remains no comprehensive, publicly available masterplan setting out the long term vision for Stoke Park and demonstrating how these individual proposals collectively affect the heritage assets, Green Belt openness and landscape character.

The absence of such a masterplan makes it difficult for the Local Planning Authority, statutory consultees and the public to properly understand and assess the cumulative impact of ongoing development.

Heritage Impact:

The proposed development is located within the Stoke Park Conservation Area, the Grade II Registered Park and Garden*, and within the setting of the Grade I Listed Stoke Park Mansion House.

These are highly significant designated heritage assets, and great weight should be given to their conservation.

The applicant acknowledges that the proposal may result in less than substantial harm to the significance of designated heritage assets. Under paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), such harm must be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

The Parish Council does not consider that the provision of additional private wellness facilities, including cryotherapy and oxygen therapy facilities, represents a public benefit sufficient to outweigh the identified heritage harm. These facilities primarily support the commercial operation of a private golf club, hotel and members’ facility rather than providing meaningful benefit to the wider community.

The proposal therefore risks further erosion of the special historic character and appearance of the Stoke Park Conservation Area and Registered Park and Garden.

The application is considered contrary to:

  • NPPF Paragraph 215 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment;
  • South Bucks Core Policy 8 – Built and Historic Environment;
  • South Bucks Local Plan Policy C1 – Development within Conservation Areas;
  • Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP6 – Design Code (Parish Wide).

Green Belt Considerations:

The site is also located within the Metropolitan Green Belt, where national policy requires substantial weight to be given to any harm arising from inappropriate development.

The applicant relies upon NPPF paragraph 154(g), arguing that the proposal represents limited redevelopment of previously developed land. However, the Parish Council considers that the cumulative impact of repeated new buildings and structures across the estate must be taken into account.

While individually each structure may appear limited, the continued expansion of built form risks undermining the openness and rural character of the Green Belt.

The proposal therefore raises concerns in relation to:

  • NPPF Paragraph 153, which requires substantial weight to be given to Green Belt harm;
  • NPPF Paragraph 154, relating to inappropriate development in the Green Belt;
  • South Bucks Local Plan Policy GB1 – Green Belt Boundaries and Control over Development;
  • South Bucks Core Policy 9 – Natural Environment.

Design and Character:

Although the applicant describes the building as a low rise, carefully designed extension to the Leisure Hall, the Parish Council considers that the introduction of another permanent structure within this historic landscape contributes to the gradual urbanisation and fragmentation of the estate.

The Stoke Park landscape derives much of its significance from its openness, designed views, historic setting and relationship between buildings and landscape. These qualities must not be diminished through a series of unrelated developments considered individually.

Conclusion

Stoke Poges Parish Council respectfully requests that Buckinghamshire Council refuses this application unless the applicant first provides a comprehensive masterplan for the future of the Stoke Park estate.

Such a masterplan should demonstrate how all existing and proposed developments can be accommodated without causing cumulative harm to:

  • the Stoke Park Conservation Area;
  • the Grade II* Registered Park and Garden;
  • the setting of the Grade I Listed Mansion House;
  • the openness of the Green Belt; and
  • the special landscape character of Stoke Park.

The Parish Council considers that approving further piecemeal development without an overarching strategy risks causing irreversible cumulative harm to one of the most important historic landscapes within Buckinghamshire.

PL/26/05134/TP 101 Rogers Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LP

T1 Corsican Pine - Fell due to sensitive location and poor rooting environment, coupled with early signs of physiology dysfunction, T2 Yew - Fell as heavily in decline.

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

PL/26/05098/FA Hope Cottage,Templewood Lane, Stoke Poges, Bucks SL2 4AN

Part first floor part two storey side extension and demolition of single storey rear projection.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

PL/26/04690/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Erection of an equipment storage facility.

Parish Comments: Parish Council Objection

Whilst the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) recognises that outdoor sports and recreation facilities may, in principle, constitute appropriate development within the Green Belt, this is only where such development preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it (NPPF paragraph 154(b)). The Parish Council considers that this proposal fails to satisfy that test.

