No 86 May 2019

HERITAGE AND ENVIRONMENT

The report of this committee must begin with the resignation of a stalwart member, namely John Edwards. John has been an active member for over 15 years and has campaigned for various important causes involving buildings, developments and highways in Windsor. He has a passionate interest in and care for our heritage and has never been afraid to defend his views and fight his corner. The Society owes a lot to him and The Heritage and Environment Committee is very grateful for all the work he has done over many years. He was presented with an initialled pen at our April meeting in appreciation of his commitment.

John is now moving to Old Windsor as his life enters another busy phase and we send him our very best wishes.

A  Planning Applications
Letters written after February meeting

1. 56 – 57 Sir Christopher Wren Hotel, Thames Street, SL4 1QW – non material amendments to planning permission 18/00255/FULL for part of the ground floor to be used as a conference/meeting room instead of a coffee lounge as originally annotated on the approved plan – (PA 19/00210)
   At a consultation in 2016 we had been led to believe that the coffee lounge would have public access as we were concerned about the loss of the Chocolate Theatre Café. We encouraged the hotel to provide this amenity. Pending
2. 28 Springfield Road Windsor SL4 3PQ – single storey rear extension and second floor rear extension – (PA 19/00012/FULL)
   We had no objection to the single storey addition but considered the second floor extension had a poor relationship to the terrace of Victorian cottages. Permitted
3. 8 Black Horse Close SL4 5QP – Variation under Section 73a planning permission 18/00253/FULL without complying with Condition 2 (C3 Occupation) for the construction of a three storey terraced dwelling with new vehicular and pedestrian access and associated parking following the demolition of existing extension and garage – (PA 19/00021)
   We expressed our concern that the insufficient parking spaces and the number of houses becoming HMOs (House of Multiple Occupancy) in this residential street would have a very detrimental impact on amenity and road safety. Refused as a Non-Material Amendment, a new application PA 19/00991/FULL has been submitted

 Letters written after March meeting

4. 19 Arthur Road, Windsor – single storey side/rear extension, alterations to rear fenestration, raising of ridge, second floor rear extension with rear dormer and 4 roof lights to facilitate a loft conversion – (PA 19/00290/FULL)
   We were unhappy about the raised roof ridge and the structure being out of keeping with neighbouring properties. Refused

 Letters written after April meeting

5. Avanti 98 Peascod Street Windsor SL4 1DH – consent to retain alterations to shop front, further works to re-paint shot front and new signage – (PA 19/00683/LBC)
   We were very unhappy about several aspects of the alterations to this Grade II listed building which was formerly Wellington Public House. Demolition of parts of the façade without Listed Building Consent caused particular concern. Pending
6. Windsor Physiotherapy, Essex Lodge, 69 Osborne Road Windsor SL43EQ – demolition of existing building and construction of a new building comprising 10 x two bedroom and 2 x one bedroom flats and associated parking alteration to existing access and new bin enclosure – (PA 19/00916 FULL)
   We were concerned about loss of this heritage asset on this prominent site and the design and lack of landscaping of the proposed development which are not in character with the area. (See below) Pending
7. 35 Park Street, Windsor – consent for the partial removal of chimney breast at ground floor level and removal of existing cupboards to accommodate new kitchen unit – (PA 19/00842/LBC)
   This is a listed building in an important street in a conservation area. We were very concerned about the proposals and the seeming lack of proper process. Pending

 B  Updates to Planning Applications mentioned in previous newsletters

• 9–11 Imperial Road – outline application for 2×2 bed dwellings, 14 apartments, parking etc. following demolition of present buildings – (PAs 18/02637 18/02637, 18/02637)
  This site has already won an appeal for development but these are new plans. We still have serious concerns about the parking provision and the impact of vehicle movement on this very busy section of road. Permitted
• 207 St Leonard’s Rd. – demolition of outbuildings, 2 storey extension and conversion of resulting building to 4 x one bedroom dwellings – (PA 18/03181)
  Concern about lack of parking and resulting vehicle movements on already busy, congested road – B3022 Still Pending
• The Sebastopol, 137 Clewer Hill Road, SL4 4DW – demolition and construction of 6 x 1bedroom and 3 x 2bedroom apartments – (PA 18/03360)
  A previous application was refused. We have no objection to the idea but thought the design rather bland and uninspiring for a significant corner site. Permitted
• Squires Garden Centre, Maidenhead Road, SL4 5UB – erection of 39 dwellings, creation of new access off Maidenhead Road and provision of parking, internal circulation, public open space, landscaping and related infrastructure – (PA 18/03754)
  We requested that the hedgerow and trees bordering the A308 be maintained, in particular 2 oak trees, and that the large block on the corner be of less bland design and complement the neighbouring ‘Willows’ buildings. Withdrawn
• Meejana, 1 Church Lane, Windsor SL4 1PA – re-painting of building, installation of 2 awnings, replacement door and shop window (retrospective) Consent to display illuminated and non-illuminated signage, menu board and vinyls – (PA 18/03665)
  We supported this application both in terms of the proposed paint palette and the replacement door and windows. Refused

 C  Letters have also been written about the following:-

1. Essex Lodge, Osborne Road, Windsor – (PA 19/00916/FULL)
   We became aware of the latest application for this site sometime after our April meeting and have now submitted our objection to the proposed demolition and erection of 12 flats. Essex Lodge features on the list of Non-Designated Heritage Assets we compiled in collaboration with the WNP Forum, and with support from RBWM Conservation Officers and advice from Historic England. The Victorian Society, SAVE Britain’s Heritage, WNP and local residents have also written to oppose the loss of this significant Victorian landmark, and it is hoped a new application will be submitted to retain and redevelop the existing building. A proposal is also being put forward by the Victorian Society and SAVE to extend the Inner Windsor Conservation Area boundary to include Essex Lodge, which we support.
2. Borough Wide Design Guide
   During March the Borough published a detailed Borough Wide Design Guide which, if adopted, will provide developers with detailed advice on what will and will not be acceptable in relation to the design of new developments in the Borough. Under the overarching themes of “Royalty” “River” and “Green”, the document covers a wide range of topics apart from just what buildings look like.  There are sections on open spaces, character, layout, scale, solar design, outlook, parking spaces and more.  The public consultation ran until 25th April and the Heritage and Environment Committee considered the guide at its April meeting and submitted comments.   While complimenting the Borough on the very detailed document we also had some concerns and a number of detailed queries and suggestions for changes.  The Guide will now be revised in the light of comments and presented to Cabinet for formal adoption as a Supplementary Planning Document.
3. Windsor Business Quarter 67 Alma Road – (PA 18/00095 – PA 18/60072 / NONDET)
   We have written requesting Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) for trees on the site of the former Imperial House. The reply we received suggested that we wait and trust the developer. We are very unhappy about this but will wait until the Planning Inspector issues his report on the proposed development of this site.
4. The Cockpit, Eton High Street – (PAs 15/02783 & 15/02786)
   We wrote to the developer enquiring about the lack of progress and resulting impact on the building and Eton High Street. The courteous reply said that progress should begin shortly now that some difficulties had been resolved.

D  Other Items of Interest:

• Windsor Neighbourhood Plan
  After five years in the making the final draft of the Windsor Neighbourhood Plan (Regulation 15 Submission Version) was delivered to RBWM Town Hall on 18th April. The Council will now undertake a final consultation on the main document and its appendices* before appointing an Examiner who will consider whether the correct process has been followed with respect to the formation of the Plan; if any further revisions are considered necessary; and whether the Plan can now proceed to a Public Referendum. If the Plan is successful at the Referendum stage, it becomes what is termed a “made” Plan and will carry legal weight in planning decisions. Over the next few months, the Committee and Forum will also be starting to put together the WNP implementation and delivery strategy.
  *Appendices to the Plan: 1- Glossary; 2- Committee and Forum members and WNP roles; 3- Urban Open Spaces List; 4- WNP Design Guide, incl. General Guide, Areas, Shop Fronts and Parking; 5- Local Viewing Corridors; 6- Non-Designated Heritage Assets List; 7- Windsor Extracts from RBWM Townscape Assessment

 Imperial House Appeal Inquiry

• In 2018, the Imperial House developers appealed against RBWM for non-determination (and refusal in January 2019) of their application for a mixed-use development for offices and 217 Buy-to-Rent flats. The Inquiry was held at Windsor Racecourse from 26th March over a six-day period, including several site visits. In addition to the Appellants (Salmon Harvester) and Defendants (the Council), a “Rule 6 Party” was invited to make representations on behalf of The Society and the local residents’ group. Several H&EC and WNP members, residents, Councillors and planning officers also attended, some speaking as objectors, citing the proposal’s overbearing scale, mass, bulk, height and insufficient on-site parking provision. The Inspector’s Report is expected in May.