Cinnamon Tree Maidens Green Winkfield Windsor Berkshire SL4

ITEM NO: 10 Application No. Ward: Date Registered: Target Decision Date: 07/00357/FUL Winkfield And 12 April 2007 7 June 2007 Cranbourne Site Address: Cinnamon Tree Maidens Green Winkfield Windsor Berkshire SL4 4SJ Proposal: Erection of single storey rear extension forming conservatory and extension to existing dining room with flat roof to existing restaurant and extension of parking area. Applicant: Mr Rann Miah Agent: Paul Freeman Case Officer: Sarah Horwood, 01344 352000 environment@bracknell-forest.gov.uk

Site Location Plan ( for identification purposes only, not to scale )

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

1 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (If Any)

618427 Validation Date: 01.01.1993 Crown & Anchor Public House Maidens Green Winkfield Windsor SL4 4SJ Erection of single storey front and side extensions, two storey rear extension including clock tower, enlargement of car park and creation of new access. Withdrawn

619464 Validation Date: 20.12.1993 The Crown and Anchor Public House Maidens Green Winkfield Erection of single storey front, rear and side extensions, two storey rear extension with creation of new access and extension to car park.

621315 Validation Date: 03.01.1996 The Crown and Anchor Public House Maidens Green Winkfield Erection of single storey front extension forming porch, single storey side extension forming conservatory restaurant, first floor rear extension, creation of new access and extension Approved

06/01080/FUL Validation Date: 29.11.2006 Erection of single storey rear extension forming conservatory and extension to existing dining room with flat roof to existing restaurant. Refused

2 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

Key to abbreviations BSP Berkshire Structure Plan 2001 – 2016

BFBLP Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan BFBCS Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Submission) RMLP Replacement Minerals Local Plan WLP Waste Local Plan for Berkshire SPG Supplementary Planning Guidance SPD Supplementary Planning Document

RPG Regional Planning Guidance RSS Regional Spatial Strategy (also known as the South East Plan)

PPG (No.) Planning Policy Guidance (Published by DCLG) PPS (No.) Planning Policy Statement (Published by DCLG) MPG Minerals Planning Guidance DCLG Department for Communities and Local Government

Note: The BSP and the BFBLP contain some policies with the same title, e.g. EN1. In such cases, the policy will be suffixed with an “_S” for the BSP and an “L” for the BFBLP, e.g. EN1_S, EN1L..

Plan Policy Description (May be abbreviated)

BFBLP EN20 Design Considerations In New Development

BFBLP M9 Vehicle And Cycle Parking

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

BFBLP GB1 Building In The Green Belt

3 CONSULTATIONS (Comments may be abbreviated)

Transportation Officer

The applicant has submitted the parking layout for the restaurant, this includes a total of 8 new spaces. The applicant is advised to create 3 new spaces adjacent to the 6 spaces that are next to the building and then the two spaces on the western side of the building and one of the isolated spaces adjacent to the access can be relocated.

The increase of 8 spaces and a more useable layout is acceptable in terms of the potential increase use of the restaurant.

Depending on the level of covers that will be provided the level of traffic increase will vary. The increase is unlikely to have an impact on the capacity of the local road network, it may however increase the chance of conflict at the access or on the A330 due to the poor visibility at the junction. The applicant has been advised to cut back the hedge to improve visibility.

Environmental Health

Local residents may be affected by noise from demolition/construction phase, so suggest condition Z1142 be attached to any planning consent.

Conditions

Z1142 Hours of demolition and construction No demolition or construction work shall take place outside the hours of 08:00 to 18:00 hrs Monday to Friday 08:00 to 13:00 hrs on a Saturday and no working at all on Sundays or public holidays. REASON: In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby premises.

Winkfield Parish Council

Considered no objection

4 REPRESENTATIONS

1 letter of objection received from the occupiers of Summerfield House who raise concerns over the issue of traffic and impact to residential amenity.

5 OFFICER REPORT

The application is reported to the Planning and Highways Committee as it represents a departure from the development plan and has been advertised as such.

i. Proposal

This application seeks permission for the erection of single storey rear extension forming conservatory and extension to existing dining room with flat roof. Dimensions of proposed conservatory to be 4m x 5m x height of 3.4 metres. Dimensions of proposed extension to dining area to be 2.4m x 5m x height of 2.6m. The proposal would create an additonal floor area of 32 square metres. An additional 8 parking

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

spaces would be provided on site as part of the proposal through re-arranging the existing parking layout on site and providing an enarged area of hardstanding to accommodate additional spaces.

ii. Site

The Cinnamon Tree is a two storey detached property outside of the defined settlement but within Green Belt Village as designated under the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan. The surrounding area is residential to the east and west of the site whilst to the south of the site is a garage. The restaurant is screened to the frontage by an estimated 0.5 metre high brick wall with laurel hedging an estimated 1 metre high behind. There is established hedging to the east of the proposal site whilst hedging and fencing to the western boundary. The car park serving the restaurant is sited to the front and side of the building. The premises benefits from an A3 use (Restaurants and Cafes).

iii. Planning Considerations

1. Principal of the development

The proposal site is outside defined settlement. Whilst the proposal site is within an area designated as Green Belt Village under the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, it represents a departure from policy but it is still considered that the proposal should be examined in the context of policies GB1 (Green Belt) and GB3 (Green Belt Villages), providing the proposal "would not adversely affect the character of the area, cause danger or inconvenience on the public highway or result in any environmental harm".

2. Effect on the amenity of neighbouring residential property

It is considered that the proposed single storey rear extension forming conservatory and flat roof extension to the existing dining room would not appear prominent from the street scene, given that the proposal would be sited to the rear or north of the building. The proposed extension would be sited 16 metres at the closest point from the boundary with Summerfield House to the north-west and 23 metres from the boundary with Maidens Green Cottages to the east at the closest point and would not appear prominent to the occupiers, given that the proposal would be screened on the eastern boundary by established hedging. There is also a 1.8 metre high close boarded fence and conifer hedging along the boundary with Summerfield House, therefore the proposed extension would have minimal impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residential properties.

The proposed parking bays would be sited along the eastern boundary of the site with residential properties at Maidens Green Cottages and Yew Trees House. At present, the area proposed for additional parking is currently grassed with 3 trees. It is however considered that the loss of this area would not have a detrimental impact upon the visual appearance of the site as it would concentrate development within one area which is already predominately hardstanding. Screening would be provided by established hedging and fencing along the eastern boundary of the site and the parking area would be sited 5 metres from the boundary at the closest point. There would be a distance of 20 metres between the proposed parking spaces and the closest part of no.1 Maidens Green Cottages to the east. It is considered that there would be minimal detrimental impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residential properties and as such, is considered acceptable.

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

3. Impact on the Character and appearance of the Area

The proposed conservatory and extension to the existing dining room would create an additional floor area of 32 square metres and is considered to be a "limited extension" to the existing property. The proposed extension would not project beyond the built form of the premises to the north of the site, there is an outbuilding to the north-west which projects beyond the building line of the restaurant and therefore the proposal would concentrate development within one area. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the open and undeveloped nature of the surrounding Green Belt to the north, given the small scale of the proposal in relation to the curtilage of the premises and that development would not extend beyond the built form that has already been established on site.

The current application proposes to provide 8 additional/amended parking spaces on site along the eastern boundary of the site and to re-design some of the existing parking bays on site for ease of access. The proposed parking spaces would be an extension to the existing parking area and as such, the area of proposed hardstanding would be concentrated within one area and would not encroach significantly into the open garden to the rear or north of the restaurant to the detriment of the area. The boundary of the premises backs onto Green Belt to the north. It is however considered that the proposed extension to the parking area would be sited 36 metres from the northern boundary and given that development would be concentrated within one area, it is considered that there would be minimal detrimental impact upon the "open, rural and undeveloped character of the Green Belt" as outlined in policy GB1 of the BFBLP. There would be minimal restriction of views over and across the rear garden which consists of an open grassed area to the Green Belt to the north of the site because of the proposed increase to the parking area and as such, the proposal is considered acceptable.

An application was made in 1994 under permission 619464 for the Crown and Anchor Public House which included an extension to the car park. This application was however refused by virtue that the car park would lead to "an increase in built development and hardsurfaced area an activity which would be detrimental to the open, undeveloped and rural character of the area" - the application proposed to provide parking along the eastern boundary of the site right up to the northern boundary backing onto Green Belt. The current application would represent an increase in hardstanding with 8 additional /amended spaces and would result in the loss of a small grassed area but as stated previously, would concentrate development within one area and would not appear visually prominent from the street scene.

4. Transportation Considerations

The proposal would create an additional floor area of 32 square metres which would equate to an additional 4 extra covers and 16 additional chairs. In accordance with the Council's Non-Residential Parking Standards, one additional space should be provided per increase of 5 square metres of ground floor area. Therefore 6 additional parking spaces should be provided on site to accommodate the increase in covers provided at the restaurant.

It is acknowledged that there is reduced visibility at the access to the proposal site, located on the A330 Maidens Green, subject to a 30mph speed limit. Comments received from the Transportation Officer are that the level of traffic generated as a result of the additional 4 covers, would not have a detrimental impact upon the capacity of the local road network but may increase the chance of conflict at the access due to

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

poor visibility. There is an existing boundary wall at estimated 0.5 metres high and laurel hedging to the frontage of the site and to improve visibility at the junction, it is considered that the hedge should be cut back to the height of the existing wall; this could be done via condition. It is considered that this would not have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenity and character of the area, given the hedging is not substantial and does not contribute significantly to the aesthetics of the site. It is further considered that the additional parking spaces provided are in accordance with the standards outlined in the Non-Residential Parking Standards. The Transportation Officer has advised that an amended parking plan is submitted to provide a more efficient layout, this could again be done via condition.

5. Access Implications

There are no accessibility issues for disabled people relating to this application.

Therefore recommend the proposal for approval.

6 RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:-

01. 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.

02. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out only in accordance with the following plans: site plan, car parking plan and elevations received 12 April 2007 as amended by condition by 3. (or any plans or details subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority as an amendment to the approved plans). REASON: To ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

03. Notwithstanding the plan submitted, no part of the extension shall be occupied until vehicle parking and turning space has been surfaced and marked out in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The spaces shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than parking and turning. 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 Plans and Policies: BFBLP M9]

04. The hedge along the front boundary of the proposal site facing onto Maidens Green should be cut down to a height of the front boundary wall and maintained at such a height to ensure safe visibility for drivers exiting the site. REASON: To ensure that the development does not result in danger to other road users. [Relevant Plans and Policies: BFBLP M9]

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007

Doc. Ref: Uniform 7/DC/Agenda

The application file to which this report relates can be viewed at the Council's Time Square office during office hours or online at www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk

Planning & Highways Committee 31st May 2007