OFFICER REPORT
-
SUMMARY
1.1 The proposed
development relates to a site within the settlement boundary and is
therefore acceptable in principle.
1.2 The
reduction in the number of residential units proposed and
subsequent changes to the proposed parking area when compared to
previous applications would ensure that the development would not
adversely impact upon protected trees within the site.
1.3 The loss of
the public house is not unacceptable where it has been proven that
there are "exceptional circumstances".
1.4 The proposal
would not adversely affect the residential amenities of
neighbouring occupiers and acceptable living conditions would be
provided for future occupiers of the proposed flats. The proposal
would also not adversely impact upon the character and appearance
of the surrounding area.
1.5 No adverse
highway safety implications would result, with sufficient on-site
parking provision, cycle and bin storage. Conditions are
recommended in relation to biodiversity and energy
sustainability.
1.6 A legal
agreement is required to secure contributions for SPA mitigation
and highway requirements.
|
RECOMMENDATION
|
|
Planning permission be granted subject to the
conditions in Section 11 of this report and a section 106 agreement
relating to mitigation measures for the SPA and highways.
|
- REASON FOR
REPORTING APPLICATION TO COMMITTEE
2.1 The
application has been reported to the Planning Committee as more
than 5 objections have been received.
- PLANNING
STATUS AND SITE DESCRIPTION
|
PLANNING STATUS
|
|
Within a defined
settlement boundary
|
|
Within 5km of
the Thames Basin Heath SPA
|
|
TPOs –
Ref: 552 and 1192
|
3.1 The Royal
Hunt lies to the south of New Road and to the west of King Edwards
Road. It comprises a vacant public house which is two storeys high
and finished in white render. There is a detached single storey
outbuilding located in the north-eastern corner of the site.
3.2 Parking lies
to the front and rear of the existing buildings on site. A grassed
area lies along the southern boundary, used formerly as a beer
garden.
3.3 To the north
are existing residential dwellings and to the east lies Ascot Life
Church. There are further residential dwellings to the south on
King Edwards Road and to the west lies Drummond Court - a flatted
development facing onto New Road with a pair of semi-detached
dwellings to the rear of the site.
3.4 There are
existing trees on site, some of which are subject to Tree
Preservation Orders.
- RELEVANT SITE
HISTORY
4.1 There have
been 2 previous applications refused at the site for residential
redevelopment.
4.2 17/00672/FUL
refused March 2018 for erection of a three storey building forming
9 no. flats with associated parking following demolition of
existing buildings for the following reasons:
1.The proposed development will have an adverse impact on protected
trees which make an important contribution to the landscape
character and appearance of the area. As such, the development
would be contrary to Saved Policies EN1 and EN20 of the Bracknell
Forest Borough Local Plan, CS7 of the Core Strategy Development
Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
2.The occupants of the development would put extra pressure on the
Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area and the proposal would
not satisfactorily mitigate its impacts in this respect. In
the absence of a planning obligation to secure suitable avoidance
and mitigation measures and access management monitoring
arrangements, in terms that are satisfactory to the Local Planning
Authority, the proposal would be contrary to Policy NRM6 of the
South East Plan, Saved Policy EN3 of the Bracknell Forest Borough
Local Plan, Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy Development Plan
Document, the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance
and Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document (2012) and the
Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (February
2015).
4.3 18/00552/FUL refused December 2018 for
erection of 9 no. 1 bedroom flats with associated parking following
demolition of existing buildings for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development would have an adverse impact on
protected trees which make an important contribution to the
landscape character and appearance of the area. As such, the
development would be contrary to Saved Policies EN1 and EN20 of the
Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, CS7 of the Core Strategy
Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. The occupants of the development would put extra pressure on the
Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area and the proposal would
not satisfactorily mitigate its impacts in this respect. In the
absence of a planning obligation to secure suitable avoidance and
mitigation measures and access management monitoring arrangements
in terms that are satisfactory to the Local Planning Authority, the
proposal would be contrary to Policy NRM6 of the South East Plan,
Policy EN3 of the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, Policy CS14
of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the Thames Basin
Heaths Special Protection Area Supplementary Planning Document
(2018).
4.4 An appeal
was lodged against the refusal of the application which was
dismissed by decision letter dated 14 August 2019 on the grounds of
impact to a protected Oak Tree located in the north-western corner
of the site which the Inspector commented as being
“extremely prominent” and
making an “important contribution to the character and
appearance of the area”. The Inspector considered that the
development would change the ground conditions within the root
protection area of the protected Oak which would be likely
to compromise the long-term health of the tree.
- THE
PROPOSAL
5.1 Full
permission is sought for the erection of a 2.5 storey building
forming 8no. 1 bedroom flats with bin and cycle store, parking and
communal amenity area following demolition of the existing
buildings (used previously as a public house).
5.2 The proposed
building would be 2.5 storeys high, with a dual frontage facing
north onto New Road and east onto King Edwards Road. The building
would have an eaves height of 6m and a maximum ridge height of
9.4m. The building would have a part hipped, part half hipped roof.
6no. dormer windows are proposed in the roof slope to provide
second floor accommodation.
5.3 Vehicular
access to the proposed development would be taken from New Road,
leading to a communal parking area with 9no. parking spaces (8no.
spaces for residents and 1no. visitor parking space). A detached
building forming a bin and cycle store is proposed facing onto New
Road. A pedestrian access is proposed from King Edwards Road. Soft
landscaped areas are proposed to the north, east and south of the
building, along with a parking court.
5.4 The building
would comprise the following layout:
GROUND FLOOR:
entrance hall, staircase, 3no 1 bedroom flats;
FIRST FLOOR:
lobby, staircase, 3no. 1 bedroom flats;
SECOND FLOOR:
landing, staircase, 2no. 1 bedroom flats.
5.5 Each flat
would comprise open plan kitchen, dining room and lounge, some with
utility/store-room, and 1no. bedroom - some of which would have
dressing area/wardrobe, and separate bathroom.
5.6 The proposal
has been amended during the course of the application, with a
reduction in the number of residential units from 9 to 8, reduction
in length of the building facing onto New Road, provision of a
detached bin/cycle store and changes to the size of the parking
area so as to avoid any hard surfacing within the root protection
area of a protected Oak tree in the south-western corner of the
site.
-
REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED
Winkfield
Parish Council
6.1 Recommend
refusal of the application for the following reasons:
1. Despite conformity to BFC's parking
standards, in practical terms the lack of accessible parking or
visitor spaces will create parking on New Road and King Edwards
Road, causing dangerous and disruptive highways situations.
2. Due to its location between two closely
sited roundabouts in close proximity to bus stops, any development
of the site which causes an increase in traffic movement will be
detrimental to the safety of the highway.
3. WPC remains concerned as to the protection
of trees on the site, insufficient mitigation of which is contained
within the arboricultural report. It is noted that no comment or
report from the Tree Officer is as yet provided and WPC would wish
to see this.
4. The local area cannot sustain the impact of
construction required to carry out the proposal (which will far
exceed that required to restore the existing building), which will
cause significant disruption and loss of amenity.
5. WPC is concerned as to the impact upon
local infrastructure (sewerage, drainage, schools, doctors, etc.)
which will result from the extra residential units.
6. WPC feels that the proposal is an
overdevelopment of the site (especially given the proximity of the
buildings to the road on two sides) which is out of character with
the local area.
7. There is no commitment contained within the
proposals to provide 10% renewables, providing WPC cause for
further concern regarding sustainability.
8. WPC notes the exceptionally high level of
local support for the preservation of this local amenity, the loss
of which WPC does not wish to see.
WPC would take
this opportunity to remind Bracknell Forest of its core strategies
(particularly CS21, CS23 and CS24) and the elements of sympathetic
development to which they allude. WPC does not feel that this
proposal is supported by the Core Strategies.
Other
representations
6.2 50no.
letters of objection received which can be summarised as
follows:
- Loss of public
house should be resisted - need a community facility.
- Impact on
character of area.
- Impact on
neighbours.
- Highway safety
issues including congestion, parking, pedestrian safety issues.
-Impact on
trees
- Impact on
services such as doctors, schools, roads, etc.
