Minutes:
Members considered a report that detailed an application for the change of use from a residential care facility to a 44 place Day Nursery. It was proposed to replace the existing conservatory with a single-storey rear extension and erect an entrance lobby. Roof lights/velux windows would be provided with ceilings removed from first floor rooms. There were a number of other minor changes to the building which in part resulted from the relocation of the stairwell to enable the provision of a central lift. The external fire staircase would be removed from the rear of the building and disabled access ramps would be provided to three entrances. Existing windows would be replaced.
The day nursery would provide 3 age-group rooms with reception/security point, staff room, kitchen, laundry, sensory room, storage and WC facilities. The nursery would be open to children between 8am and 6pm on Mondays to Fridays. The proposal would provide employment for 10 full-time staff.
Existing preserved trees would be removed andreplaced by 10 new trees and other landscaping would be provided including hedging to the rear garden area and grass.
The proposal would also include increasing the width of the existing vehicular access onto Erroll Road. A second vehicular access and hardstanding area would be constructed to Erroll Road which would provide 2 drop-off bays and a disabled parking space to the rear of the building. The total parking provision would be 7 with a turning area to the front of the building.
A Travel Plan had been submitted with the application.
Members noted that 6 letters of representation had been received and a letter of support had been received from the Council’s Social Care and Learning Support Team.
It was noted that the application had been called in by Councillor Andrew Curtin on grounds relating to traffic movements and car parking problems at a busy junction with the Main Road particular reference was made to a similar application at the junction of Kingston Road and Main Road having been refused on the grounds of traffic impact a few years ago.
With its agreement Councillor Curtin addressed the committee. Councillor Curtin asked members to give careful consideration to the scheme considering the previously rejected application.
In accordance with the public speaking arrangements, the Committee was addressed by an objector without a response from the applicant.
During a lengthy debate members discussed the possible numbers of children attending the nursery and the impact this could have on the amenity of neighbouring properties.
Mention was also made of the possible traffic movements within a busy area and the possibility of displaced parking.
A motion was proposed for refusal of planning permission which was lost by 6 votes to 3 with 1 abstention. Councillors Misir, Hawthorn and Ower voted for the motion. Councillors Brace, Kelly, Oddy, Osborne, Pain and McGeary voted against the motion. Councillor Tebbutt abstained from voting.
It was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report. The vote for the resolution to grant planning permission was passed by 7 votes to 2 with 1 abstention. Councillors Brace, Kelly, Oddy, Osborne, Pain, Tebbutt and McGeary voted for the resolution to grant planning permission. Councillors Hawthorn and Ower voted against the resolution to grant planning permission. Councillor Misir abstained from voting.