OFFICER REPORT
1.
SUMMARY
1.1 This is
an application for prior approval under Schedule 2, Part 20 of the
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England)
Order 2015 (as amended). Under Class AA, of Part 20, permitted
development consists of works for the construction of up to two
additional storeys of new dwelling houses immediately above the
topmost storey on a detached building subject to certain criteria
being met and an application for prior approval being granted by
the Local Planning Authority.
1.2 This
application constitutes the application for prior approval and
having had regard to the criteria and conditions of Class AA, part
20 and it is recommended that prior approval be granted.
|
RECOMMENDATION
|
|
Prior approval be
granted subject to the conditions in Section 11 of this report
|
2.
REASON FOR REPORTING APPLICATION TO ADVISORY PLANNING
COMMITTEE
2.1 The
application is reported to the Advisory Planning Committee as it
has received more than 5 objections.
3.
PLANNING STATUS AND SITE DESCRIPTION
|
PLANNING STATUS
|
|
Within settlement
boundary
|
|
With 5km of the
SPA
|
3.1 This application
relates to a site which borders the A322 Bagshot Road to the west,
Nightingale Crescent to the north and Opladen Way to the east. To
the south the site adjoins a wooded area and access to the site is
from Opladen Way.
3.2 The site consists of a
three storey former office building which was granted planning
permission in 1988. In 2017 consent was granted for the conversion
of the existing building from B1 offices to C3 residential use
under Class O, Part 3, Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended)
(reference: 17/00457/PAC).
3.3 The existing building
is constructed from red brick with buff stone horizontal cornice detailing and strong
vertical columns breaking up the glazing elements. The building has
a footprint similar to a boomerang in shape sitting within a lawned
space with parking located to the north and east. Additional
parking is contained within a basement.
3.4 To the west of the
site, and across a large traffic intersection is the Bracknell
Leisure Centre with two storey residential properties within
Harmans Water located to the east.
4.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
4.1
The relevant planning history can be summarised as follows:
20/00683/PARC
Prior Notification
requirement under Class AA of Part 20 of the GPDO for a part single
and part two storey roof extension to form 35 apartments.
Refused
Was refused for being an
incongruous form of development
17/00805/FUL
Construction of
a new third floor together with a fourth floor mansard roof
extension over the existing building to create new residential
accommodation comprising 45no. One and two bedroom flats. (In
addition to the flats granted under prior approval
17/00457/PAC).
Refused
16.08.2019 (Dismissed at appeal)
The Inspector
dismissed the appeal on the harm to the character and appearance of
the area, particularly on views form the east.
19/00019/FUL
External alterations
to existing building. Approved 15.03.2019
17/00457/PAC
Application for
Prior Approval for the change of use of offices (Class B1a) to
residential Class C3) to form 69 no. apartments Consent Granted
22.06.2017
614112
Erection of a
three-storey building
Approved 12.01.1989
612562
Outline
application for Demolition of Westwick House and erection of a
building for business use (Class B1) comprising up to 45,000 sq ft
gross floor area. Approved 20.06.1998
[Various
application for minor works, including advertisements not
considered relevant to this application]
5. THE
PROPOSAL
5.1 It is proposed to erect
2 additional storeys to the top of L’Avenir, to contain 35
one and two bedroom flats. The two storeys would be directly above
the main building and have been designed to replicate the building
below.
6.
REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED
6.1 Bracknell Town
Council
Bracknell Town Council recommends
refusal for the following reasons:
1) This development will
cause significant impact upon road safety with a considerable
increase in road traffic accessing and leaving close to a busy
junction.
2) Insufficient parking
causing off site obstructive parking for other local roads and
residents contrary to core strategy and local plan policies
supported by the NPPF.
3) Adding a 2 storey roof
extension to this already large building will have an overbearing
impact on other local properties.
4) Councilors can see no
significant changes to the previous application bringing them to
the same conclusion to recommend refusal again.
6.2 Other
Representations
44 letters have been
received from different addresses objecting to the proposal on the
following grounds:
·
Scale and mass
·
Out of character with the local
area due to the height. There are no other 5 storey blocks in the
area and this would tower over the existing area.
·
Proposal includes multiple
balconies which would overlook the properties on Primrose Walk and
Wilberforce Way. [Officer Note: the balconies have been removed by
an amendment].