The proposal therefore conflicts with the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy set out in NPPF paragraph 142, which states: The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

The Parish Council also considers that the proposal conflicts with one of the five purposes of the Green Belt identified in NPPF paragraph 143, namely: to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

The cumulative impact various additional buildings would represent a clear encroachment into the countryside and erode the rural character of the site.

In accordance with NPPF paragraph 153, substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt. The Parish Council considers that the proposal would result in harm to the openness of the Green Belt and that this harm has not been outweighed by any clear planning justification.

The Parish Council is also concerned that the proposal conflicts with local planning policy, including Core Policy 9 and Saved Policy GB1, which seek to protect the openness and character of the Green Belt. It is also considered to be contrary to the adopted Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, particularly Policy SP9 (Green Infrastructure), which seeks to protect the parish's green infrastructure and landscape character, and Policy SP12 (Dark Skies), which seeks to minimise unnecessary light pollution and preserve the rural night-time environment.

Cumulative Impact and Lack of an Estate Masterplan:

The applicant presents this proposal as a modest, subordinate addition to the existing Leisure Hall. However, the Parish Council is concerned that this is another example of incremental development within a highly sensitive historic landscape.

Historic England has previously raised concerns regarding the cumulative impact of development at Stoke Park, stating that while individual proposals may result in “less than substantial harm” at the lowest end of the scale, when considered together with other small structures that have appeared across the grounds, they result in:

"an accretion of clutter in this very significant landscape."

Historic England further expressed concern that cumulatively these developments increase the level of harm to the significance of the landscape.

The Parish Council considers that this application must not be assessed in isolation. Recent developments and proposals, including the Air Dome, plant equipment and acoustic screening, padel courts and now this wellness facility, demonstrate a continuing pattern of additional built form across the estate.

There remains no comprehensive, publicly available masterplan setting out the long term vision for Stoke Park and demonstrating how these individual proposals collectively affect the heritage assets, Green Belt openness and landscape character.

The absence of such a masterplan makes it difficult for the Local Planning Authority, statutory consultees and the public to properly understand and assess the cumulative impact of ongoing development.

Heritage Impact:

The proposed development is located within the Stoke Park Conservation Area, the Grade II Registered Park and Garden*, and within the setting of the Grade I Listed Stoke Park Mansion House.

These are highly significant designated heritage assets, and great weight should be given to their conservation.

The applicant acknowledges that the proposal may result in less than substantial harm to the significance of designated heritage assets. Under paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), such harm must be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

  • NPPF Paragraph 215 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment;
  • South Bucks Core Policy 8 – Built and Historic Environment;
  • South Bucks Local Plan Policy C1 – Development within Conservation Areas;
  • Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP6 – Design Code (Parish Wide).

Green Belt Considerations:

The site is also located within the Metropolitan Green Belt, where national policy requires substantial weight to be given to any harm arising from inappropriate development.

The applicant relies upon NPPF paragraph 154(g), arguing that the proposal represents limited redevelopment of previously developed land. However, the Parish Council considers that the cumulative impact of repeated new buildings and structures across the estate must be taken into account.

While individually each structure may appear limited, the continued expansion of built form risks undermining the openness and rural character of the Green Belt.

The proposal therefore raises concerns in relation to:

  • NPPF Paragraph 153, which requires substantial weight to be given to Green Belt harm;
  • NPPF Paragraph 154, relating to inappropriate development in the Green Belt;
  • South Bucks Local Plan Policy GB1 – Green Belt Boundaries and Control over Development;
  • South Bucks Core Policy 9 – Natural Environment.

For the reasons set out above, Stoke Poges Parish Council considers that the proposal fails to preserve the openness of the Green Belt, conflicts with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt, would result in unacceptable urbanisation of the countryside and has not been supported by sufficient evidence of need. Accordingly, the Parish Council respectfully requests that Buckinghamshire Council refuses planning permission

PL/26/04689/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire.

Erection of an Air Dome and installation of plant equipment for a temporary period of five years (retrospective).

Parish Comments: Objection.

Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this application on the grounds that the proposal would result in harm to the setting and significance of Stoke Park House, a Grade I Listed Building of exceptional historic importance, and its associated historic designed landscape.

