Three flats at 104 - 105 High Street, Eton, Windsor

What was proposed

The application sought to convert vacant upper-floor offices into three flats, with communal access and a ground-floor cycle store.

“Planning permission is sought for the partial conversion and change of use of the existing first and second floor offices to create 3no. flats (2no. 2 bed flats at first floor and 1no. 1 bed flat at second floor). The flats would be accessed via the existing ground floor communal entrance /stairwell off Eton Court. A small area of office space is to be converted into a secure cycle store at ground floor. The remainder of the ground floor would remain in commercial use.”

Officer report

The site and its constraints

The site is in a mixed commercial and residential area, within the conservation area and Flood Zone 3.

“The site lies within a mixed commercial and residential area. To the south lies number 103 High Street, a retail unit with residential above, and offices at 102 High Street. To the immediate west lies a row of residential properties, Regency House.”

“The site lies within the Eton Conservation Area and Flood Zone 3 (high risk of flooding). It also lies within an Amber Impact Zone for Great Crested Newts.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and appeal

Earlier applications for residential conversion were refused, and an appeal was dismissed because safe access and escape routes were not demonstrated.

“The site lies within Flood Zone 3 and while a Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted, it has not been demonstrated that flood risk can be safely managed and that a safe means of escape for future occupiers of the development can be achieved. As such the proposal would increase the number of people at risk from flooding which would be in conflict with the requirements of paragraph 167 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy NR1 of the Borough Local Plan.”

“A subsequent appeal was dismissed on the grounds that no safe access and escape routes for future occupiers could be provided, contrary to BLP policy NR1 and the guidance set out in the NPPF.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers found insufficient marketing evidence, unresolved flood safety, and no secured carbon offset contribution, while other impacts were acceptable.

“Permission is sought to convert the first and second floor offices at 104-105 High Street, Eton into 3no. flats (2 x 2 bed and 1 x 1 bed). The site lies within Flood Zone 3. A previous prior approval application for a similar proposal was refused and dismissed on appeal in 2024 on the grounds that no safe access and escape routes for future occupiers could be provided.”

“It is recommended the Committee refuses planning permission for the following summarised reasons (the full reasons are identified in Section 14 of this report): 1. Insufficient evidence in the form of a marketing exercise has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of Local Plan policy ED3 and Appendix D of the Borough Local Plan (adopted February 2022) to determine whether the proposed change the use from commercial to residential would cause unacceptable harm…”

Officer report

Responses from consultees and neighbours

A neighbour raised privacy and right-of-way concerns, while consultees recorded no objection, requested conditions, or identified evacuation concerns.

“Two letters of objection were received from the neighbour at 103 High Street, summarised as:”

“Comments Where in the report this is considered 1. The building was purpose-built for offices with large windows. Concern that residential use will impact privacy of adjacent yard and first floor apartment at 103 High Street. Windows should be frosted glass. See section 10iv 2. Right of way from rear of number 103 High Street must be preserved. Rights of way is a legal/civil matter and not a material planning consideration.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee was addressed by the agent on behalf of the applicant.

The committee’s motion

A councillor proposed refusing permission in line with the officers’ recommendation, and another councillor seconded the motion.

“Councillor Buckley proposed a motion to refuse planning permission, in line with Officer recommendations, for the reasons outlined in the report. This was seconded by Councillor D. Davies.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

A named vote was taken, and the committee agreed to refuse permission in line with the officers’ recommendation.

“AGREED: To refuse planning permission, in line with officer recommendations, for the reason listed in the committee report.”

Minutes