·
No affordable housing [Officer
Note: There is no requirement to consider affordable housing under
the prior approval procedure].
·
The noise and disruption of
living beneath a building site would be completely unacceptable to
the existing residents of L’Avenir, especially those that
work from home or work shifts and therefore sleep during the
day.
·
Possibility of damage to cars
and flats from the construction work
·
Inadequate onsite parking will
result in increased parking on Primrose Walk and Wilberforce
Way.
·
Increased congestion on the
road network from the increase in vehicles.
·
Adversely affect the character
of the area of semi-detached and detached dwellings.
·
Increase shading of the
surrounding properties.
·
Existing problems with water
pressure within the building which will only increase as more flats
are constructed.
·
Increase in the use of local
services such as GPs, Schools, Dentists etc.
·
Noise and light
pollution.
·
When L’Avenir was
originally built, there was an undertaking that the new building
would not exceed the height of the original Westwick
building.
·
Gates to the site do not work
and block Opladen Way if more than one car is waiting to be let
into the site.
·
Bin store is consistently full
and other functional problems with the site will be made worse by
the proposal
·
The communal gardens enjoyed
now by residents will be disturbed and unusable during the
construction process.
·
Common law states that
residents have a right to ‘quiet enjoyment’ of the
property. This would be breached during the construction work.
[Officer comment: this is a civil matter and not covered in
planning legislation].
·
The effect of the proposed
development on the integrity of the Thames Basin Heath Special
Protection Area (the SPA).
·
Devalues our
property.
7.
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES
7.1 Highway
Authority
No objections
subject to conditions.
7.2 Environmental Health
No
objections.
7.3 Waste and Recycling
No
objections.
8.
MAIN POLICIES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO THE
DECISION
8.1 The primary strategic
planning considerations applying to the site and associated
policies are:
|
|
Development Plan
|
NPPF
|
|
General policies
|
CS1 & CS2 of
CSDPD
|
Consistent
|
|
Design
|
CS7 of CSDPD, Saved
policy EN20 of BFBLP
HO 8 and HO 9 of the
BTNP
|
Consistent
Consistent
|
|
Residential
Amenity
|
Saved Policy EN20 of
BFBLP
|
Consistent
|
|
Parking
|
Saved policy M9 of
BFBLP
|
Consistent
NPPF refers to LAs
setting their own parking standards for residential development,
this policy is considered to be consistent.
|
|
Transport
|
CS23 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
|
8.2 Development Plan Polices,
including the Bracknell Town Neighbourhood plan and the NPPF are
considered relevant in prior approval cases, but only insofar as
they relate to the development and prior approval matters.
9.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
9.1 The key issues for
consideration are:
i.
Principle of Development
ii.
Transport and Highway Implications
iii.
Air traffic and defence assets impacts of development
iv.
Contamination risks in relation to the development
v.
Flooding risks in relation to the development
vi.
The external appearance of the building
vii.
Impact of any works permitted by sub paragraph (1) or (d) of Class
AA
viii.
Provision of adequate natural light in all habitable rooms of the
new dwelling houses
ix.
Impact upon the amenity of existing building and neighbouring
premises including overlooking, privacy, and the loss of light
x.
Impacts of noise from any commercial premises on the intended
occupiers of the new dwelling houses.
xi.
Impacts of the introduction of or an increase in, a residential use
of premises in the area on the carrying out if any trade, business
or other use of land in the area.
xii.
Whether, because of the siting of the building, the development
will impact on a protected view identified in the Directions
Relating to Protected Vistas dated 15th March 2012
issued by the Secretary of State.
xiii.
Other issues
i.
Principle of Development
9.2 This
application seeks consent under Class AA, Part 20, Schedule 2, of
the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)
(England) Order 2015 (as amended).
9.3 Under Class
AA permitted development consists of works for the construction of
up to two additional storeys of new dwellinghouses immediately
above the topmost storey on a detached building to which sub
paragraph (2) applies, together with any or all-
(a) engineering
operations reasonably necessary to construct the additional storeys
and new dwelling houses;
(b) works for the
replacement of existing plant or installation of additional plant
on the roof of the extended building reasonably necessary to
service the new dwelling houses;
(c) works for the
construction of appropriate and safe access to and egress from the
new dwelling houses and existing premises in the building
(d) works for the
construction of storage, waste or other ancillary facilities
reasonably necessary to support the new dwelling houses.
9.4 Sub paragraph
(2) states that this class only applies to a building which
is—
(a) used for any
purpose within Class A1 (shops), Class A2 (financial and
professional services), Class A3 (restaurants and cafes) or Class
B1(a) (offices) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order, or as a
betting office, pay day loan shop or launderette;
(b) in a mixed use
combining –
(i) two or more uses
within paragraph (a); or
(ii) a use falling
withing Class C3 (dwelling houses) of the Schedule to the Use
Classes Order, together with one or more uses withing paragraph
(a).
9.5 L’Avenir was
constructed as purpose built office block which was its lawful use
until the 2017 prior approval was implemented. The first apartments
were occupied during the summer of 2020 and therefore at the key
date of the 5 March 2018 it was considered that the lawful use was
as B1(a) Offices and the use is considered to fall within a use
specified by sub paragraph (2).
9.6 If there are no
implications associated with these matters, the development is
considered to be permitted development.
9.7 The
table below analyses the proposal against the requirements of Class
AA
|
|
Development is
not permitted by Class A if:
|
Complies?
|
|
a
|
Above ground level, the building is less
than 3 storeys in height
|
Yes
|
|
b
|
The building was constructed before 1st
July 1948, or after 5th March 2018
|
Yes
|
|
c
|
On 5th March 2018 the building
was in a use other than-
i) a use or mixed use
ii) a use falling within class C3 of the
Schedule of the UCO.
|
Yes
|
|
d
|
The additional storeys are constructed
other than on the principal part of the building
|
Yes
|
|
e
|
The floor to ceiling height of any additional
storey is
i) More than 3 metres in height, or
ii) More than the floor to ceiling height of
any of the existing
storeys
Whichever is lesser where such heights are
measured internally
|
Yes
|
|
f
|
The new dwelling houses are not flats
|
Yes
|
|
g
|
The overall height of the roof of the extended
building would be
greater than 7 metres higher than the highest
part of the existing roof (not including existing plant).
|
Yes
|
|
h
|
The extended building (not including plant)
would be greater than 30 metres in height
|
Yes
|
|
i
|
Development under Class AA(1)(a) would include
the provision of visible support structure on or attached to the
exterior of the building upon completion of the development
|
Yes
|
|
j
|
Development under Class AA(1)(a) would include
engineering operations other than works to:
i) strengthen existing walls;
ii) strengthen existing foundations: or
iii) install or replace water, drainage,
electricity, gas or other services.
|
Yes
|
|
k
|
In the case of Class AA(1)(b) development
there is no existing plant on the building
|
Yes
|
|
l
|
In
the case of Class AA(1)(b) development (works replacing or for new
plant) the height of any replaced or additional plant is no higher
than any existing plant.
|
Yes (no plant proposed)
|
|
m
|
In the case of Class AA(1)(c) development
(works to the access, doors etc.) would extend beyond the curtilage
of the existing building
|
Yes
|
|
n
|
In the case of Class AA(1)(d) development
would;
i) Extend beyond the curtilage of the existing
building.
ii) be situated on land forward of a wall
forming a principal elevation of the existing building: or
iii) be situated on land forward of a wall
fronting a highway and forming a side elevation of the existing
building; or
|
Yes
|
|
o
|
The land or site on which the building is
located, is or forms part of:
i) article 2(3) land (conservation areas,
AONBs etc.):
ii) site of special scientific interest
iii) a listed building or land within its
curtilage
iv) a scheduled monument or land within its
curtilage
v) a safety hazard zone
vi) a military explosives storage area: or
vii) land within 3 km of the perimeter of an
aerodrome.
|
Yes
|
9.8 From
the analysis above, the application is considered to meet the
requirements of AA.1 and is therefore considered to be permitted
development.
9.9
However, under paragraph AA.2, before beginning the development the
developer must apply to the local planning authority for prior
approval for:
a) transport
and highway implications,
b) air
traffic and defence asset impacts of the development
c)
contamination risks in relation to the development
d) flooding
risks in relation to the development
e) the
external appearance of the building, including-
i.
the principal elevation; and
ii.
any side elevation that fronts a highway; and
f) the
impact of any works permitted by sub paragraph (1) or (d) of Class
AA.
g) provision
of adequate natural light in all habitable rooms of the new
dwelling houses
h) impact
upon the amenity of the existing building and neighbouring premises
including overlooking, privacy, and the loss of light
i)
impacts of noise from any commercial premises on the intended
occupiers of the new dwelling houses
j)
impacts of the introduction of or an increase in, a residential use
of premises in the area on the carrying out if any trade, business
or other use of land in the area;
k) whether,
because of the siting of the building, the development will impact
on a protected view identified in the Directions Relating to
Protected Vistas dated 15th March 2012 issued by the
Secretary of State.
9.10 These are
assessed in turn below.
ii.
Transport and Highway Implications
9.11
A parking plan has been submitted, this shows 86 car parking spaces
in the basement and 81 spaces at ground floor level, giving a total
of 167 spaces.
9.12 The permitted and
proposed developments require a total of 150 car parking spaces,
comprising 98 spaces required for the development approved under
17/00457/PAC and 52 spaces (including visitor spaces at 1 per 5
units) required for this application, to accord with the Parking
Standards SPD (March 2016) and therefore the amount of car parking
available is sufficient.
9.13 Details of
additional cycle parking and provision of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure for 1 in 5 of the spaces for the development (10
spaces) have not been provided and are therefore requested by
condition.
iii.
Air traffic and defence assets impacts of development
9.14 There are no
defence bases which would be affected and the building is too low
to affect air traffic.
iv. Contamination risks
in relation to the development
9.15 As the proposal
is for additional storeys to an existing building, there is no
contaminated land concern.
v. Flooding risks
in relation to the development
9.16 The site is within Flood Zone 1 and
there are no records of flooding being reported to the Council.
9.17 Reports
relating flooding from the Thames Water Sewage system have been
noted. The applicant will have to ensure they have any applicable
consents.
vi.
The external appearance of
the building
9.18 Policies CS7 of the CSDPD and EN20 of
the BFBLP support proposals which are appropriate in scale, mass
design and materials.
9.19 Amended plans have been received and
the design features and details have been replicated on the two
floors above. The glazing elements and vertical pillars continue up
proving a greater consistency and therefore cohesive appearance to
the built form as a whole. It is therefore considered that the
proposal now relates well to the building below, presenting a
cohesive and appearance to the building.
9.20 Additional floors are permitted
development and the proposal does not exceed the height of the
limits specified within the GPDO, providing they are appropriately
designed, the additional mass and bulk is acceptable. This is being
reflected in appeal decisions such as appeal ref:
APP/T1410/W/20/3263486 concerning Seaforth Court, 91 Victoria Drive
Eastbourne. stated:
13. For the purposes of
assessing whether prior approval should be granted, I consider the
assessment of the matter in dispute is limited to the external
appearance of the building rather than its effect on the wider
area. The Framework is only relevant so far as it relates to the
subject matter of the prior approval, in this case the external
appearance of the building.
14. Even if a wider
interpretation of the matter to be considered under prior approval
is taken,
the principle of upward
extension of up to 2 storeys is established by the permitted
development right in Part 20, Class A of the 2015 Order, and the
matters requiring prior approval need to be interpreted in the
context of that principle.
9.21 Objections have also questioned how
can this application be considered when a previous scheme for 2
floors was refused and dismissed at appeal. This historical
application was a Full planning application in which the decision
maker (whether that was the LPA or the Planning Inspector) could
consider the application in terms of the impact upon the character
and appearance of the surrounding area. Following the dismissal of
the application at appeal, SI 2020 no. 755 and came into
force on 31st August 2020. This application is therefore
not a full application and can only be determined on a more limited
basis as set out within the GPDO.
9.22 Accordingly the mass and bulk as a
result of the proposed two additional storeys are permitted
development and cannot be a reason for refusal neither can the
impact upon the character and appearance of the area.
9.23 The design is considered to be
consistent with and relate well to the host building. Therefore
there are no objections to the design and appearance of the
proposal.
vii. Impact of any works
permitted by sub paragraph (1)(c) or (d) of Class AA
9.24 Sub paragraph (1) (c) relates to works
for the construction of appropriate safe access to and egress from
the new dwelling houses including external doors or staircases.
9.25 Sub paragraph (1) (d) relate to
ancillary structures considered to be reasonably necessary to
service the new dwelling houses. Such as bin or cycle stores.
9.26 No new structures are required in
relation to sub paragraph (1) (c). The current bin store would be
utilised and is considered large enough to provide for sufficient
bin storage.
viii. Provision of adequate natural
light in all habitable rooms of the new dwelling houses
9.27 All of the habitable rooms to the
proposed new residential units have external windows of a suitable
size providing adequate natural light into each habitable room.
There are no objections on these grounds.
ix.
Impact upon the amenity of
existing building and neighbouring premises including overlooking,
privacy, and the loss of light
9.28 The nearest residential properties,
not within the building, to the proposal are located to the east of
the proposal and comprise the properties on Primrose Walk and
Harmans Water Road.
9.29 No. 18 Harmans Water Road is located
31.3 m from the projecting stairwell on the east elevation (35.9m
from the elevation). No windows are proposed to be inserted into
this elevation. The walls will be clad in the opaque material used
in the rest of the building. The extract of the floor plan below
shows that no windows are proposed facing towards the properties of
Harmans Water Road or Primrose Walk.
9.30 The properties to Primrose Walk are
located further away at a distance of 68m to the rear elevation of
no. 2 Primrose Walk, and 34m to the garden boundary.
9.31 The distances mentioned within the
Design SPD relate to window to window distance. As there are no
proposed windows in the east elevation facing the flank elevation
of 18 Harmans Water or Primrose Walk there is not an adverse impact
from overlooking.
9.32 Given the distances involved,
orientation of the properties and neighbouring dwellings, it is not
considered that the proposal would result in an overbearing
relationship.
9.33 Accordingly it is not considered that
the proposal would result in additional loss of privacy harmful to
the occupiers of nearby properties, or that there would be any
significant harm to the amenity of the exiting occupants of the
building that would render the scheme unacceptable.
x. Impacts of noise
from any commercial premises on the intended occupiers of the new
dwelling houses
9.34 The Environmental Health Officer has
looked at the surrounding land uses and noted that the leisure
centre on the opposite side of the roundabout, has some noise
generating plant. There is housing significantly closer than this
proposal and noise from road traffic would be expected to be the
dominant noise source at this location with noise from the leisure
centre far below background noise, therefore there are no
commercial noise objections.
xi. Impacts of the
introduction of, or an increase in, a residential use of premises
in the area on the carrying on of any trade, business or other use
of land in the area.
9.35 As above, there is no commercial land
uses in proximity to the site which would be affected by additional
units.
xii. Whether, because of the
siting of the building, the development will impact on a protected
view identified in the Directions Relating to Protected Vistas
dated 15th March 2012 issued by the Secretary of
State.
9.36 There are no protected views that the
proposal would impact upon.
xiv. Other issues
Thames Basin
Heaths SPA
9.37 The application site is within 5km of
the SPA.
9.38 The GPDO is an order which grants
permission for development subject to the conditions set out within
the document and any the decision taker may impose. Under Article
3(1) of the General Permitted Development Order and regulations 73
to 76 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017,
a development must not be begun or continued before the developer
has received written notice of the approval of the local planning
authority.
9.39 The requirement for written approval
of the Council prior to the commencement of development is
therefore embedded in legislation that seeks to protect the
integrity and features of the protected species. Accordingly, this
aspect of the process falls outside of the prior approval regime
but to comply with relevant legislation the scheme would not be
able to progress without the necessary mitigation being
provided.
Disruption
during building works
9.40 Objections have been raised regarding
the noise disturbance, dust and use of the parking spaces during
building works of the current residents in L’Avenir .
9.41 Development permitted under Class AA
is subject to certain conditions including:
Any development under
Class AA is permitted subject to the condition that before
beginning the development, the developer must provide the local
planning authority with a report for the management of the
construction of the development, which sets out the proposed
development hours of operation and how any adverse impact of noise,
dust, vibration and traffic on occupiers of the building and
adjoining owners or occupiers will be mitigated.
9.42 However this does not require the
report to be approved by the local planning authority or for the
development to be undertaken in accordance with report.
