Browse

Agenda item

20/05322/VAR: 18 Burford Road, Harnham, SP2 8AN

Variation of condition 5 of planning permission 18/00376/FUL to allow the hours of play in garden nursery from 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday

Minutes:

Public Participation

Miss Jay read a statement in objection to the application

Ms Argo read a statement on behalf of Mrs Volkes in objection to the application

Mr Flint read a statement in objection to the application.

 

Christos Chrysanthou, Planning Officer, presented the variation application for condition 5 of planning permission 18/00376/FUL [Condition 4 of Variation of condition approval 18/10898/VAR] to allow the hours of play in garden nursery from 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday. The application was recommended for approval with conditions as detailed in the Officer report.

 

The site was in a residential area. The variation was in relation to the garden area of the nursery, the times of use and the numbers of children permitted to play at one time.

 

The garden was approx. 26m from rear elevation and 15m wide. The building was set approx. 1.5m away from the boundary.

 

Key issues highlighted included the planning history, in 2012, an appeal was allowed by the planning Inspector for a log cabin that was sited retrospectively. In 2018 there was an application for a single storey flat roof extension to replace the log cabin, this was approved with conditions, relating to the garden use, restricting the times of use as a children’s play area to 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday, carried over from the 2012 appeal decision.

 

A variation of condition application was then received, which requested an increase in numbers of children attending the nursery from 45 to 65. The hours of use condition was then adjusted at that time to allow for two separate windows of outdoor play, which were 09:00 – 11:30 and 14:30 – 16:00 Monday to Friday. This was discussed and agreed as acceptable by Public Protection (PP) with a maximum of 15 children playing outside at any one time. To minimise impact on neighbouring amenity.

 

The current application requests to revise the wording of the condition, to revert  to the hours of 09:00 to 18:00, which was considered acceptable by PP, with the restriction of a maximum of 15 at any one time. There would also be an additional condition of a restriction of amplified music being played outside the building at any time during those hours.

 

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. In response to queries, it was clarified that the basis for the original condition of the blockage of use of the garden over the lunch time period, was to protect the amenity of the neighbouring area and residents and that it was now felt that with the restriction to a maximum of 15 children able to play outside at one time, it was considered that allowing the hours to revert to 09:00 to 18:00 was acceptable.

 

Members of the public, as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

Local Member Cllr Sven Hocking then spoke in objection to the application, noting that he completely agreed with the points of the three speakers in objection.

 

He acknowledged that some people would say that living near to school sites would experience a bit of noise, however, schools had break times and lunch times, if approved, the variation would permit the nursery to have all day outdoor play. This nursery did not operate half terms or summer holidays, it was in operation all year round.

 

He drew attention to the report which stated the department had not received any complaints, advising that there had actually been 20 or more complaints, which had been directed to different departments at the council.

 

Resident had been encouraged to make a log of any noise disturbance; however, this was not practical unless they were to remain at home all day every day.

 

The Public Protection suggested a noise management plan, but then advised that it was not feasible to enforce it. This was not the fault of the residents.

 

Cllr Hocking did not feel that there had been a supportive case for the change to the hours. The report stated under CP49, that the proposal would not unduly impact on neighbouring community and create undue noise, yet this variation would do that, making it worse for nearby residents.

 

Cllr Hocking then moved a motion of refusal, against Officer recommendation, stating the reasons as CP49 & PS5. Neighbouring amenity, and the Health and wellbeing of neighbouring residents, this was seconded by Cllr Dalton.

 

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the planning history in particular the variations to conditions, which individually may be minor, added up to a bigger picture over time. The impact on the neighbouring residents. The limit on the building and grounds to meet growing needs catered for by the nursery which was originally a 4-bedroom detached house.

 

Following debate, the Committee confirmed they had heard and seen all

relevant visual materials and voted on the motion of refusal against officer recommendation with the reasons stated above. It was:

 

Resolved:

 

That application 20/05322/VAR be refused against Officer recommendation, for the following reasons:

 

1.     The existing 65 place children’s nursery is positioned in a residential area of Salisbury where residents can expect a reasonable level of quiet enjoyment during daytime hours. Planning permission 18/10898/var restricted the garden area to the hours of 09.30 and 11.30, and between 14.30 to 16.00 Mondays to Fridays, allowing residents to quietly enjoy their property between these hours. The reason for this was that it was "In the interests of the amenity of the area and to protect the living conditions of nearby residents". The removal of this part of the condition would allow the unrestricted use of the garden by up to 15 children and employees for a period of 9 hours a day 5 days a week. This level of intensive use of the garden area, it is considered, will lead to a noise level far in excess of what could reasonably be expected by residents living in close proximity to the site. As such, the proposal, it is considered, would be contrary to policy CP57 (vii) of the Wiltshire Core strategy which requires the local authority to have regard to the compatibility of adjoining buildings and uses, the impact on the amenities of existing occupants, and to ensure that appropriate levels of amenity are achievable within the development itself, including inter alia, noise.

 

 

Supporting documents: