Minutes:
The proposal before Members was to demolish the existing buildings and erect a single-storey building to be used as a church hall with a small stage area, storage space, an office and toilet and kitchen/bar facilities. It was intended that the building would be used to meet the needs of the Church and the local community and it was envisaged that the building would be used for youth clubs, social events, lunches for senior citizens, mother and toddler groups, children's groups including cubs, scouts, girl guides, parties, wedding receptions, art and sport clubs/groups, religious group meetings.
In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response by the applicant.
The objector commented that there had been thirty six letters of objection to the proposal from local residents. The objector also commented that: the existing building could be used as a church hall and that the application represented a modest increase in floor space; there were limitations on access and egress to and from the site. The objector also commented that the proposed floor area, quoted in the report, had been miscalculated and that the proposed building would in fact be 60% larger than the existing building.
In response the applicant commented that the Church had noted the concerns from neighbouring properties and that the proposal had been fully scrutinised by officers who had, following consideration, recommended that planning permission be granted. The applicant also commented that the new hall would be an excellent facility for the community that would be run by the Church. The applicant also confirmed that the proposal was to be funded by a private owner on behalf of the community. The applicant also confirmed that the Church was omitting the bar area from the application proposed.
During the debate Members discussed the current and proposed parking provision at the site raising concerns that the application may provide an insufficient level of parking leading to overspill parking in nearby side roads.
Members also sought clarification on the number of users that the hall could accommodate should planning permission be granted.
Members also considered the effect of increased noise and vehicle movements on the residential amenity of occupiers of neighbouring properties and the possible loss of a tree in the car park that was preserved by means of a Tree Protection Order.
The report recommended that planning permission be granted, however following a motion to refuse planning permission which was carried by 5 votes to 4 with 1 abstention. It was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the grounds:
· Harm to immediate neighbours' residential amenity caused by noise and disturbance including external user and vehicular activity plus the impact of functions held within the building and the possible impact on neighbours' reasonable use of their rear gardens.
· Harm to broader residential amenity caused by overspill car parking into Wennington Road because of shortfall of on-site parking in relation to likely hall capacity.
· Green Belt harm due to bulky and intrusive building.
· Loss of Tree Presentation Order.
· Prejudices pedestrian safety due to site access sightline deficiencies.
The vote for the resolution to refuse planning permission was carried by 5 votes to 4 with 1 abstention.
Councillors Hawthorn, Ower, McGeary, Osborne and Burton voted for the resolution to refuse planning permission.
Councillors Oddy, Bennett, Evans and Kelly voted against the resolution to refuse planning permission.
Councillor Brace abstained from voting.