Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 18 October 2022 by Nichola Robinson BA (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 22 November 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/J0405/W/22/3299308 Wellonhead, The Barracks, Hillesden MK18 4DD • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr N Caldwell against the decision of Buckinghamshire Council. • The application Ref 21/00910/AOP, dated 4 March 2021, was refused by notice dated 24 March 2022. • The development proposed is outline planning for the erection of a new single storey dwelling. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Application for costs 2. An application for costs was made by the appellant against Buckinghamshire Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision. Preliminary Matters 3. The application was submitted in outline with all matters reserved for future consideration, except for access. I have considered the appeal on this basis. 4. The Council has confirmed that the third reason for refusal relating to protected species was included in error.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Based on the Council’s Statement of Case and the Council’s ecology consultation comments I have no reason to take an alternative view. This matter does not therefore form one of the main issues. Main Issues 5. The main issues are: • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area; and • whether the proposal is in a suitable location for housing, with regard to the spatial strategy of the development plan and accessibility. Reasons Character and appearance 6. Wellonhead is a dwelling located on a corner plot, the frontage of which sits at the end of a ribbon of houses known as ‘The Barracks’. The Barracks forms one of three small settlements that comprise the village of Hillesden. Dwellings to the northwest of the site are low density and in a modern vernacular. Here boundary hedgerows and the modest scale of dwellings give the area a https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J0405/W/22/3299308 distinctive village character and appearance. To the south of Wellonhead buildings are more dispersed. This, and the prominence of farmland, gives this area a distinctive rural and open character. 7. The site is elevated above the adjacent highway where a boundary fence and planting provide some screening of the site. At the time of my site visit the site appeared to be in residential use, and the Council has confirmed that the site is not the subject of any landscape designations. However, it is absent of built form, and this, along with the separation between the site and the nearest dwelling to the south contributes positively to the dispersed rural character of the area. 8. Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan 2013-2033 (2021) (VALP) Policy S3 seeks to avoid development in the open countryside where it would cause harm to the local environment. In ‘other settlements’ such as Hillesden VALP Policy D5 allows for the infilling of small gaps in developed frontages with one or two homes in keeping with the scale and spacing of nearby homes, where there would be no adverse effect on the character of the countryside or other planning interests, subject to other policies in the VALP. 9.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Access to the proposed dwelling would be taken from the highway to the south of Wellonhead. The location of the proposed dwelling would be visually separated from Wellonhead and the other dwellings in this row. Consequently, the proposed dwelling would not relate to the other dwellings in this part of The Barracks or form part of the same frontage. Its development would not therefore comprise the infilling of a small gap, thereby introducing built form in the open countryside which would extend the Barracks towards the open countryside to the south. 10. This application is in outline format and scale, layout, appearance and landscaping are reserved for future consideration. However, even if limited in scale to a single storey dwelling as set out in the description of development, the dwelling would still be discernible above the boundary treatment. It would be openly visible in views from the highway approaching the site in both directions, where the proposed dwelling would form a visual intrusion into the open countryside resulting in harm to the established rural character and appearance of the area. 11.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Therefore, the proposal would be contrary to those aims of VALP Policies S3, NE4, D5 and BE2 which, amongst other matters, require that new development in the countryside should be avoided and that proposals should respect the physical characteristics of the site and surroundings and consider the characteristics of the landscape character. I also find conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) which requires that developments are sympathetic to the surrounding built environment and landscape setting. Whether a suitable location for housing 12. VALP Policy S3 sets out that ‘other settlements’ are not sustainable locations for development. The Barracks does not contain any community facilities and the village centre of Hillesden, approximately 0.9 miles from the appeal site, offers limited community facilities. Consequently, the proposal would introduce a new dwelling into a location defined in VALP Policy S3 as not being sustainable due to poor access to facilities. Thus, future occupiers of the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J0405/W/22/3299308 dwelling are likely to travel to settlements further afield, such as Padbury and Preston Bissett1 for services necessary for day-to-day living. 13. The Framework indicates that some travel by private vehicle is likely in rural areas such as this. However, access to Hillesden is along an unlit road with no pavement or cycleway and with no apparent opportunities to use public transport. Thus, given the level of local service provision, there would be a high probability that residents of the new dwelling would drive into neighbouring towns and villages, rather than walk or cycle, as a result of these conditions. 14. Therefore, the proposal would introduce a dwelling in the open countryside in an area which is poorly served by local services contrary to the Council’s strategic objectives for the location of development. This would conflict with the objectives of VALP Policies S1, S2, and S3 which seek, amongst other matters, to ensure that development complies with the principles of sustainable development set out in the Framework, contributes to meeting the vision and strategic objectives for the area and accords with the settlement hierarchy.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision The proposal would also conflict with those aims of VALP Policy T1 which, amongst other matters, seek to encourage modal shift with greater use of more sustainable forms of transport. There would also be conflict with the core planning principles of the Framework which seeks to guide development towards sustainable solutions. Other Matters 15. The construction of one dwelling on a small site would make a small contribution towards local housing supply and there would be short-term economic benefits associated with construction of the dwelling. This weighs in favour of the scheme. However, one new home would make only a small contribution in this respect. 16. Both parties agree that a planning condition could be used to improve the site’s biodiversity value. This weighs in favour of the proposal. Additionally, I note that the Council has not raised an objection to the impact on trees, hedgerows or woodlands. 17. The Highway Authority did not object to the proposal on highway safety grounds. Nonetheless, for the reasons set out above, I have found conflict with VALP Policy T1 and the Framework with regards to access to sustainable modes of transport. 18.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision The proposal would assist in providing accommodation for a family member who, due to health reasons, would benefit from a single storey dwelling. Accordingly, the development would bring demonstrable social benefits for the appellant’s family allowing them to remain in their current location and continue making a positive contribution to the local community. These are personal circumstances to which I attribute weight in favour of the appeal. In weighing the personal circumstances in the planning balance, this must be considered against the adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, the Council’s settlement strategy and whether the appeal site is a suitable location for new housing. 19. I have had due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty contained in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, which specifies the need to eliminate unlawful 1 located approximately 1.4 miles and 2 miles from the appeal site respectively https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J0405/W/22/3299308 discrimination, harassment and victimisation, and to advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. I have also had regard to rights conveyed within the Human Rights Act. 20. In respect of the above, a refusal of planning permission is a proportionate, and necessary approach to the legitimate aim of ensuring that development accords with the Council’s development strategy and does not result in harm to the character and appearance of the area. Therefore, whilst I acknowledge the personal circumstances of the appellant’s family, I conclude that this is not a matter that outweighs the harm that would be caused by the proposed development in respect of my conclusions on the main issues. 21. Concerns regarding the manner in which the planning application was considered by the Council fall outside the scope of this decision. Conclusion 22. I have found conflict with the development plan and there are no material considerations which have been shown to have sufficient weight to warrant a decision otherwise than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Wellonhead, Hillesden, BUCKINGHAM, MK18 4DD — Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area * — Nichola Robinson INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4