Accordingly, a condition is proposed to ensure that the local
planning authority agree the details and the construction work is
undertaken in accordance with the approved scheme to ensure that as
much mitigation as practically possible is provided for existing
residents.
10.
CONCLUSIONS
10.1 This is an
application for prior approval under Schedule 2, Part 20, Class AA
of the General Permitted Development Order. Under the application,
the Local Planning Authority can only consider a limited number of
considerations, as set out above.
10.2 The design has
been amended to replicate the style and design of the host
building. According the proposal is considered acceptable on design
grounds. In addition, the building is considered to be sited a
sufficient distance from neighbouring properties, and no windows
are proposed directly facing the nearest dwellings. There is
sufficient onsite parking and the bin store is large enough to
accommodate the number of bins required.
10.5 It is therefore
considered that the proposed development complies with
‘Saved’ policies M9, and EN20 of the BFBLP, Policies
CS7 and CS23 of the CSDPD and the NPPF. Accordingly, the
application is considered to comply with Part 20, Class AA of the
GPDO, subject to the conditions within AA.2. of Part 20 Class AA
and therefore the recommendation is to grant prior approval.
11.
RECOMMENDATION
11.1
The Assistant Director: Planning be recommended to grant prior
approval subject to the following conditions:-
01. The development hereby
permitted shall be carried out only in accordance with the
following approved plans and other submitted details:
JW879-160 (Existing Site and Block Plan)
JW879-151 Rev A (Existing plans Basement and Ground floor)
JW879-152 (Existing plans First and Second Floors)
JW879-162 (Existing elevations)
JW879-163 Rev C (Proposed Plans Third and Fourth Floor)
JW879-164 Rev C. (Proposed elevations, proposed strip section)
REASON: To ensure that the development is carried out only as
approved by the
Local Planning Authority.
02. The
associated vehicle parking and turning space as shown on
drawing JW879-160 shall 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,
Core Strategy DPD CS23]
03.
No development shall take place until a scheme has been submitted
to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning
Authority for covered and secure cycle parking facilities for 45
cycles. No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the
approved scheme has been implemented. The facilities shall
thereafter be retained.
REASON: In the interests of
accessibility of the development to cyclists.
[Relevant Policies: BFBLP M9,
Core Strategy DPD CS23]
04. No
dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the details of
infrastructure to support electric vehicle charging points with an
output of at least 7kw per charging point for at least 10 car
parking spaces within the development have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling
hereby approved shall be occupied until the approved electric
vehicle charging infrastructure has been provided. Thereafter the
electric vehicle charging infrastructure shall be retained unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
REASON: To ensure adequate
provision of spaces for charging plug-in low emission
vehicles.
[Relevant Policies: BFBLP M9,
NPPF paragraphs 105 e) and 110 e)]
05.
Prior to the commencement of
development a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating how the effects of
construction will be mitigated. The scheme shall include:
(a) hours of construction
operation
(b) how adverse impacts
of noise, dust and vibration on occupiers of the building and
adjoining occupiers will be mitigated.
(c) How the site shall be
set out to enable storage of materials, welfare facilities, loading
and unloading of plant and materials and parking of site
operatives.
(d) Parking and access
for residents during construction.
The scheme shall be implemented as approved.
REASON: To protect the amenities of neighbouring residents and
highway safety
[Relevant Policies: BFBLP EN20, M9, Core Strategy DPD CS23]
Informative(s)
01. The Local Planning
Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this
application by assessing the proposal against all material
considerations, including planning policies and any representations
that may have been received and subsequently determining to grant
planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of
sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning
Policy Framework.
02. Your attention is drawn to
the conditions under Schedule 2, Part 20, Class AA, of the GPDO,
which must be complied with. This includes details of the
mitigation proposed to protect existing residents during the
construction process and to complete the proposal within 3 years of
the date of the prior approval permission.
03. Under Article 3(1) of the General
Permitted Development Order and regulations 73 to 76 of the
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, a
development must not be begun or continued before the developer has
received written notice of the approval of the local planning
authority. This will require the LPA to undertake an appropriate
assessment and the applicant will be required to enter into a legal
agreement to secure the relevant mitigation. Further information
can be obtained from:
Thames Basin Heaths SPA Supplementary Planning Document | Bracknell
Forest Council (bracknell-forest.gov.uk)
