of the meeting held on 23 June 2010 (ENCLOSURE).                                 (to follow)

The Minutes of the meeting held on 23 June 2010 were approved as a correct record, and signed by the Chair.

Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation (ENCLOSURE).

The Committee considered a report on the above application to extend trading to 2300 hours on Mondays to Saturdays as a variation of condition No.12 of previously approved application No. B2001/48409/FUL, which stated that ‘the hours of trading for the proposed development shall be between 0700 and 2200 hours and at no other time whatsoever’.

In response to questions officers explained that the original hours had been imposed to protect the residential amenity of adjoining occupiers.  The applicant wished to extend the hours to provide sufficient to operate the in-store pharmacy.  There were still adjoining residential properties, but other premises in the area now opened for longer hours and there had not been any objections to the application from adjoining properties.  The extended hours would also support the night time economy.

A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 33.4, when there voted:

To grant (7)                Councillors Mary Burstow, Moira Butt, Adrian Davey, Edward Joyce, John Leach, Janet Lowne and Tony Shields.

Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. B2010/62770/FUL, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out in the Appendix to these Minutes.

Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation (ENCLOSURE).

The Committee considered a report on the above application for the rebuilding of an existing single storey extension to modify a storeroom.

A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 33.4, when there voted:

To grant (7)                Councillors Mary Burstow, Moira Butt, Adrian Davey, Edward Joyce, John Leach, Janet Lowne and Tony Shields.

Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. B2010/62711/3FR, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out in the Appendix to these Minutes.

Councillor Tony Shields declared a personal interest in the above application because his children attended the School.

Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation (ENCLOSURE).

The Committee considered a report on the above retrospective application for a covered play area with hard standing and a single storey detached building for storage purposes, together with associated works, all in connection with use as a safe play area for the adjoining church.

The application had been de-delegated by Councillor Jonathan Pritchard.

Officers explained that the use of the land was not an issue.  The application sought approval for the structures that had been placed on the land.  They also reported that the applicant had submitted a separate application for the dual use of the building at 38 The Avenue and the remaining parts of the garden for either Class C3 (residential) use or Class D1 (non-residential institution) use, excluding all but parts (b) and (h).

In response to questions officers explained that the nursery operated under a franchise as a non-profit making facility allied to the church, and the outdoor play area was needed to meet guidance published by the Office for Standards in Education.  The nursery was limited to 40 children and was open from 9.30 am to 12 noon, but was not restricted to school terms and the premises could be used by other church organisations.  The hours of use would not be controlled by the application but there was no known proposal to increase them.  38 The Avenue had been owned by the church since 1942 and, although a residential use had been retained, most of the ground floor and garden had been used by many organisations.

Mr Peter Mattey, an objector, and Councillor Jonathan Pritchard, a ward councillor, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 33, and the applicant, Mr Nigel MacDonald, replied.

The principal issues raised by Mr Mattey were:-

• 38 The Avenue had been built at the same time as other properties in The Avenue
• It was the residence of the church caretaker, it was a family house and was occupied by a family
• The nursery operator had built structures, funded by a Council grant, and had turned the garden into a playground
• The nursery was expanding and much more use was expected
• The proposal would encourage a greater level of outdoor activity
• The children were encouraged to be noisy
• The nursery could operate for further hours
• The applicant had changed its description of the use of the garden to indicate that it was greater than ‘occasional’
• Concerns regarding the certificate of lawful use of the premises had been ignored
• There was no supporting evidence to justify the certificate of lawful use
• 54 letters of objection to the application had been submitted
• Key issues in the grant of the certificate of lawful use had been ruled as inadmissible
• The dominant use of the premises was residential

In response to questions Mr Mattey confirmed that the play area had received a Council grant.  He said that the applicant church were not good neighbours and had not consulted residents; that the use of the play area was occasional; that 38 The Avenue was used  ...  view the full minutes text for item 506.