- Is too small a
plot of land to accommodate 9 flats and parking
- Already
considerable housing development in North Ascot. Area is
overdeveloped
- Realistic
possibility building could be brought back into use as a pub
- Area not
meeting the social and community needs of the area
- Previous
applications for residential development have been refused on this
site
- Is a historic
building
- Profit driven
development.
- Council
has a housing land supply met with other developments
- Wish to make a
new Asset of Community Value nomination. Monies have been raised to
fund a freehold purchase of the site
- The site lies
within 5km of the Thames Basin Heath SPA. An Appropriate Assessment
is required. The development would place extra pressure
on the Thames Basin Heath SPA.
- SUMMARY OF
CONSULTATIONS RESPONSES
Highways
Officer
7.1 No objection
subject to conditions.
Tree
Officer
7.2 No objection
subject to conditions.
Biodiversity
Officer
7.3 No
objection subject to conditions.
- MAIN POLICIES
AND OTHER DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO DECISION
8.1 The key
policies and guidance applying to the site and the associated
policies are:
|
|
Development Plan
|
NPPF
|
|
General
policies
|
CS1 & CS2 of
CSDPD
|
Consistent
|
|
Design
|
CS7 of CSDPD,
Saved policy EN20 of BFBLP
|
Consistent
|
|
Residential
Amenity
|
Saved Policy
EN20 of BFBLP
|
Consistent
|
|
Parking
|
Saved policy M9
of BFBLP
|
Consistent
NPPF refers to
LA’s setting their own parking standards for residential
development, this policy is considered to be consistent.
|
|
Transport
|
CS23 of
CSDPD
|
Consistent
|
|
Trees,
biodiversity and landscaping
|
Saved policy
EN1, EN2 and EN3 of BFBLP, CS1 of CSDPD.
|
Consistent
|
|
SPA
|
SEP Saved Policy
NRM6, CS14 of CSDPD
|
Consistent
|
|
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD)
|
|
Design SPD
|
|
Parking
Standards SPD
|
|
Thames Basin
Heath Special Protection Area (SPD)
|
|
Other publications
|
|
National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and National Planning Policy
Guidance (NPPG)
|
|
CIL Charging
Schedule
|
- PLANNING
CONSIDERATIONS
9.1 The key
issues for consideration are:
i.
Principle of development
ii.
Loss of public house
iii.
Impact on residential amenity
iv.
Impact on character and appearance of surrounding area
v.
Impact on highway safety
vi.
Trees
vii.
Biodiversity
viii.
Thames Basin Heath SPA
ix.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
x.
Energy sustainability
xi.
Drainage/SuDS
i.
Principle of Development
9.2 Section
38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires
that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material
considerations indicate otherwise, which is supported by the NPPF
(paras. 2 and 12).
9.3 Core Strategy
Policies CS1 (Sustainable Development) and CS2 (Locational
Principles) are relevant and consistent with the objectives of the
NPPF. In particular, Policy CS2 permits development within defined
settlements.
9.4 The site is
located with the Defined Settlement as designated by the Bracknell
Forest Borough Policies Map (2013). As a result, the proposed
development is considered acceptable in principle, subject to no
adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring occupiers and
upon the character and appearance of the area, highway safety,
trees, etc.
ii.
Loss of public house
9.5 Para 235 of
the CSDPD refers to community functions. It states that "many
retail units are hubs of the community...Units that perform an
important community role including post offices, convenience
stores, chemists and pubs will be protected. Planning applications
involving their loss by redevelopment or change of use will not be
allowed unless exceptional circumstances have been proven and an
equivalent or better replacement facility has been secured".
9.6 Section 8 of
the NPPF refers to promoting healthy and safe communities. Para 92
states:
To provide the social, recreational and
cultural facilities and services the community needs, planning
policies and decisions should:
(a) plan positively for the provision
and use of shared spaces, community facilities (such as local
shops, meeting places, sports venues, open space, cultural
buildings, public houses and places of worship) and other local
services to enhance the sustainability of communities and
residential environments:
(c) guard against the
unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services, particularly
where this would reduce the community’s ability to meet its
day-to-day needs.
9.7 When
previous application 17/00672/FUL was under consideration, a
Marketing Report by Savills (UK) Ltd dated September 2016 and a
Viability Study by Savills (UK) Ltd dated September 2017 was
submitted at that stage. These documents have been re-submitted as
part of this current application.
9.8 As part of
considering previous application 17/00672/FUL, the Council
instructed an independent review of the marketing and viability
information that was submitted by the applicant. This review was
undertaken by Fleurets Limited, a firm of Chartered Surveyors that
deals with the sale and valuation of licensed and leisure
premises.
9.9 The review
by Fleurets remains applicable to this application and the
following comments from the review are replicated below:
9.10 The Royal
Hunt was acquired by Hawthorn Leisure from Greene King in May 2014.
At the time of purchase, the pub was tenanted by an independent
operator under a rolling tied agreement due to expire. Hawthorn
Leisure sought to secure an A1 retail use at the premises via a
Certificate of Lawfulness, LPA ref: 15/00432/LDC which was refused
by the Council in October 2015. It was subsequently dismissed at
appeal by decision letter in August 2016. Because of the failure to
secure an A1 use on the site, Hawthorn Leisure disposed of the
site.
Marketing
Report
9.11 Savills
marketed the premises from 2 September 2014 and approximately 4
months later, it was placed under offer to a purchaser that was
conditional to planning permission being secured. This was not
secured, and subsequently the offer was withdrawn. The premises
remained advertised by Savills during this period but was shown as
Under Offer. Interested parties at this time were able to still
obtain sales particulars and make offers. Following withdrawal of
the offer, the premises was re-marketed from 11 January 2016 and
sold to Patrick Ruddy Homes on 30 December 2016.
9.12 Savills
circulated sales particulars to those registered on their database
which included restaurant/public house operators. Fleurets consider
that the marketing report was not "conducive to enticing interest
from the public house sector" given it was marketed as a
'development/investment opportunity', not as a public house which
could have impacted upon securing a public house operator.
Notwithstanding this, the premises was still marketed for over 12
months, exposed to the public house sector/hospitality sector.
9.13 It was
considered that there were constraints to the premises and interest
in it as a public house:
- There
was a premises licence however it was for sale of alcohol off the
premises only, held by Southern Co-Operative Ltd;
- The
premises is located in a fairly quiet residential area, therefore
limiting daytime trade, restricting it to evenings/weekends;
- The
premises has small trade areas and no commercial kitchen,
restricting trade potential further. An extension would be required
to create a trade kitchen at the expense of parking (officer
comment: application, LPA ref: 14/01203/FUL for a ground floor
extension to the existing Public House including internal
alterations, and reconfiguration of parking area following the
demolition of single storey side element and ancillary kitchen
outbuilding was refused in January 2015 on parking grounds which
re-enforces this view).
- The
premises was in poor repair/condition. The existing small
dated kitchen wouldn't have been capable of providing even modest
food offerings. Therefore investment was required in the premises
for it to operate as a viable public house.
9.14 Managed pub
companies have site requirements to enable turnover and profit,
with desired turnover levels being £20,000/week. This would
require a prominent road location, a site of ¾ to one acre,
a built area of 7000-8000sqft and customer area of 2500-3500sqft;
none of which the Royal Hunt has.
9.15 Further, in
general, beer volumes have declined. Managed pubs have evolved
becoming more food driven. For premises unable to do this, trade
has become more difficult, particularly for wet sales led pubs
(which the former Royal Hunt PH was).
Viability
Report
9.16 Barrelage
volumes were falling considerably in the run up to the sale of the
premises. The applicant's report states it was a fall of
48.9%whereas Fleurets calculated a fall of 32.6%.
9.17 No
commercial kitchen at the premises meant it was wet sales led and
given there was no commercial kitchen, this would restrict trade
potential as only nominal food sales would be achieved and
therefore stay periods in the pub would be shorter.
9.18 The
refurbishment and reopening of the Royal Foresters (London Road,
Ascot under planning permission 17/00555/FUL) has large trading
areas and parking and is prominently positioned which would create
additional pressures on the Royal Hunt (if trading). Oakman Inns
who now operate the Royal Foresters are experienced, successful
operators who create destination venues. Prospective purchasers
would therefore be cautious and this would put strain on the
trading potential of the Royal Hunt.
9.19 Fleurets
undertook their own trade assessment for the Royal Hunt which
concluded that the premises (after all property costs, repairs,
etc) would not make a financial return (there would be a net loss)
and would therefore not be financially viable as a public
house.
9.20 In summary,
the premises is small with limited trading potential and would
require considerable investment, however it is financially
unviable. As per the test under para 235 of the CSDPD, these
factors are considered to constitute "exceptional circumstances"
and with alternative pubs in the area, including the Royal
Foresters, this would lead to strain on trading potential on the
Royal Hunt (if operational).
Asset of
community value
9.21 The
Community Right to Bid was established under the Localism Act 2011.
It allows communities and parish councils to nominate buildings or
land to the council as being of community value. A building or
other land is an Asset of Community Value if its main use has
recently been, or is currently used, to further social wellbeing
and interests of the local community, and could continue to do so
in the future.
9.22 The Royal
Hunt was listed as an Asset of Community Value (ACV) in November
2017 after being nominated by the Campaign for Real Ale - CAMRA.
However, the premises was subsequently de-listed on 19 March 2018
following an internal review. A further nomination to list the
building was made in June 2018; however, this was rejected in July
2018 for failure to satisfy criteria set out in the Localism Act
2011.
9.23 As the
premises is not listed as an ACV, this is not currently a material
planning consideration to the determination of this revised
application. Notwithstanding this, the LPA sought independent
advice on the loss of the public house as a community facility at
the time of assessing previous application 17/00672/FUL and it was
concluded that the loss of the facility was not unacceptable.
iii.
Residential amenity
188A to 196
New Road
9.24 The
northern elevation of the building would be set a minimum of 25m
from the front elevations of dwellings to the north/north-east of
the site at nos. 188A to 196 New Road. This front elevation
facing New Road would be part two storey, part two and a half
storeys high with 2no. dormer windows proposed on the northern roof
slope. There would be sufficient separation distance between the
front elevation of the proposed building and the front elevations
of nos. 188A to 196 New Road to ensure that no adverse overlooking
or loss of privacy would result. There would be a 25m separation
distance between the northern elevation of the proposed building
and existing dwellings at no. 188A to 196 with the highway as an
intervening feature between. The proposed building would therefore
not appear overbearing, nor would it result in loss of daylight or
overshadowing to the occupiers of nos. 188A to 196 New Road.
6 King
Edwards Road
9.25 The
proposed building would be set 13.4m from the boundary with no. 6
King Edwards Road with a 14.2m separation distance to the flank
wall of no. 6 at the closest point. In view of these separation
distances and the siting and layout of the building as proposed, it
would not appear unduly overbearing to the occupiers of no. 6.
There are ground and first floor windows proposed in the southern
elevation of the building facing the flank wall of no. 6 at the
closest point, including a Juliet Balcony. However, given there are
no windows in the flank wall of no. 6 at first floor level facing
the application site and there would be some 14m separation
distance between the flank wall of no. 6 and the proposed building
at the closest point, no adverse level of overlooking would result
to no. 6.
9.26 The
furthest staggered rear elevation of the building would be set 25m
from the boundary with no. 6 and the first floor windows proposed
on this section of the building would not result in undue
overlooking to the rear garden of no. 6. The side (western)
elevation of the building would comprise ground and first floor
windows with 2no. dormers and 2no. rooflights proposed on the roof
slope. These windows would be set 13.4m from the boundary with no.
6 at the closest point and given the positioning of the windows
relative to the rear garden of no. 6, would have oblique views over
the rear garden and would not result in an adverse level of
overlooking or loss of privacy.
9.27 The
proposed parking spaces would be set approximately 12m from the
boundary with no. 6 at the closest point. In view of this
separation distance, this would not result in adverse noise and
disturbance to no. 6. The vehicular movements associated with a
residential use compared to the former public house would be
significantly reduced. The area of land abutting the boundary with
no. 6 was formerly utilised as a beer garden when the public house
was operational. A communal garden is proposed along the boundary
with no. 6 which would be beneficial to the residential amenities
of no. 6 when compared to the former use of the land as a beer
garden.
Drummond
Court
9.28 The
proposed building would be set out in an L-shaped formation in the
site. There would be a 12.4m separation distance between the
proposed building and the flank wall of Drummond Court (the flatted
development at 1-7) at the closest point, increasing to a
separation distance of 19.2m. 5no. Windows (2 of which are
dormers), 2no. rooflights and a door are proposed in the side
elevation of the building which will be set 19.2m from Drummond
Court. At ground floor level, a door is proposed serving an
entrance hall and a window serving a bathroom which would be
obscure glazed; at first floor level, 2no windows are proposed - 1
serving a lobby and 1 serving a bathroom which would be obscure
glazed and at second floor level, there are 2no. dormer windows - 1
which would serve a bedroom and 1 a bathroom which would be obscure
glazed and 2no. rooflights serving a landing and hallway. Given the
positioning of these windows relative to Drummond Court, the side
to side relationship between the existing building at Drummond
Court and the proposed building, and the separation distance of
19.2m between the flank wall of the proposed building and the flank
wall of Drummond Court at the closest point, no unacceptable level
of overlooking or loss of privacy would result to the occupiers of
Drummond Court.
9.29 Due to the
siting of the proposed building and separation distances between
the proposed building and Drummond Court, there would be no adverse
loss of daylight or overbearing impact to the occupiers of Drummond
Court.
9.30 Part of the
communal parking area would be sited close to the boundary with
Drummond Court, providing 4no. parking spaces. This would not
result in undue noise and disturbance to occupiers of Drummond
Court and details of boundary treatment and landscaping will be
secured by condition to provide screening to the parking
spaces.
9.31 There is a
pair of semi-detached dwellings to the rear of the flatted
development at nos. 1-7 Drummond Court - nos. 8 and 9 Drummond
Court along with a detached double garage serving these dwellings.
The proposed building would be set some 35m from nos. 8 and 9
Drummond Court at the closest point. In view of these separation
distances, the proposed development would not result in loss of
daylight or overlooking, or appear overbearing to the occupiers of
nos. 8 and 9 Drummond Court.
9.32 The
proposed building would be set approximately 12m from the
church/church hall to the east of the site, with the highway as an
intervening feature between. The proposed flatted development would
follow similar building lines to that of the church hall. Given the
church/hall is not in residential use and the separation distances
between the buildings, no adverse impacts would result to users of
the church/hall.
Future
occupiers of proposed flats
9.33 In relation
to the residential amenities of future occupiers of the proposed
dwellings, each unit would have windows serving habitable rooms,
the provision of on-site parking and cycle storage, along with
communal amenity areas.
9.34 Previous
applications for the residential redevelopment of the site have not
included reasons for refusal on impact to residential amenities of
surrounding dwellings. As such, the proposal would not be
considered to have such an adverse effect on the residential
amenities of neighbouring properties and acceptable living
standards would be provided for future occupiers of the proposed
flats, in accordance with Saved Policy EN20 of the BFBLP and the
NPPF.
iv.
Impact on character and appearance of surrounding area
9.35 The Council
adopted the Design SPD in March 2017 which seeks to secure good
design and high quality development. The Design SPD sets out a
number of recommendations that are relevant to the proposed
development. Of particular relevance are the following
recommendations:
- The form of new buildings, including roofs, should relate well to
those found in the local context;
- Frontages should relate to the context of the area, in particular
the relationships between existing building lines, set backs,
landscaping and the continuity of the frontage;
- Buildings on corners should respond to their position and should
have two front elevations. Apartments should be placed on plots
where a good balance between built form, parking and useable
amenity space can be achieved.
9.36 The site
lies in a predominantly residential area with a mix of housing
ages, types and styles. To the north are two storey semi-detached
dwellings of traditional appearance with hipped roofs; immediately
to the west lies Drummond Court, a 2.5 storey high flatted
development comprising hipped roofs, gables and dormer windows; and
to the south on King Edwards Road are a mix of bungalows, chalet
bungalows and two storey dwellings. Therefore, whilst the area is
residential in character, there is no predominant pattern of
development or housing style in the local area.
9.37 A flatted
development is proposed on site that would be 2.5 storeys high,
containing 8no. residential units following demolition of the
existing public house and ancillary outbuilding. The existing
building is neither listed, nor locally listed. The density of the
development would be similar to the density of development on the
adjoining site at Drummond Court and would be considered an
efficient use of land, promoted by the NPPF, on a previously
developed site located in the settlement boundary, with a net gain
of 8no. 1 bed units.
9.38 Drummond
Court to the west is 2.5 storeys high and the development as
proposed would also be 2.5 storeys high with rooms in the
roofspace. The proposed development would be lower in height than
the adjoining development to the west when viewed from New Road and
would therefore relate well to surrounding built form. Further, the
staggered roofline of the building as proposed, roof form, gable
features and dormers, along with a brick and render finish, would
reduce the bulk and massing of the building when viewed in the
street scene.
9.39 There would
be some 12m separation distance between the flank wall of the
flatted development and the flank wall of Drummond Court to the
west, where the northern elevation of the building facing New Road
has been reduced in length following the removal of one of the
residential units originally proposed. the single storey bin and
cycle store would be set close to the boundary with Drummond Court.
Given the separation distances between the flank wall of the
proposed flatted development and Drummond Court, with the single
storey building forming bin/cycle store between, there would be
good visual and physical separation between the buildings, along
with opening up views into the site, particularly towards prominent
protected Oak tree located in the south-western corner of the
site.
9.40 The
proposed building facing onto New Road would project beyond the
building line of the adjoining building at Drummond Court but would
not project beyond the building line of the Church/hall opposite
the site also facing onto New Road. The building frontage
facing onto King Edwards Road would project beyond the building
line of the dwellings at nos. 6 and 8 King Edwards Road. However,
the proposed building would be sited in a similar position to that
of the church/hall opposite the site. The proposed building, along
with the bin and cycle store, parking court and communal amenity
area would not represent overdevelopment of the site, with
sufficient space for soft landscaping around the northern and
eastern elevations of the building addressing the roads, and within
the communal amenity area. the proposed layout would not be
dissimilar to that at Drummond Court.
As such, the
siting and layout of the building would be acceptable when viewed
in the context of the surrounding area.
9.41 The
proposed building would be dual frontage with the northern and
eastern elevations addressing New Road and King Edwards Road, with
the addition of projecting gables and windows overlooking both
roads, creating a well-designed, active street frontage in
accordance with the Council's Design SPD (2017).
9.42 The design
of the building would replicate that of the flatted development to
the north-west of the site at Drummond Court in relation to a
similar roof design comprising hips, gables and dormer windows and
materials comprising a mix of render and brick. Architectural
detailing would include soldier courses above windows and doors and
brick stringcourse to add design interest to the building.
9.43 A flat
roofed bin store is proposed facing onto New Road, with a cycle
store located to the rear. The bin store would project beyond the
front elevation of the proposed flatted development by
approximately 1m, however, due to its size and design, with a flat
roof, it would not appear unduly prominent in the streetscene.
There is an existing flat roofed outbuilding which is larger in
size than the bin store proposed which is sited on the corner of
New Road/King Edwards Road closer to New Road than that of the
proposed bin store. The bin store would also not project beyond the
building line of the Church to the east.
9.44 Soft
landscaping is proposed to the front of the building facing onto
both New Road and King Edwards Road, including boundary planting
which would help soften the built form on its frontages. The
proposed parking area would be sited to the side and rear of the
building so it would not appear readily visible in the street
scene. Railings are proposed to enclose the land to the front and
side of the building along with planting, which would be
acceptable, seen elsewhere in the streetscene. Full details of
landscaping and means of enclosure will be secured by planning
conditions.
9.45 Previous
applications for the residential redevelopment of the site have not
included reasons for refusal on design/impact on character of the
area. As such, the proposal would not harm the character and
appearance of the surrounding area and would be in accordance with
Saved Policy EN20 of the BFBLP, Policy CS7 of CSDPD, the Design SPD
and the NPPF.
v.
Transport
Access
9.46 Access for vehicles is
proposed within a 20mph section of New Road, which changes to 30
mph to the east, close to the junction with King Edwards Road.
Visibility splays of 2.4 x 25m (Manual for Streets 20mph) are shown
on the submitted Site Layout plan, though greater than this is
available to the right, with at least 2.4 x 43m (Manual for Streets
30mph) into the 30 mph speed limit area.
9.47 The proposed access
location should not conflict with the adjacent bus stop to the
north-west. 2m x 2m visibility splays to the back of the footway
appear to be available to either side of the car park egress and
these should be secured via planning condition.
9.48 A 4.8m wide access road
into the site is proposed, alongside a footway area around the bin
and cycle store to the north-west. There is a solid wall to the
south-eastern edge of the access road, though there are no windows
or other openings proposed within it which would conflict with the
highway operation
9.49 A separate pedestrian
access is proposed onto King Edwards Road to the
south-east.
9.50 There is currently a long
dropped kerb along the New Road frontage. The applicant will need
to enter into a S278 legal agreement with the Highway Authority to
create the new access and reinstate full-height footway in areas
where dropped-kerb is no longer needed. There may also be a
requirement to extend the double-yellow lines on the site frontage
through amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order, to reduce the
likelihood of vehicles parking in the visibility splay to the right
of the access.
Car Parking
9.51 9no. parking spaces are to
be provided within a communal car park, which would provide 8no.
residents parking spaces to comply with the Council's Parking
Standards SPD (March 2016) for 8no. one bed flats; plus one visitor
parking space. The Parking Standards SPD states that 1 visitor
space should be provided per 5 units (over 5 units) which
would be provided on site.
9.52 The proposed parking spaces
will be 2.4m by 4.8m with 6m of aisle space which complies with the
current standards and nib beyond space 6 is provided to ease
movement into and out of this end space. A transfer area to the
proposed disabled space (numbered 10) is shown, compliant with
Annex B of the Parking Standards SPD.
Cycle Parking
9.53 The proposed cycle store
can accommodate 8 cycles, as required by the Parking Standards SPD.
However, having the door on the end of the cycle store may make
access difficult. It is recommended that a sliding door is used on
the south-western elevation instead, facing the car park. This can
be secured by condition.
Refuse Collection
9.54 A bin store is proposed
fronting New Road and refuse collection would be undertaken from
New Road. The Council’s Waste and Recycling Team have
confirmed that the bin store is of sufficient size to serve the
development.
Trips
9.55 The
previous use of The Royal Hunt as a pub could have generated in the
region of 200 trips per day based on survey data from
similarly-sized pubs. The proposal for 8no. 1 bed flats would
generate significantly fewer vehicular movements when compared to
the former use of the building as a public house.
9.56 Construction
Management
The development site is in a
very sensitive location for pedestrian movements and parking
associated with Ascot Heath Infant and Junior School.
9.57 Construction deliveries
should not be undertaken during the defined Traffic Sensitive time
periods for New Road; currently defined as 0700 to 0930 hours and
1430 to 1900 hours daily. A Construction Management Plan is
recommended to be secured by condition.
9.58 Previous
applications for the residential redevelopment of the site have not
included reasons for refusal on highway grounds. Subject to the
imposition of conditions, the proposal is considered to be in
accordance with CS23 of the CSDPD, Saved Policy M9 of the BFBLP,
the Parking Standards SPD and the NPPF and would not result in
adverse highway safety implications.
vi.
Trees
9.59 There are 3no. trees on site which are
covered by Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs).
9.60 An Oak (Survey ref: T7) is protected by
confirmed Tree Preservation Order 552 (Ref T1).
A Scots Pine (Survey Ref: T5) and Sycamore (Survey
Ref: T3) are protected by confirmed Tree Preservation Orders 1192
(Ref T1 & T2).
