To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies received from Councillors Christine Bateson and Colin Rayner.

To receive any Declarations of Interest.

Cllr L Evans – Declared a prejudicial interest in item 16/02358 as she was a Parish Councillor at Sunningdale Parish Council and in the past, prior to becoming a Member of the Windsor Rural Development Control Panel, had prepared the Parish Council in arguaing against the application. Cllr L Evans left the room during the debate and the bote on this item.

Cllr Lenton – Declared a personal interest in items 16/02133 and 16/02214 as he was a Member of Wraysbury Parish Council and was present when the items were discussed, although he did not take part in the discussion. Cllr Lenton confirmed he had come to Panel with an open mind.

To confirm the Part I Minutes of the meeting of the previous meeting

RESOLVED: That the Part I minutes of the meeting of the Windsor Rural Development Control Panelo Held at Holy Tinity CE School, Sunningdale on 21 September 2016 be approved subject to the following amendment being made:

16/01892 – Two Councillors voted against (Cllrs Beer and Sharpe).

To consider the Director of Development & Regeneration / Development Control Manager’s report on planning applications received.

Please Note: Item 16/02577 has been WITHDRAWN from the agenda

Full details on all planning applications (including application forms, site plans, objections received, correspondence etc.) can be found by accessing the Planning Applications Public Access Module by selecting the following link. http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/pam/search.jsp or from Democratic Services on 01628 796251 or democratic.services@rbwm.gov.uk

16/02133*      Mr Griffin: Outline application with all matters reserved: Erection of 6 x detached dwellings with associated works at  Breakers Yard and Land Adjacent to Breakers Yard, Gloucester Drive, Wraysbury, Staines –  THE PANEL VOTED to REFUSE the application in accordance with the Head of Planning’s recommendations  to refuse planning permission for the following summarised reasons (the full reasons are identified in Section 10 of the Main Report):

Ø  The scheme for residential development is a form of inappropriate development within the functional flood plain. In addition, it has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the development would not reduce the capacity of the floodplain storage. The scheme also fails to provide a safe means of escape for future occupiers of the dwellings in the event of a flood.

Ø  The information submitted within this application does not provide a suitable basis for assessing that the risk of pollution to controlled waters is acceptable in the Source Protection Zone.

Ø  The very Special Circumstances (VSC) does not outweigh all other harm arising from the development and so the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

Four Councillors voted in favour of the motion (Cllrs Beer, L. Evans, Hilton and Yong), and one Councillor voted against the motion (Cllr Lenton).

(The Panel was addressed by Kevin Davies on behalf of the applicant).

16/02214       Mr Hall: New dwelling following demolition of existing dwelling (part retrospective) at 3 Welley Avenue, Wraysbury, Staines, TW19 5HE –  THE PANEL VOTED to APPROVE the application in accordance with the Head of Planning’s recommendations with the conditions listed in Section 10 of the Main Report.

                        Four Councillors voted in favour of the motion (Cllrs Beer, L. Evans, Hilton and Yong), and one Councillor abstained from the vote (Cllr Lenton).

(The Panel was addressed by Brian Tullett in objection and Jason Hall, the applicant).

16/02358*      Mr and Mrs Mills: 4 No. dwellings formed of 2 pairs of semi detached houses with basement, associated parking and amenity space following demolition of existing dwelling at Lime Treet Lodge, London Road, Sunningdale, Ascot SL5 0JN –  THE PANEL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY to REFUSE the application against the Head of Planning’s recommendations for the reasons set out below:

Ø  The site is located in a leafy residential suburb on the edge of the urban area but shares more similarities with the semi rural character to the north east.  The proposed dwellings are considered to have a more urban form and be bulkier than the consented scheme due to the steps running up to the front doors; in addition the basement rising above ground level results in windows being raised and therefore the dormers raised in the roof which has increase in width and thus appears bulkier.  These changes from the approved scheme will be noticeable in public views from London Road and would have a materially greater effect on the appearance of the surrounding semi rural area than the consented scheme.  The contribution the development would make towards addressing housing supply issues would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

To consider the Essential Monitoring Reports.

Details of the Appeal Decision Report and the Planning Appeals Received were noted.