Stoke Park is one of Buckinghamshire’s most significant heritage assets. Its importance derives not only from the architecture of the mansion itself but also from its relationship with the surrounding parkland, views, landscape features and historic setting. The landscape was laid out by Lancelot “Capability” Brown in the 18th century, with later involvement by Nathaniel Richmond and Humphry Repton, making the wider parkland an important example of historic landscape design.

The introduction of a large air dome, together with associated plant equipment, represents an inappropriate and visually intrusive modern structure within this highly sensitive historic environment.

Harm to the Setting of the Grade I Listed Building

The Parish Council considers that the scale, appearance and siting of the air dome fails to preserve the setting and significance of Stoke Park House. Although described as temporary, a five-year period represents a significant length of time during which this modern structure would remain within the historic landscape.

The proposal conflicts with the statutory duty under Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which requires decision makers to have special regard to preserving listed buildings and their settings.

The proposal also fails to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Section 16 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment, which requires great weight to be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets. Any harm must be clearly justified and outweighed by public benefits.

The applicant has not demonstrated that the public benefits arising from this development outweigh the harm caused to a nationally significant heritage asset.

Retrospective Application and Risk of Permanent Change

The Parish Council is concerned that this application is retrospective. The fact that the structure has already been installed should not reduce the level of scrutiny applied to its impact. Temporary permissions within sensitive heritage settings can create a precedent and result in pressure for continued retention or future permanent development. A five-year approval risks allowing a significant modern intervention to become an established feature within Stoke Park’s historic landscape.

Availability of Alternative Facilities

The Parish Council notes that there are already publicly available padel court facilities within the local area, including facilities within a short distance of Stoke Park. With a further 2 applications for courts pending.

The applicant has not demonstrated that there is an identified local need that requires additional provision within the setting of a Grade I Listed Building, nor has it demonstrated why alternative locations that would have a lesser impact on heritage assets have not been considered.

The availability of alternative facilities weakens the justification for introducing further harm into this sensitive location.

Lack of a Comprehensive Masterplan

The Parish Council is concerned that this application represents piecemeal development rather than part of a comprehensive and properly considered plan for the future use and management of Stoke Park.

Given the exceptional heritage significance of Stoke Park House and its landscape, any further leisure, sporting or commercial development should only be considered within the context of a publicly available masterplan addressing:

  • the long term conservation and management of the historic landscape;
  • the cumulative impact of new structures and infrastructure;
  • impacts on views, vistas and the relationship between the mansion and parkland;
  • traffic, parking, servicing, lighting and noise impacts;
  • the balance between commercial use and heritage conservation.

Without such a masterplan, there is a risk of incremental development causing cumulative harm to the character and significance of this nationally important heritage asset.

Impact of Plant Equipment and Associated Infrastructure

The application should also fully consider the impact of associated plant equipment, including:

  • visual intrusion;
  • noise impacts;
  • lighting;
  • servicing requirements;
  • the cumulative effect of additional infrastructure within the parkland.

These elements further contribute to the urbanisation of a historic landscape that should remain predominantly open and parkland in character.

Conclusion

Stoke Poges Parish Council recognises the recreational benefits of sporting facilities but considers that such benefits do not justify harm to the setting of a Grade I Listed Building and its historic designed landscape.

The proposal introduces an inappropriate modern structure into one of Buckinghamshire’s most important historic landscapes. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the development is necessary in this location, that alternative sites have been properly considered, or that the heritage harm is outweighed by public benefit.

Should the Local Planning Authority be minded to approve the application, the Parish Council considers that this should not occur without a comprehensive heritage assessment and an agreed masterplan for Stoke Park to prevent further piecemeal development and cumulative harm.

PL/26/05141/FA Stoke Park Golf Club, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Bucks, SL2 4PG

Installation of supply and extractor fan plant and associated acoustic screen.

Parish Comments: Objection.

Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this application due to concerns regarding the impact of further incremental development within the highly sensitive setting of Stoke Park Conservation Area, a Grade I listed park and garden, and the setting of the Grade I listed Stoke Park Mansion House.

The Parish Council recognises the importance of supporting the long-term viability of Stoke Park as a hotel, golf club and leisure facility. However, this application must be considered within the wider context of the estate and the cumulative impact of continued piecemeal development.