9.61 These TPOs are significant trees which represent
a material planning constraint on this site and need to be retained
and fully safeguarded. Based on BS5837 (2012) guidance these trees
fall into the following categories:
- Survey T7 Oak– (T1~ TPO 552) and
Survey T3 Pine (T5~ TPO 1192) are A1 grade trees.
- Survey T3 Sycamore – (T2~ TPO
1192) is a grade B1 specimen.
9.62 A1 and B1
category specimens are described in the Standard
as:
Trees of high quality with an estimated remaining
life expectancy of at least 40 years –
A1: Trees that are particularly good examples of
their species, especially if rare or unusual; or those that are
essential components of groups or formal or semi-formal
arboricultural features (e.g. the dominant and/or principal trees
within an avenue).
B1: Trees that might be included in category A, but are downgraded
because of impaired condition (e.g. presence of significant though,
remediable defects, including unsympathetic past management and
storm damage), such that they are unlikely to be suitable for
retention for beyond 40 years; or trees lacking the special quality
necessary to merit the category A designation
9.63 The Oak (TPO
552) is a landmark specimen that can be viewed from all major
approaches to the site. It makes an extremely prominent and
significant contribution to the landscape character and appearance
of the area. This quality is further enhanced by the general small
number of other mature specimens in the immediate
vicinity.
[Officer comment:
The importance of T7 is acknowledged by para 4 of the appeal
decision dated 14 August 2019 which states: T7 has been
described by the Council as a landmark specimen. It was apparent
from inspection that it is considerable in size and readily visible
from a variety of different viewpoints. It significantly exceeds
the height of the vacant public house that sits before it in the
New Road street scene such that a substantial extent of its crown
is widely visible. T7 is extremely prominent and makes an important
contribution to the character and appearance of the area].
9.64 The Oak has
good overall form and based on the significant amount of new growth
being produced within the canopy has continued to progressively
adapt to the radical change to its original rooting environment,
caused in part by development pressures from the redevelopment of
the site to the west at Drummond Court. The tree has a long
remaining lifespan and this is heavily reliant on avoiding any
further loss, disturbance or other pressures on its remaining
rooting environment. The minimum rooting area and natural growing
environment of the protected Oak is heavily impaired/pressured on
multiple sides by the existing tarmac parking areas within the
application site and on the adjacent site to the west located
within approximately 5 metres of the trunk.
9.65 Based on its
size this tree it requires a minimum RPA of 684sqm. Taking into
account the existing constraints, the areas beyond the footprints
of existing structures on site, forms the tree’s
primary/minimum rooting area on which it will very heavily reliant,
to sustain its long term health and vigour. Any encroachment into
the minimum RPA of the Oak (an area of 684sqm) or changes to the
present ground conditions in this area (regardless of the proposed
design) potentially has significant implications for its health and
retention.
9.66 In relation to
the 2 other TPO trees on site:
- T5 - Semi mature
Scots Pine is a healthy, well-formed tree with prominent views from
outside the site. The tree has significant future growth potential
and has a remaining life expectancy of well in excess of 40 years.
This is considered to be an important long-term feature on this
site. Any development needs to make allowance for its ultimate
size.
- T3 –Sycamore
(T2~TPO 1192) is a healthy semi mature specimen which divides into
3 main stems. Based on its prominent location on the boundary,
contribution to the street scene and perfectly sustainable and
manageable form, this remains an important feature to retain and
safeguard.
9.67 The
scheme has been amended during the course of the application, and
the proposed layout now respects the minimum root protection area
around the TPO trees on site, particularly the mature
Oak.
9.68 The
reduction in the number of residential units on site and
alterations to the parking court to serve the development are now
located outside the minimum RPA of the Oak.
9.69 A
knee rail fence is proposed between the parking court and the
adjoining soft landscaping to prevent use for overspill
parking. Additional tree
planting can be provided within the communal amenity area to the
rear of the building/parking court. There is also scope for new
hedge planting along the northern and eastern
boundaries.
9.70 In summary, the
amendments to the scheme submitted during the course of this
application, with the reduction in the number of residential units
proposed and changes to the parking area to ensure that all hard
surfacing would be located outside of the minimum RPA of the
protected Oak tree, overcome the main reason for refusal of
application 18/00552/FUL and the subsequent dismissed appeal.
Subject to the imposition of conditions, including details of tree
protection, hard and soft landscaping and details of service
layout, the proposed development, as amended, would not result in
adverse impacts to protected trees which make an important
contribution to the landscape character and appearance of the area.
As such, the proposal would be in accordance with Saved Policies
EN1 and EN20 of the BFBLP, CS7 of the CSDPD and the
NPPF.
vii.
Biodiversity
9.71 The application
is accompanied by the findings of an Ecological Impact Assessment
(ACD Environmental; November 2019). This was originally undertaken
in April 2017 and updated in November 2019. Th updated survey
confirmed conditions on site largely remain the same.
9.72 The
Assessment sets out the findings of a Phase 1 habitat survey,
preliminary bat roost assessment and bat emergence survey.
The Assessment takes into account the findings of a search of data
held by the Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre
(TVERC).
9.73 The survey
has shown that the site comprises the former public house,
outbuilding and surrounding hardstanding with areas of improved
grassland, introduced shrubs and scattered mature trees on the
boundaries. The preliminary roost assessment found no
evidence of bats within any of the buildings. The former pub
(Building 1) and one outbuilding (Building 2) had features of low
bat roost potential. The trees were considered to be of
negligible bat roost potential. Emergence survey covering
Buildings 1 & 2 recorded no evidence of the presence of
bats. The site is not designated for its wildlife interest
and considered to be of negligible value for protected and notable
species.
9.74 The report
sets out precautionary measures for bats during demolition and
measures to avoid nesting birds during vegetation clearance.
Opportunities to minimise the ecological impact of development e.g.
use of sensitive lighting and allowing wildlife e.g. hedgehogs free
movement are set out. Measures to enhance the ecological
value are proposed including the provision of integral bat boxes,
use of native planting, provision of bird and hedgehog boxes.
9.75 The
Ecological Impact Assessment has been completed in accordance with
good practice guidance by appropriately qualified ecologists and
the conclusions that the proposals are unlikely to have any impact
on habitats and species of conservation importance are considered
to be appropriate. The report makes recommendations for
measures to protect and enhance the ecological value of the
site. These matters can be dealt with by condition, including
biodiversity enhancements and no site clearance (including
demolition) during the bird nesting season.
9.76 Subject to
the imposition of conditions, the proposal would not adversely
impact upon biodiversity and would be in accordance with Policies
CS1 and CS7 of the CSDPD and the NPPF.
viii.
Thames Basin Heath SPA
9.77 The Council,
in consultation with
Natural England, has formed the view that any net increase in
residential development between 400m and 5km straight-line distance
from the Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area (TBH SPA) along
with any larger developments comprising over 50 net new dwellings
within the 5 - 7km zone is likely to have a significant effect on
the integrity of the TBH SPA, either alone or in-combination with
other plans or projects. An Appropriate Assessment has been carried
out for this proposed development in accordance with Conservation
of Habitats and Species 2017 (as amended).
9.78 This site is
located approximately 4.3km from the boundary of the SPA and
therefore is likely to result in an adverse effect on the SPA,
unless it is carried out together with appropriate avoidance and
mitigation measures.
9.79 On commencement
of the development, a contribution (calculated on a per-bedroom
basis) is to be paid to the Council towards the cost of measures to
avoid and mitigate against the effect upon the Thames Basin Heaths
SPA, as set out in the Council's Thames Basin Heaths Special
Protection Area Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The strategy
is for relevant developments to make financial contributions
towards the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces
(SANGs) in perpetuity as an alternative recreational location to
the SPA and financial contributions towards Strategic Access
Management and Monitoring (SAMM) measures. The Council will also
make a contribution towards SANG enhancement works through
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments whether or not this
development is liable to CIL.
9.80 In this instance, the development would
result in a net increase of 8 x 1-bedroom dwellings replacing a single 3-bedroom
dwelling within the 400m – 5km TBH SPA buffer zone
which results in a total SANG contribution of £29,112.
