The West Buckinghamshire Area Planning Committee met on Wednesday 21 October 2026, discussing a range of planning applications. Key decisions included the refusal of an application for a new dwelling at High Hedges, Cryers Hill Road, due to concerns about protected species, and the refusal of an application to extend Shrublands Day Hospital in Queens Road, High Wycombe, citing overdevelopment and negative impacts on the area's character. The committee also voted to refuse a retrospective application at 69 Marlow Road, High Wycombe, for a dwelling that had been built larger than approved, due to its overbearing impact on a neighbour's outlook.

High Hedges, Cryers Hill Road, Cryers Hill

The committee considered an outline application for a new four-bedroom detached dwelling at High Hedges, Cryers Hill Road. The application was recommended for approval, subject to the satisfactory resolution of ecology and protected species issues. Councillors expressed concerns about highway safety, particularly due to the proximity of Great Kingshill C of E Combined School, and the potential for increased traffic. Councillor David Carroll, Leader of the Council, and Councillor Stephen Broadbent, a local ward member, spoke against the application, highlighting the historical Green Belt designation of the area and the dangerous traffic conditions near the school. Despite assurances from officers regarding the grey belt designation and highway authority's lack of objection, concerns about overlooking the school and the impact on the Green Belt persisted. Ultimately, the committee voted to refuse the application, with concerns about the cumulative impact of the development on the character of the area and neighbouring amenities.

Shrublands Day Hospital, Queens Road, High Wycombe

An application to extend Shrublands Day Hospital in Queens Road, High Wycombe, to create five additional flats, bringing the total to thirteen, was discussed. The proposal was recommended for approval, with officers noting that the principle of development and the number of units had been supported by a previous planning inspector's appeal decision. However, concerns were raised by ward councillors and residents about overdevelopment, insufficient parking, and the impact on the character of the area and neighbouring amenities. Councillor Leslie Clark OBE and Sarah Jones spoke against the application, highlighting the dire parking situation on Queens Road and the potential for increased overlooking into neighbouring properties. Mark Oates, representing the applicant, argued that the scheme was a revised and acceptable proposal that would contribute to housing supply. After extensive debate, the committee voted to refuse the application, citing concerns about the scale, height, and design of the development, its overbearing nature, and its negative impact on the character of the surrounding area and the setting of the High Wycombe Town Conservation Area.

69 Marlow Road, High Wycombe

The committee considered a retrospective application to vary conditions on a previously approved dwelling at 69 Marlow Road, High Wycombe, to allow for changes to the approved plans, including retaining a larger footprint and a raised patio. The application was recommended for refusal due to its overbearing impact and loss of outlook for the neighbouring property at No. 67 Marlow Road. Councillor Leslie Clark OBE spoke in support of the applicant, citing alleged errors by council enforcement officers and the applicant's good faith reliance on their advice. Marianne Heise and Penelope Tollett, representing neighbours, argued that the development was an overbearing structure that materially harmed their outlook and amenity, and that the applicant's reports were selective. Councillors Clive Harris, Michael West, and Mark Turner spoke against the application, emphasizing the overbearing nature of the development and the loss of amenity for the neighbouring property. Despite arguments about potential council liability and the fallback position of planting trees, the committee voted to refuse the application, upholding the officer's recommendation.

The meeting concluded with the confirmation of the next meeting date and a brief discussion about member availability for site visits.