The proposed rooftop supply and extraction plant, together with a 2.4 metre acoustic enclosure, represents another permanent addition within a nationally significant historic landscape. Whilst the applicant considers the proposal to be a modest operational requirement, the Parish Council is concerned that individual developments are being considered in isolation, without a clear comprehensive master plan for the future of the Stoke Park estate.

The absence of such a master plan makes it difficult to assess the combined impact of multiple new structures, plant installations and operational changes on:

  • the Grade I registered park and garden;
  • the Stoke Park Conservation Area;
  • the setting of the listed Mansion House;
  • Green Belt openness; and
  • the historic landscape character of the estate.

The NPPF requires development to be well designed and sympathetic to its surroundings (Paragraph 135) and requires the significance of heritage assets and their settings to be properly assessed (Paragraph 198). Where development causes less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset, that harm must be weighed against public benefits (Paragraph 215). The Parish Council considers that the cumulative impact of further infrastructure within Stoke Park has not been adequately addressed.

Although plant equipment is functional infrastructure, it remains development and must satisfy the same requirements for appropriate design, visual impact, heritage protection and amenity. The introduction of additional rooftop plant, ducting and screening risks contributing to an accumulation of visual clutter within a highly sensitive historic landscape.

The site is also located within the Green Belt. The NPPF requires substantial weight to be given to any harm to the Green Belt (Paragraph 153). The Parish Council considers that the continued addition of external structures and screening contributes to a gradual erosion of openness and landscape character.

Concerns also remain regarding potential impacts from noise, vibration and odour associated with commercial kitchen extraction equipment. Should permission be granted, robust conditions would be required to control operating hours, noise levels, maintenance and odour management.

The Parish Council therefore considers that, while the operational needs of Stoke Park are acknowledged, further individual developments should not be approved without a clear estate wide strategy demonstrating how the historic, landscape and environmental significance of Stoke Park will be protected.

PL/26/04256/FA Luttrells, Stoke Wood, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4BA

Erection of a two-storey side extension including internal alterations and addition of two bay windows on the principal elevation. Demolition of previous double garage extension and reconstruction of original single garage.

Parish Comments: We are concerned about pending and previous applications which will in total along with this application take them over the Green Belt 50% rules.

PL/26/02007/FA Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire

Installation of lighting columns (Retrospective).

Parish Comments: Objection.

Stoke Poges Parish Council objects to this retrospective application for the installation of lighting columns at Stoke Park House.

The application site lies within the Stoke Park Conservation Area and within the setting of the Grade I Listed Stoke Park House, a heritage asset of exceptional national importance set within a historic designed landscape. The significance of Stoke Park derives not only from the Mansion itself but also from its wider landscape setting, openness, historic views, tranquillity and the relationship between the buildings and surrounding parkland.

The Parish Council considers that the introduction of lighting columns represents an inappropriate urbanising feature within this highly sensitive historic landscape. The elevated position of Stoke Park, together with its proximity to the heavily urbanised areas of Slough and surrounding settlements, makes this remaining area of open parkland particularly important as a dark sky corridor, ecological resource and rural landscape buffer. The remaining areas of darkness within this increasingly urbanised environment are of significant value for wildlife and the character of the landscape.

Harm to Heritage Assets

The proposal fails to demonstrate that the lighting columns preserve the special architectural and historic interest of Stoke Park House or preserve the character and appearance of the Stoke Park Conservation Area.

The setting of a heritage asset includes more than the immediate surroundings of a building. It includes views, landscape character, tranquillity and the way in which the historic asset is experienced. Artificial lighting changes the night-time character of the historic landscape and introduces a modern infrastructure element into a designed parkland setting.

The application therefore conflicts with:

  • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Section 66(1) – requiring special regard to be given to preserving the setting of Listed Buildings.
  • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Section 72(1) – requiring special attention to preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of Conservation Areas.
  • NPPF Paragraph 212 – requiring great weight to be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets.
  • NPPF Paragraph 213 – requiring clear and convincing justification for any harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset.
  • NPPF Paragraph 215 – requiring any harm to be weighed against public benefits.

