PL/25/3469/FA - 40 Woodside Avenue, Beaconsfield HP9 1JH (part 1 of 3)

We all know that our local area needs more homes, but our duty is to secure the right homes in the right places, not to just simply approve development at all costs, or any cost. This application, in my respectful view, crosses the thin line from sensible intensification into harmful erosion of a settled neighbourhood. I would ask councillors to focus on three things, the place, the people and the practicalities. Firstly, the place. This part of Woodside Avenue is identified as green suburban, with a strong landscape character, spacious plots, greenery and a rhythm along the street that residents value, and that policy expects us to protect it. Even the applicant's own material recognises the green and spacious character of the area. This proposal takes one of these generous plots and splits them into a tenum form with two substantial dwellings. Whatever the density, once it's been changed, it's been changed and it impacts the residents. Secondly, the people. Planning isn't just about drawings. It isn't really about the impact on someone's home. The neighbour at 40A faces a materially different relationship, increased two -storey depth with a close flank relationship. The report relies on a standard 45 -60 degree guidance. But you members are not here to tick a box or a guideline. You're here to judge in real life whether that outcome is overbearing or enclosing in real life. The residents' concerns are straightforward. What is presently a light relationship becomes a dominant relationship between its neighbours, with a real sense of loss, not just a technical change. Then we get on to practicalities. Now, I appreciate there are new amendments to the proposed conditions, but this requires further scrutiny. The Highway Authority rightly so does not object. It says so. But it does flag up the fact that the plot one parking and manoeuvring is very tight and, in my view, awkward to use if all spaces are occupied. It recommends changes, widening the drop curb, adjusting the hedge and more hard standing to make it work properly. That is an early warning to councillors about the day -to -day functioning of this plot. Approving a scheme, knowing it's awkward at design stage, risks avoidable on -street pressure and repeating shuffling at the frontage. Finally, members should note that the recommendation is to delegate subject to approval of a special area character mitigation scheme. If character is central, and it is in my view, members should be clear what mitigation is actually being secured rather than living it as a layer to detail. For those reasons, I would invite a committee and you councillors to refuse this application as contrary to development plan policies and character, residential amenity and highway practicality. However, if you members are not with me on refusal, then I will at the very least ask you to defer and require a revised scheme that genuinely protects the green character of the area, safeguards 40A from overbearing impact and the loss of privacy and free fixes. Thank you councillors. Thank you councillor, your time is up. Thank you very much. We now move to Mr Longworth. Associate Spitúa