9.81 The development is required to make a
contribution towards Strategic Access Management and Monitoring
(SAMM) of £2,481 which is also calculated on a per bedroom
basis.
9.82 The total SPA related financial
contribution for this proposal is £31,593. The applicant must agree to enter into a S106
agreement to secure this contribution and a restriction on the
occupation of each dwelling until the Council has confirmed that
open space enhancement works to a SANG is completed. Subject to the
completion of the S106 agreement, the proposal would not lead to an
adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA and would overcome the
holding reason for refusal of previously refused
application,18/00552/FUL.
ix.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
9.83 Bracknell
Forest Council commenced charging for its Community Infrastructure
Levy (CIL) on 6th April 2015.
9.84 CIL applies
to any new build (except outline applications and some reserved
matters applications) including those that involves the creation of
additional dwellings. CIL is applied as a charge on each square
metre of new development. The amount payable varies depending on
the location of the development within the borough and the type of
development.
9.85 The
application site lies within the zone of the Northern Parishes.
x.
Energy sustainability
9.86 Policy CS10
of the CSDPD requires the submission of a Sustainability Statement
in relation to water usage (average water use of 110
litre/person/day). A planning condition is recommended to secure
the submission of a Sustainability Statement to satisfy the
requirements of Policy CS10 of the CSDPD.
9.87 Policy CS12
requires at least 20% of energy requirements for 5 or more net
additional dwellings to be generated from on-site renewables, as
well as a reduction in carbon emissions of at least 10% through the
submission of an Energy Demand Assessment. A planning condition is
recommended to secure the submission of an Energy Demand Assessment
to satisfy the requirements of Policy CS12 of the CSDPD.
xi.
Drainage/SuDS
9.88 The
application site is located within Flood Zone 1. A condition is
recommended to ensure that the hard-surfaced areas proposed for
access and on-site parking/turning are SuDS compliant.
-
CONCLUSION
10.1 The
proposed development relates to a site within the settlement
boundary and is therefore acceptable in principle.
10.2 The
reduction in the number of residential units proposed and
subsequent changes to the proposed parking area to ensure that all
hard surfacing would be located outside of the minimum RPA of the
protected Oak tree, overcome the main reason for refusal of
application 18/00552/FUL and the subsequent dismissed appeal. As
such, the proposal would not adversely impact upon protected trees
which make an important contribution to the landscape character and
appearance of the area.
10.3 The loss of
the public house is not unacceptable as it has been demonstrated
that there are "exceptional circumstances" to justify its
removal.
10.4 The
proposal would not adversely affect the residential amenities of
neighbouring occupiers and acceptable living conditions would be
provided for future occupiers of the proposed flats. The proposal
would also not adversely impact upon the character and appearance
of the surrounding area.
10.5 No adverse
highway safety implications would result, with sufficient on-site
parking provision, cycle and bin storage. Conditions are
recommended in relation to biodiversity and energy
sustainability.
10.6 A legal
agreement is required to secure contributions for SPA mitigation
and highway requirements.
10.7 The
application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to the
completion of a legal agreement.
-
RECOMMENDATION
11.1Following the completion of
planning obligation(s) under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
relating to:
i.
Measures to avoid and mitigate the impact of residential
development upon the
Thames Basins Heath SPA
ii.
(a) ensure a
Highways Act S278 agreement is entered into for:
(i) the vehicular
access formation onto New Road, including reinstatement of sections
of dropped-kerb which are no longer required back to full-height
kerb;
(ii) the pedestrian
access formation onto King Edwards Road; and
(b) for the
applicant to pay legal costs associated with reviewing and
advertising amendment of the parking restrictions Traffic
Regulation Order, to extend double yellow line provision across the
site frontage onto New Road, and paying the costs of implementing
the revised Traffic Regulation Order subject to this being
successful.
the Assistant Director: Planning be authorised
to APPROVE the application subject to the following
conditions amended, added to or deleted as the Assistant: Director:
Planning considers necessary:
1. The
development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration
of three years
from the
date of this permission.
REASON: To
comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990.
2. The
development hereby permitted shall be carried out only in
accordance with the following approved plans received by the Local
Planning Authority:
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-201 Rev D received 1 July 2021
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-202 Rev A received 9 February 2021
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-203 Rev B received 24 May 2021
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-204 Rev B received 24 May 2021
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-209 received 9 February 2021
Drawing
no. 17-J1703-210 received 9 February 2021
REASON: To
ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the
Local Planning Authority.
3. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until details of
the materials to be used in the construction of the external
surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
REASON: In
the interests of the visual amenities of the area.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN20, CSDPD CS7]
4. The development hereby permitted shall not be
begun until details
showing the slab level and finished floor levels of the building in
relation to a fixed datum point have been submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development
shall be constructed in accordance with the approved
drawing.
REASON: In
the interests of the character of the area.
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: BFBLP EN20, CSDPD CS7]
5. The
windows shown on the approved drawings as having obscured glazing
shall not be glazed at any time other than with a minimum of
Pilkington Level 3 obscure glass (or equivalent) to a height of
1.7m from floor level. The windows shall at all times be
fixed shut to a height of 1.7m from floor level.
REASON: To
prevent the overlooking of neighbouring properties.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN20]
6.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, no additional
windows, similar openings or enlargement thereof shall be
constructed in the southern and western elevations (side and rear
elevations) of the building hereby permitted except for any which
may be shown on the approved drawings.
REASON: To
prevent the overlooking of neighbouring properties.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN20]
7. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until comprehensive
details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
These details shall include: -
a) Comprehensive planting
plans of an appropriate scale and level of detail that provides
adequate clarity including details of ground preparation and all
other operations associated with plant and grass establishment,
full schedules of plants, noting species, and detailed plant
sizes/root stock specifications, planting layout, proposed
numbers/densities locations.
b) Comprehensive 5 year post
planting maintenance schedule.
c) Paving including paths,
patios, proposed materials and construction methods, parking
courts,etc.
d) Location, site specific
design (including foundation requirements), and implementation
method statement for permanent low barriers to prevent vehicle
parking access onto retained soft landscaping areas forming part of
the Root Protection areas of protected trees affecting the
site.
All
planting comprised in the soft landscaping works shall be carried
out and completed in full accordance with the approved scheme, in
the nearest planting season (1st October to 31st March inclusive)
to the completion of the development or prior to the occupation of
any part of the approved development, whichever is sooner, or as
may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
All hard landscaping works shall be carried and completed prior to
the occupation of any part of the approved development. As a
minimum, the quality of all hard and soft landscape works shall be
carried out in accordance with British Standard BS 8545:2014 -
Trees: from nursery to independence in the landscape -
Recommendations or any subsequent revision. All trees and other
plants included within the approved details shall be healthy,
well-formed specimens of a minimum quality that is compatible with
British Standard 3936:1992 (Part 1) 'Specifications For Trees &
Shrubs' and British Standard 4043 (where applicable) or any
subsequent revision. Any trees or other plants which within a
period of 5 years from the completion of the development, die, are
removed, uprooted, are significantly damaged, become diseased or
deformed, shall be replaced during the nearest planting season (1st
October to 31st March inclusive) with others of the same size,
species and quality as approved. The areas shown for soft
landscaping purposes on the approved plans shall thereafter be
retained as such and shall not be used for any other
purpose
REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities
of the area.
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: BFBLP EN20, CSDPD CS7]
8. The
development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of
boundary treatments have been submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. All boundary treatments should
provide for the free movement of wildlife to and from the site. The
approved scheme shall be implemented in full before the occupation
of any of the flats approved in this permission.
REASON: In
the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in the
interests of biodiversity.
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: BFBLP EN20, CSDPD CS1, CS7]
9. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a
Sustainability Statement covering water efficiency aimed at
achieving an average water use in new dwellings of 110
litres/person/day, has been submitted to, and agreed in writing by,
the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented
in accordance with the Sustainability Statement, as approved, and
retained as such thereafter.
REASON: In
the interests of sustainability and the efficient use of
resources.