The applicant has not demonstrated that the lighting columns are essential, that alternative solutions have been considered, or that the heritage impact has been adequately assessed.

Conflict with Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan – Dark Skies

The proposal is contrary to the objectives of the Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan, particularly Policy SP12 – Dark Skies, which seeks to protect the rural character of the parish and minimise unnecessary artificial lighting.

The Parish Council considers that the application fails to demonstrate appropriate control of:

  • light spill;
  • glare;
  • sky glow;
  • lighting intensity;
  • hours of operation;
  • impact on the surrounding landscape.

Stoke Park forms an important area of relative darkness between Stoke Poges and the urban edge of Slough. Further artificial lighting risks eroding this remaining dark corridor and changing the rural and historic character of the area.

Conflict with National Planning Policy Framework – Light Pollution and Landscape Character

The proposal conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework, including:

  • NPPF Paragraph 135 – requiring development to be sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding landscape setting.
  • NPPF Paragraph 187 – requiring protection of valued landscapes and recognition of the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.
  • NPPF Paragraph 187(d) – requiring development to contribute to and enhance the natural environment.
  • NPPF Paragraph 198 – requiring planning decisions to ensure development is appropriate for its location, taking account of impacts including pollution and light pollution.

The application provides no convincing evidence that the lighting has been designed in accordance with recognised principles for reducing obtrusive light.

The Institute of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note 01 – The Reduction of Obtrusive Light highlights the importance of controlling sky glow, glare and light trespass, particularly in sensitive rural and landscape locations. The sensitive historic setting of Stoke Park requires the highest level of care to prevent unnecessary illumination.

Impact on Biodiversity and Wildlife

The Parish Council is concerned that no wildlife surveys or ecological assessments have been submitted with this retrospective application.

Artificial lighting is known to affect nocturnal wildlife, including:

  • bats;
  • insects;
  • birds;
  • other species dependent upon natural darkness.

The Stoke Park landscape contains mature trees, parkland and ecological features that are likely to support wildlife movement. The site’s elevated location and proximity to extensive urban development increases the importance of maintaining dark ecological corridors.

Guidance from organisations including the Bat Conservation Trust recognises that artificial lighting can disrupt bat commuting routes, reduce feeding opportunities and create barriers to movement.

The absence of ecological assessment means that the Local Planning Authority cannot properly determine whether harm has occurred or whether mitigation is required.

The proposal therefore conflicts with:

  • NPPF Paragraph 187(d) – protection and enhancement of biodiversity.
  • NPPF Paragraph 193 – requiring biodiversity impacts to be identified, avoided, mitigated and compensated where necessary.
  • The objectives of the Environment Act 2021 to conserve and enhance biodiversity.

Retrospective Nature of the Application

The Parish Council objects to the retrospective nature of this application.

By installing the lighting columns before seeking permission, the applicant has prevented proper consideration of:

  • alternative locations;
  • alternative lighting solutions;
  • reduced lighting levels;
  • ecological mitigation;
  • heritage impacts.

Retrospective applications should not become a substitute for proper forward planning, particularly within a nationally significant heritage landscape.

Lack of Comprehensive Masterplan and Cumulative Impact

The Parish Council remains concerned that there is no comprehensive masterplan or strategic vision for the future development and management of Stoke Park.

A series of individual applications for lighting, structures, plant, recreational facilities and other interventions may appear limited when considered separately. However, when considered cumulatively, these incremental changes are resulting in an accumulation of urbanising features within a nationally important historic landscape.

The Local Planning Authority should consider the combined impact of these developments rather than assessing each application in isolation.

This approach is supported by:

  • NPPF Paragraph 8 – achieving sustainable development by protecting and enhancing the environment.
  • NPPF Paragraph 135 – ensuring development responds positively to local character.
  • NPPF Paragraphs 212–215 – conserving heritage assets for future generations.

Conclusion

Stoke Poges Parish Council considers that the installation of lighting columns represents unacceptable harm to the character, appearance and significance of Stoke Park.

