Concrete hardstanding and drainage at Keay Roofing Services Nutts Close, Eton Wick, Windsor

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for concrete hardstanding and replacement surfacing, together with proposed additional drainage works.

“1 WINDSOR AND ASCOT DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 9 April 2026 Item: 2 Application No:25/03422/FULL Location:Keay Roofing Services Nutts Close Common Road Eton Wick Windsor SL4 6QY Proposal:Laying and replacement of hardstanding in concrete and part proposed works for the installation of additional new drainage system (retrospective).”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the concrete hardstanding harms Green Belt openness and rural character and lacks information on flooding, ecology and groundwater pollution.

“It is recommended the Committee refuses planning permission for the following reasons as also listed in Section 14 of this report. 1.The development constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The laying of a concrete hardstanding which enables the area to be used for vehicle storage has an adverse impact upon the openness of the Green Belt.”

“3.The application site is located in Flood Zones 2 and 3, where there is a medium and high probability of flooding respectively, and an area identified as being at risk from surface water flooding. In the absence of an appropriate Flood Risk Assessment and drainage strategy, it has not been demonstrated that the proposed development would not lead to an increase in flood risk both on or off site.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The Environment Agency objected over the missing flood risk assessment, the LLFA found insufficient information, and the ecology consultee required an assessment and compensation strategy.

“9.Questions over the lawful use of the site.The application is just to consider the development in the description. Other applications may be required. Statutory consultees ConsulteeComment Where in the report this is considered Environment Agency Objects to the application and recommends that planning permission is refused due to the absence of a flood risk assessment. See 10(ii). LLFAInsufficient information provided.”

“6 Waste Management Team No comments received.N/A Eton Town Council No comments received.N/A 10.EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATION 10.1The key issues for consideration are: i)Development within the Green Belt; ii)Flood risk; iii)Impact on the character and appearance of the area; iv)Highways considerations; v)Impact on residential amenity; vi)Ecology and biodiversity; vii)Contamination and Source Protection Zone i)Development within the Green Belt; 10.2The application site is…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from a registered objector.

The committee vote

Councillor Wilson proposed refusal, Councillor K. Davies seconded it, and the named vote was unanimous.

“Councillor Wilson proposed a motion to refuse planning permission, in line with officer recommendations, for the reasons listed in section 14 of the committee report. This was seconded by Councillor K. Davies.”

“AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: To refuse planning permission, in line with officer recommendations, for the reasons listed in section 14 of the committee report.”

Minutes