[Relevant
Policy: CSDPD CS10]
10. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until an Energy
Demand Assessment demonstrating that:
(a)
the proposed development will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at
least 10% against the appropriate Target Emission Rate as set out
in Part L of the Building Regulations (2006), and
(b)
a proportion of the development’s energy requirements will be
provided from on-site renewable energy production (which proportion
shall be 20%)
has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The building shall thereafter be constructed in
accordance with the approved assessment and retained as such
thereafter.
REASON: In
the interests of the sustainability and the efficient use of
resources.
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: CSDPD CS12]
11.
The development hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until the existing access to the site from New Road is
closed and the footway/verge is reinstated in accordance with
details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The reinstatement shall be retained
thereafter. The approved
scheme shall be implemented in full before the occupation of any of
the flats approved in this permission.
REASON: In
the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant Policies: CSDPD CS23]
12.
The
development hereby permitted shall not be occupied
until means of access for
pedestrians onto New Road and onto King Edwards Road have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The accesses shall thereafter be constructed in
accordance with the approved plans. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full
before the occupation of any of the flats approved in this
permission.
REASON: In
the interests of accessibility and to facilitate access by
pedestrians.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP M6, CSDPD CS23]
13.
The development hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until the proposed vehicular access has been formed onto
New Road in accordance with the approved plans and provided with
visibility splays of at least 2.4m x 25m in each direction with the
detailed access design and visibility splays to be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the
land within the visibility splays shall be cleared of any
obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres in height measured from the
surface of the adjacent carriageway and maintained clear if any
obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres in height at all times.
REASON: In
the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant
Policies: CSDPD CS23]
14.
The development hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until visibility splays of 2.0 metres by 2.0 metres have
been provided at the junction of the access and the adjacent
footway. The dimensions shall be measured along the edge of the
access and the back of the footway from their point of
intersection. The visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free
of all obstructions to visibility over a height of 0.6 metres
measured from the surface of the carriageway.
REASON: In
the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant
Policies: CSDPD CS23
15.
The development hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until the associated vehicle parking and turning space for
9 vehicles has been surfaced with a bound or bonded material and
marked out in accordance with the approved plans. The spaces shall
thereafter be kept available for parking and turning at all
times.
REASON: To
ensure that the development is provided with adequate car parking
to prevent the
likelihood
of on-street car parking which would be a danger to other road
users.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP M9, CSDPD CS23]
16.
The development hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until secure and covered cycle parking for 8 cycles has
been provided in the location identified 'Cycle Store' on the
approved plans within the development. The store shall thereafter
be retained. The doors to the cycle store hereby approved shall be
on the south-westerly elevation and of a sliding design. Any
replacement or repair shall only be with a sliding door.
REASON: In
the interests of accessibility of the development to
cyclists.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP M9, CSDPD CS23]
17. No
gates shall be provided at the vehicular access to the
site.
REASON: In
the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant
Policies: CSDPD CS23]
18. The
development (including demolition and site clearance) hereby
permitted shall not be begun until a scheme has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to
accommodate:
(A)
Parking of vehicles of site personnel, operatives and
visitors
(B)
Loading and unloading of plant and vehicles
(C)
Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the
development
(D) Wheel
cleaning facilities
(E)
Temporary portacabins and welfare for site operatives
(F) Swept
path plans demonstrating that the larges anticipated construction
vehicle can arrive in a forward gear, turn around on site and
depart in a forward gear onto the adopted highway
(G) crane
location (if required)
(H) timing
and control of vehicle arrivals and departures,
including:
(i) how
timing will be controlled to avoid ensure that there is sufficient
space on side for
construction vehicles to enter the site, turn around and
leave the site in a forward gear;
(ii)
timing of vehicle arrivals and departures to avoid the defined
traffic sensitive time periods
on the
neighbouring adopted highway network;
(iii)
routes of construction vehicles to / from the site and how these
will be monitored and
controlled.
(iv)
details of proposed banksman arrangements, in particular if
reversing movements of
construction vehicles are anticipated;
(I)
visibility splays available at the site access onto New Road during
construction; and
(J)
details of any temporary traffic management or signage
proposed.
and each
facility shall be retained throughout the course of construction of
the development, free from any impediment to its designated use. No
other areas on the site, other than those in the approved scheme
shall be used for the purposes listed (A) to (J) above.
REASON: In
the interests of amenity, trees and road safety.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1, EN20, CSDPD CS23]
19. The
development shall incorporate surface water drainage that is SuDS
compliant and in accordance with DEFRA "Sustainable Drainage
Systems - Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable
drainage systems" (March 2015). It shall be operated and
maintained as such thereafter.
REASON: To
prevent increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water
quality and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage
scheme.
[Relevant
Policies: CSDPD CS1, BFBLP EN25]
20. The
demolition shall not be begun until a scheme for the provision of
biodiversity enhancements (not mitigation), including a plan or
drawing showing the location of these enhancements, has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The approved scheme shall be performed, observed and
complied with.
REASON: In
the interests of nature conservation
Relevant
Plans and Policies: CSDPD CS1, CS7]
21.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended)
or any Order revoking and re-enacting that order, no external
lighting shall be installed on the site or affixed to any buildings
on the site except in accordance with details set out in a lighting
design strategy for biodiversity that has first been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
strategy shall:
a)identify
those area/features on site that are particularly sensitive for
bats and that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their
breeding sites and resting places or along important routes used to
access key areas of their territory, for example, for foraging;
and
b)show how
and where external lighting will be installed (through the
provision of appropriate lighting contour plans and technical
specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas
to be lit will not disturb or prevent bats using their territory or
having access to their breeding sites and resting
places.
All
external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the
specifications and locations set out in the strategy, and these
shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the strategy.
Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be
installed.
REASON: In
the interests of nature conservation
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: CSDPD CS1, CS7]
22. No
site clearance shall take place during the main bird-nesting period
of 1st March to 31st August inclusive, unless a scheme to minimise
the impact on nesting birds during the construction of the
development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be complied
with during construction.
REASON: In
the interests of nature conservation
[Relevant
Plans and Policies: CSDPD CS1, CS7]
23.
The development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a
detailed scheme for the protection of existing trees, hedgerows and
groups of mature shrubs to be retained, in accordance with British
Standard 5837 (2012) 'Trees In Relation To Construction
Recommendations' (or any subsequent revision), has been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Protection measures shall be phased as necessary to take into
account and provide protection during demolition/site clearance
works - all construction works - hard landscaping works.
Details shall include an approved development layout plan at a
minimum scale of 1:200, showing the following:
a) Accurate trunk positions
and canopy spreads of all existing trees within the site and on
adjoining land adjacent to the development within influencing
distance of the development.
b) Positions and spreads of
existing hedgerows and groups of mature shrubs.
c) All proposed tree, hedge
or shrub removal. Shown clearly with a broken
line.
d) Proposed location/s of 2m
high (minimum) protective barrier/s, supported by a metal
scaffold framework, constructed as a minimum in accordance with
Section 6 (Figure 2), to include appropriate weatherproof tree
protection area signage (such as "Keep Out - Construction Exclusion
Zone") securely fixed to the outside of the protective fencing
structure at regular intervals.
e) Illustration/s of the
proposed protective barriers to be erected.
f) Proposed location/s
and illustration/s ground protection measures within the main root
protection areas of retained trees, designed as necessary for
pedestrian light traffic or heavy plant machinery, as necessary to
prevent contamination and ground compaction.
g) Annotated minimum
distances between protective barriers and trunks of retained trees
at regular intervals.
h) All fenced off areas
clearly annotated as Tree Protection Areas/Construction Exclusion
Zones.
i) Notes
regarding restrictions which apply to Tree Protection
Areas/Construction Exclusion Zones.