The proposal:

  • harms the setting of a Grade I Listed Building;
  • fails to preserve the Stoke Park Conservation Area;
  • conflicts with Stoke Poges Neighbourhood Plan Policy SP12 – Dark Skies;
  • increases artificial light pollution in an elevated and visually sensitive location;
  • threatens an important dark ecological corridor close to the urban edge of Slough;
  • has been submitted retrospectively without proper prior assessment;
  • contributes to the cumulative urbanisation of a nationally important historic landscape.

For these reasons, Stoke Poges Parish Council respectfully requests that planning permission is refused.

AMENDED PLANS

PLANS FOR INFORMATION ONLY

TREE PRESEERVATION ORDER

NOTED APPENDIX 3

PLANNING DECISIONS

PL/26/03185/FA 5 Ash Grove, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4AG

Front porch infill and garage conversion into habitable room.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits.

PL/26/03463/TP Sandiway, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4PA

T1 - T4, All Ash trees -To be felled. All have ash dieback disease.

Parish Comments: - No Comment Subject to the Tree Officers report

Consent Refused.

PL/26/03990/KA The Old Cottage, Hollybush Hill, Stoke Poges, Bucks, SL2 4QN

T1) Thuja- Large - Fell to ground level - Reason for removal: Tree has outgrown the walled corner of client’s garden and is inhibiting the growth and their enjoyment of the purple maple. T2) Purple Maple - Crown reduce all round by 1.5m - Remove deadwood - As part of regular maintenance and good practice.

Parish Comments: - No Comment Subject to the Tree Officers report

No TPO Required.

PL/26/01654/FA The Annexe, The Ledgers, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire

Demolish the existing roof in order to create a new first floor and accommodation in the loft space, creation of a double storey side extension and fenestration alterations.

Parish Comments: No Comment

Hereby Refuses Permission.

PL/26/02871/FA 30 Decies Way, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EF

Retrospective outbuilding.

Parish Comments: - No Comment However, we would like to point out that the area in question is surrounded by trees and shrubs contrary to what is stated in the Site and Ecology Report.

Hereby Permits.

PL/26/02169/FA 15 Clevehurst Close, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EP

Single storey rear extension, first floor front and sides extensions, alterations to roof form and external fenestration following demolition of single storey rear store.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits.

PL/26/02000/FA 27 Hazell Way, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4DD

Proposed single storey side and rear extensions incorporating store conversion.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits

PL/25/2164/FA Land Adjacent Jasmine Lodge, School Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire

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).

Parish Comments: Object.

This property on the green belt has been under Enforcement investigation since 2020.

We understand that this application is seeking to regularise breaches but believe the applicant has been endeavouring to circumnavigate the system to obtain planning permission for a dwelling that he has historically been unsuccessful in obtaining.

The application erected a cabin ancillary to the use of a piggery, we believe this was a step-by-step approach to achieving a dwelling in the green belt

Policies GB1, GB2, GB3. EP3, EP4, H9 & H12 all apply.

Due to the nature of this application, the Parish Council wish to call in this application based on the above long history that is has with Enforcement and the above objections.

Hereby Permits

PL/26/02130/FA Stenthorp, Stoke Wood, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4AU

Part garage conversion to habitable accommodation and two storey front extension, first floor side extension and part-single/part-two storey rear extension with loft conversion into habitable accommodation incorporating front, side and rear rooflights and rear dormer (amendment to planning permission ref: PL/24/3349/FA).

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits.

PL/26/02766/FA 46A Rogers Lane, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4LF

Part single storey rear extension and a detached outbuilding to rear of garden.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits

PL/26/03130/FA 18 Penn Meadow, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire, SL2 4EB

Double storey side and partial rear extension.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

Hereby Permits

PL/26/02014/FA The Normans, 4 Chapel Cottages, Chapel Lane, Stoke Poges, SL2 4QL

Proposed two-storey rear extension, first-floor front extension, porch extension, installation of front and rear rooflights, and alterations to fenestration.

Parish Comments: No Comment.

PL/26/03612/HB Stoke Park House, Park Road, Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire

Listed building application for the onsite refurbishment of lion sculptures on stone plinths to the North elevation.

Parish Comments: - No Comment

Hereby Grants Listed Building Consent.

ENFORCEMENTS

APPEALS