Erection of two storey extension and bell tower to facilitate use of school building as children's nursery; change of use of agricultural land to play area; formation of vehicular access and parking area (part retrospective).

The Area Planning and Building Control Manager introduced the application and confirmed that Members had undertaken a site visit that morning and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.  Members also viewed the site from the neighbouring property.  With reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout, elevations and access.  

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting, and which detailed further comments from an objector and a supporter.  Members also noted that a request had recently been forwarded to English Heritage requesting that consideration be given to designating the Old School House as a Listed Building.

Mrs J Allen, a local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Longden Road already suffered from a high volume of traffic and the additional traffic resulting from this proposal would further exacerbate this;

·         Insufficient parking provision on site would result in an increase in on-street parking;

·         The access would be widened within inches of a public bench;

·         The proposed extension would be very close to her boundary and would impact on her privacy;

·         Trees had already been removed; and

·         Would suffer from exhaust, light and noise pollution and all the associated health risks.

Councillor P Carter, representing Longden Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Originally a small school with relatively low traffic flow;

·         The phone box had been designated as a public facility but had been removed by the applicant;

·         Would impact on the ability of residents to access their properties;

·         Would increase flow of traffic through village;

·         Impact on privacy;

·         The entrance required the use of common land; and

·         Many trees had already been removed.

Mrs J Phillips, the applicant, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Already ran a successful nursery in Bayston Hill;

·         The proposal constituted an investment in facilities and staff; and

·         Sustainable, would provide long-term employment and would return the building to its intended use.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rules (Part 4, Paragraph 6.1) Councillor Roger Evans, as local Member, participated in the discussion and spoke against the proposal but did not vote. During which he raised the following points:

·         This nursery would be situated in a totally different environment to that of the nursery in Bayston Hill;

·         Site entrance would be situated on a slope, which would be very dangerous in icy weather; and

·         This was already a very busy road and further traffic would impact on highway safety and would create congestion.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the potential for an increase in traffic movements, the limited turning area and its associated impact on the Yew tree, and the impact of the proposal on neighbouring properties.  Other Members acknowledged that that the building was designated as a school and on the Chairman’s casting vote it was

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted as per the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the Conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.