The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
REASON: In
order to safeguard existing trees and other vegetation considered
worthy of retention.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD CS7]
24. The
protective fencing and other protection measures specified by
condition 23 shall be erected in the locations agreed in writing by
the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any
development works, including any initial clearance, and shall be
maintained fully intact and (in the case of the fencing) upright,
in its approved locations at all times, until the completion of all
building operations on the site (unless agreed otherwise in writing
by the Local Planning Authority). Where phased protection measures
have been approved, no works shall commence on the next phase of
the development until the protective fencing barriers and other
protective measures have been repositioned for that phase in full
accordance with the approved details. No activity of any
description must occur at any time within these areas including but
not restricted to the following: -
a) No mixing of cement or any
other materials.
b) Storage or disposal of any
soil, building materials, rubble, machinery, fuel, chemicals,
liquids waste residues or materials/debris of any other
description.
c) Siting of any temporary
structures of any description including site office/sales
buildings, temporary car parking facilities, porta-loos, storage
compounds or hard standing areas of any other
description.
d) Soil/turf stripping,
raising/lowering of existing levels, excavation or alterations to
the existing surfaces/ ground conditions of any other
description.
e) Installation/siting of any
underground services, temporary or otherwise including; drainage,
water, gas, electricity, telephone, television, external lighting
or any associated ducting.
f) Parking/use of
tracked or wheeled machinery or vehicles of any
description.
In
addition to the protection measures specified
above,
a) No fires shall be lit
within 20 metres of the trunks of any trees or the centre line of
any hedgerow shown to be retained.
b) No signs, cables, fixtures
or fittings of any other description shall be attached to any part
of any retained tree.
REASON: In
order to safeguard existing trees and other vegetation considered
worthy of retention.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD CS7]
25. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until the following
details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority:
(i)
details of all proposed alterations to the ground levels within the
site within 5 metres of the minimum 'Root Protection Areas'
calculated in accordance with BS 5837 (2012) recommendations (or
any subsequent revision), for all existing retained trees within
the site and on neighbouring land adjacent to the approved
development. The details shall include:
a) Existing and proposed
finished levels.
b) Any proposed soil level
re-grading in relation to existing retained trees, hedges and other
vegetation.
c) Proposed retaining
structures required to address level differences adjacent to
retained trees and hedges and other vegetation, and
(ii) a
programme and method of implementation.
The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
REASON: In
order to safeguard existing trees and other vegetation considered
worthy of retention.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD CS7]
26. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a site
specific method statement for the removal of all existing hard
surfaced areas and/or structures of any other description, located
within the minimum Root Protection Areas (RPA's) of trees to be
retained, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Details shall include: -
a) A site plan at a minimum
scale of 1:200, identifying all areas where such work is to be
undertaken.
b) Reinstatement to soft
landscape area including proposed ground de-compaction
works.
c) Timing and phasing of
works.
The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
REASON: In
order to safeguard tree roots and thereby safeguard existing
trees.
[Relevant Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD
CS7]
27. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until:
(i) a site
layout plan at a minimum scale of 1:200 showing the proposed layout
of all underground services and external lighting and
(ii) a
programme for the phasing and timing of works
have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Details of the site layout plan shall include:
-
a) Accurate trunk positions
and canopy spreads of all retained trees/hedgerows and mature
groups of shrubs.
b) Surface water/ foul
drainage and associated inspection chambers (existing reused and
new)
c) Soak-aways (where
applicable)
d) Gas, electricity, telecom
and cable television.
e) Lighting columns and all
associated ducting for power supply.
f) Phasing and timing
of works.
The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
REASON: In
order to safeguard tree roots and thereby safeguard existing trees
and other vegetation considered worthy of retention.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD CS7]
28. The
development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a detailed
site specific programme of supervision/monitoring for all
arboricultural protection measures has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details
shall include: -
a) Induction and personnel
awareness of arboricultural matters.
b) Identification of
individual responsibilities and key personnel.
c) Statement of delegated
powers.
d) Timing and methods of site
visiting and record keeping. To include routine site visits at
maximum 4 week intervals
e) Procedures for dealing
with variations and incidents.
The
programme of arboricultural monitoring shall be undertaken in full
compliance with the approved details. No variation of the approved
monitoring program shall take place without the prior written
agreement of the Local Planning Authority. A copy of the signed
inspection report shall be sent to the Local Planning Authority
following each visit.
REASON: In
order to safeguard trees and other vegetation considered to be
worthy of retention.
[Relevant
Policies: BFBLP EN1 and EN20, CSDPD CS7]
In the event of the S106 agreement not being
completed by 29th October 2021, the Assistant Director:
Planning be authorised to either extend the period further or
refuse the application on the grounds of:
In the absence of a planning obligation to
secure suitable avoidance and mitigation measures and access
management monitoring arrangements, in terms that are satisfactory
to the Local Planning Authority, the proposal would be contrary to
Regulation 63(5) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species
Regulations 2017 (as amended), Policy NRM6 of the South East Plan,
Policy EN3 of the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, Policy CS14
of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the Thames Basin
Heaths Special Protection Area Supplementary Planning Document
(2018).
Informatives
1. The Local
Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in
determining this application by identifying matters of concern
within the application (as originally submitted) and negotiating,
with the Applicant, acceptable amendments to the proposal to
address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning
Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an
acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour
of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning
Policy Framework.
2. The applicant
is advised that the following conditions require discharging prior
to commencement of development:
3. Materials
4. Slab
level/finished floor level
7.
Landscaping
9.
Sustainability Statement
10. Energy
demand assessment
18. Site
organisation
20. Biodiversity
enhancements
23. Tree
protection
25. Ground
levels
26. site
specific method statement for the removal of all existing hard
surfaced areas and/or structures within RPAs
27. Services
28. Programme of
supervision/monitoring for all arboricultural protection
measures
The following
conditions require discharge prior to the occupation of the
dwellings hereby approved:
8. Boundary
treatment
11. Closure of
existing access
12. Pedestrian
access
13. Visibility
splays
No details are
required to be submitted in relation to the following conditions;
however they are required to be complied with:
1. Time
limit
2. Approved
plans
5. Obscure
glazing
6. Restrictions
on additional windows
14. Visibility
splays
15. Parking
16. Cycle
store
17. Restrictions
on gates
19. SUDS
21. No external
lighting (unless proposed then details need to be submitted to the
LPA)
22. No clearance
during bird nesting season (Unless proposed then details need to be
submitted to the LPA)
24. Tree
protection
3. The Highways and Transport
Section should be contacted at Time Square, Market
Street,
Bracknell, RG12 1JD, telephone
01344 352000 or via email at
Highways.Transport@bracknellforest.gov.uk, to agree a Section 278
agreement in relation to the vehicular and pedestrian access
construction and reinstatement details and any off-site highway
works. Permission must be granted by the Highway Authority through
S278 of the Highways Act before any work is carried out within the
highway. A formal application should be made allowing at least 12
weeks prior to when works are required to allow for processing of
the application, agreement of the details and securing the
appropriate agreements and licences to undertake the work. Any work
carried out on the public highway without proper consent from the
Highway Authority could be subject to prosecution and fines related
to the extent of work carried out
4. This planning
permission contains certain conditions that state 'before
development commences' or 'prior to commencement of any
development' (or similar). As a result these must be
discharged prior to any development activity taking place on site
(including any initial clearance works). Commencement of
development without having complied with these conditions will make
any development unauthorised and possibly subject to enforcement
action such as a Stop Notice. If the conditions have not been
subsequently satisfactorily discharged within the time allowed to
implement the permission then the development will remain
unauthorised. This may be highlighted in any subsequent
search carried out on the property/
properties.
5. Trees on and
adjacent to this site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders. In
simple terms, detailed written consent must be therefore obtained
from the Council’s Tree Section before undertaking any form
of work to such trees (including any work affecting their root
systems), unless detailed works to such trees have been
specifically approved in writing as a part of this planning
permission. Any pruning or removal of trees without the necessary
consent or any damage arising from non-compliance with other
conditions of this permission or otherwise may be liable to
prosecution by the Council. This may be in addition to any
enforcement action deemed appropriate for non-compliance with
relevant planning conditions. Property owners, developers and/ or
any other relevant persons are therefore advised to take
appropriate measures to ensure that all persons responsible for
overseeing works approved under this permission are suitably
briefed on this matter.
Doc.
Ref:Uniform
7/DC/Agenda
The application
file to which this report relates can be viewed on-line at the
Council's Time Square office during office hours or online at
www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk
