Up to 18 homes at Lambscroft Nursery, Chalfont St Giles

What was proposed

The outline proposal sought demolition of existing structures and up to 18 dwellings, with access considered now and other details reserved.

“To the north and east of the site is a field and to the south is an existing row of dwellings. To the west, on the other side of Narcot Lane, is Oakland Park Golf Club. The site is within the Green Belt but there are no other constraints identified. This application seeks outline planning permission for the demolition of the existing structures and erection of up to 18 dwellings with associated infrastructure and landscaping.”

“Chalfont St Giles Parish Council, Councillor Tett, Councillor Rouse and Councillor Jackson have called the application to Committee. Description of Proposed Development 2.1 The application site is located on the eastern side of Narcot Lane within the village of Chalfont St Giles. To the north and east of the site is a field and to the south is an existing row of dwellings. To the west, on the other side of Narcot Lane, is Oakland Park Golf Club.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended granting permission because they considered the site grey belt, the location sustainable, access safe and the Golden Rules satisfied.

“In terms of the principle of development, a thorough assessment has been carried out, which concludes that the proposed development is not inappropriate development in the Green Belt. This is because it complies with all of the criteria in paragraph 155 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).”

“Although design and layout are considerations for the reserved matters stage, the illustrative layout submitted with the application demonstrates that a development of this scale could be accommodated on the site without having a significant impact on the character of the area or amenities of neighbouring properties. In consultation with specialists, no objections are raised by officers with regard to ecology, trees, waste or environmental health.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Ward members and a parish council representative spoke, alongside an objector and a representative of the applicant.

What members decided

Members considered the location unsustainable and found that necessary infrastructure improvements and publicly accessible green space requirements were not met.

“Members voted in favour of the motion to refuse the application, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation on the grounds that:”

“development was not within a sustainable location and therefore there was conflict with paragraph 155c of the NPPF which refers, in turn, to paragraph 115 and was therefore inappropriate development in the Green Belt. • it did not meet the Golden Rules within paragraph 156 of the NPPF, specifically sub-paragraph b) in terms of necessary improvements to the local infrastructure, and sub-paragraph c) with regards to the green space provision.”

Minutes

The vote

Members voted in favour of refusing the application, contrary to the officer recommendation.

“Resolved: that the application be refused, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, for the reasons as stated above.”

Minutes