To receive any apologies for absence.

No apologies for absence were received.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Bowden declared that he was a Ward Councillor for Eton & Castle, where all 3 applications fell under. He added that in 2017, he also sat on the panel that granted the original planning permission to the property in applications 21/02367/FULL & 21/02368/LBC. He added that he had also attended public and private meetings at the location of the application 21/02063/FULL. He noted that he was attending the meeting with an open mind and was merely declaring this for transparency.

Councillor Davey declared that he had a pecuniary interest in application 21/02063/FULL, having launched a publication with the premises sponsoring it in November 2021. He stated that he would leave the room and not participate in voting on this application.

Councillor Shelim also declared that he was a Ward Councillor for Eton & Castle, where all 3 applications fell under. This was merely for transparency and he attended the meeting with an open mind.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 1^st December 2021 as a true and accurate record.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the last meeting held on 1^st December 2021, be a true and accurate record.

PROPOSED: Part change of use of the ground floor from A2 (financial and professional services) to residential, part single part two storey side extension, single storey rear extension, alterations to fenestration and external alterations, following demolition of the existing single storey side and rear elements.

RECOMMENDATION: PERMIT

APPLICANT: Mr Jagdev

MEMBER CALL-IN: Councillor Samantha Rayner

EXPIRY DATE: 7^th January 2022

A motion was put forward by Councillor Knowles to permit the application as per officer’s recommendation for the reasons listed in section 13 of the main report and the amendment made to condition 2. This was seconded by Councillor Davey.

A named vote was taken.

The motion fell.

A second motion was then put forward by Councillor Bowden to refuse the application, which was against officer’s recommendation on the basis that there was a loss in commercial floorspace contrary to the Eton and Eton Wick Neighbourhood Plan policies BL1 & BL2 and would therefore have a harmful impact on the vitality of Eton High Street.

A named vote was taken.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused, which was against officer’s recommendation.

The panel were addressed by Dr Ros Rivaz, objector, Parish Councillor Malcolm Leach, Mr Dan Lewandowski, Applicant’s Representative and Ward Councillor Rayner.

PROPOSED: Consent for part change of use of the ground floor from A2 (financial and professional services) to residential, part single part two storey side extension, single storey rear extension, alterations to fenestration and internal and external alterations, following demolition of the existing single storey side and rear elements.

RECOMMENDATION: PERMIT

APPLICANT: Mr Jagdev

MEMBER CALL-IN: Councillor Samantha Rayner

EXPIRY DATE: 7^th January 2022

A motion was put forward by Councillor Knowles to permit the application as per officer’s recommendation for the reasons listed in section 12 of the main report and the amendment made to condition 3. This was seconded by Councillor Davey.

A named vote was taken.

RESOLVED: That the application be permitted, in line with officer’s recommendation.

PROPOSED: New outdoor seating area with entrance gates, decking, steps, access ramp and handrails, pergola, arbour, and planters. (Retrospective)

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

APPLICANT: Genesta Georgian LLP

MEMBER CALL-IN: Councillor Samantha Rayner

EXPIRY DATE: 7^th January 2022

Due to his declaration of a pecuniary interest at the beginning of the meeting, Councillor Davey left the meeting at this time and did not take any further part in the discussions or the voting.

A motion was put forward by Councillor Sharpe to refuse the application, as per officer’s recommendations. This was seconded by Councillor Knowles.

A named vote was taken.

The casting vote was made by the Chairman, which was against. Therefore, the motion fell.

A second motion was proposed by Councillor Bowden to permit the application, which was against officer’s recommendation on the basis that the harm that would arise to the heritage assets, would be outweighed by the public and economic benefits that would arise from the proposal. Responsibility would be delegated to the Head of Planning to agree additional conditions with the applicant including operational hours, to limit noise pollution. This was seconded by Councillor Shelim.

A named vote was taken.

The casting vote was made by the Chairman, which was for. Therefore, the motion passed.

AGREED: That the application be approved, which was against officer’s recommendation.

The panel were addressed by Mr Maarten De Vries, objector, Mr Sam Goss, Applicant and Ward Councillor Rayner

To note the contents of the report.