There were no apologies for absence.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 4^th June 2015 to be submitted and signed.

Copies of the minutes of this meeting  are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

CONDUCT OF THE MEETING

The Committee to take items in the following order:

1. All items where people wish to speak to the Committee and have registered to do so by telephoning the Democratic Services Team.
2. Any remaining items that the Committee agree can be determined without further debate.
3. Those applications where Members wish to discuss matters in detail.

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2015 were submitted and signed.

Application for the erection of single storey extensions on both sides of the existing children's nursery building.

The Committee received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Development including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application, explaining to the Committee that the application was a re-application which sought to address the reasons for which the previous application (14/01036/FUL) had been refused in 2014 by officers under delegated powers.

The Chair invited Mrs Sarah Sugarman to speak to the Committee in objection to the application.  

Mrs Sugarman stated that the proposed extension would affect neighbours in the surrounding area with regards to the noise, traffic and parking.

With regards to noise, Mrs Sugarman questioned the reliability of the report produced by an acoustic consultant on behalf of the applicant. She highlighted that the report was carried out on an overcast day in February when the children at the nursery were not outside, however on a sunny, summer day children would be outside all day, every day which would increase noise levels.

With regards to traffic and parking, the speaker referred to the report carried out by a transport consultant on behalf of the applicant. Mrs Sugarman considered the estimated increase of 24 additional daily trips for 25 additional children to be extremely conservative and unrealistic. She believed the number would be more likely to be around 60 additional trips. She also noted that the estimate did not account for staff who were dropped off at the nursery. She also questioned the estimated duration of picking up or dropping off children. While the consultant’s report that had been submitted stated this took a matter of seconds she believed that in practice this took 15 minutes.

Mrs Sugarman noted that the flow of traffic on Hempstead Road was continually interrupted and the increase in traffic which would result from the proposed application would further exacerbate the situation. Mrs Sugarman also noted the parking problems generated on Woodville Court.

Mrs Sugarman also highlighted the clerical error in the paperwork sent to neighbouring properties by the Council which reduced the time available to thoroughly prepare objections to the application.

The Chair invited Mr Phil Grover to speak to the Committee in favour the application.  

Mr Grover stated that the applicant provided a valuable service to the community and was a vibrant local employer. The services of the nursery were described as highly sought after and it was noted that there was a waiting list for places at the nursery.

The application sought to improve the service by the better use of the application site. The proposed changes were to the building line, garage, former staff room and side access which would be gated. Mr Grover noted the height of the proposed new extension on the right side of the building would be lower than the existing structure that it would replace.

Mr Grover stated the nursery did not follow a school style timetable therefore children arrived at different times during the day. Parking arrangements were only  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.