Ward: Kerne Bridge

 

A report was presented by the Southern Team Leader about an application for additional facilities at an established business. The application had been referred to the Committee because the Southern Area Planning Sub-Committee was mindful to refuse it contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.  The Sub-Committee had expressed concerns in relation to the perceived incompatibility of the children’s nursery and health and spa facilities with particular reference to the potential risk to children associated with unrestricted access by adults and the sale of alcohol.  It was considered that this was contrary to Policy DR2 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.  In addition there were concerns about highway safety implications regarding difficult access onto the B4324.  The proposal involved a commitment to reduce the number of nursery children from the potential 30 that the premises is currently licensed for to 10.  This reduction would offset any traffic generated by the dormitory accommodation which was also likely to generate traffic outside the times when the nursery traffic would be at its peak.  This together with the formalisation of a Travel Plan was considered acceptable by the Traffic Manager.  The Head of Planning and Transportation was concerned that the reasons for refusal might not be defensible if challenged by way of an appeal. 

 

The Southern Team Leader said that the applicants had provided details of their existing Ofsted licence, demonstrating that the necessary authority had been obtained in relation to the operation of the nursery.  The applicant had also explained that the proposed dormitory building was intended to provide overnight accommodation for families and groups using the health and spa facilities.  The applicants had also explained that the diversification was a response to changing Government legislation which threatened the viability of the children’s nursery.  The enhanced health and spa facilities were seen as an important tourism opportunity by the applicants.

 

The receipt of the following updates was reported:

 

ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATIONS

 

It has been brought to the attention of your officers that the site boundary for was incorrectly drawn along the southern boundary.  A suitably amended showing a revised site boundary drawing has been received.

 

The Environmental Health Officer has raised no objection to the dormitory accommodation.

 

A further objection has been received from Mrs VC Stoddard, Creeds Cottage, Leys Hill.  The letter does not raise any further objection to those reported under paragraph 5.3

 

 

A further letter from the applicant has been received:

 

·         the Spa is pre-booked registered guests only.  Nursery children are never permitted to use the Spa;

 

·         CATS Nursery (OFSTED Registered) is a safe, secure environment.  Security measures include gated access, a locked door and parental/guardian sign in procedures.  The nursery is closed evenings and weekends;

 

·         the dormitory will be pre-booked and registered spa groups only;

 

·         all use of the gated and fenced tennis court is pre-booked.  Nursery children are supervised at all times by OFSTED and CRB approved staff during the day.  Guests are restricted to evenings and weekends.

 

·         the swimming pool is exclusively for pre-booked guests.  No nursery children are allowed;

 

·         parents escort their children to and from the car park.  Sleeping policemen are installed for safety and there are clearly visible parking bays and a segregated children’s walkway;

 

·         the performance area at the end of the proposed dormitory will be used as an outdoor fitness and table tennis area.  It is not a stage;

 

·         there is no interaction between adult guests and nursery children anywhere;

 

·         all of our healthy group Spa Packages are pre-booked.  The parties have exclusive use of the Spa and registration forms are completed by the group leader.  If they request a theme for their booking we will happily oblige with a 60/70`s spa experience or a salsa dance session;

 

·         we are a health spa and do not hold an adult entertainment license and will not book stag parties;

 

·         groups of 8-12 ladies (sometimes called a hen party) who have exclusive use of the health spa because it is a healthy alternative. The Spa is not available as a venue only;

 

·         teen Queen parties (12-17 year old girls).  They have exclusive use of the spa in parental approved age related activities.  Parents accompany them to the health spa where they are registered and greeted by qualified CRB approved teachers, lecturers and beauty therapists who fully supervise the agreed programme;

 

·         prohibited drugs.  There is a zero tolerance policy in place.  We have been an educational, recreational, fitness and leisure establishment for 22 years.  We hold an unblemished record;

 

·         we are qualified personal license holders and are fully aware of the licensing laws.  A premises license has been applied for because we serve wine with a meal and we donate a bottle of champagne to some groups;

 

·         this empirical information is a professional response to the child protection issue discussed at the Sub Committee meeting on Wednesday 30 September 2009.

 

Letter of support from Mr S Mitchell, The Firs, Welsh Newton Common

 

The objections centred on two issues: that of ‘risk to children’ and ‘the highway safety implications of the proposal’.

 

-          the presence of adults adjacent to the nursery premises where the children are subject to close and personal supervision already exists.

 

 

-           dormitory wing would allow the option for an overnight stay for clients who may already be using the leisure facility anyway and would of course be outside nursery hours.

 

-          shared use of premises is hardly a new concept.  Most authorities encourage it in the interest of a cost effective service to the council tax payer. 

 

-          many supermarkets are providing crèches within the supermarket itself to allow parents to shop while their children enjoy supervised play activities and hospitals often set aside play areas for children.

 

-          Regarding the issue of highway safety, I do understand that this may be of concern to those in the area, but I believe that the concern is misplaced, particularly as the proposals and the recommendations set out by your officers would ensure that the likely traffic on Leys Hill Rd would be less than the existing development already allows.

 

To object to the proposals would deny CATS the reasonable flexibility that any small business and employer needs to remain viable, and would jeopardise the continuance of what I believe to be a very attractive and socially responsible community service, with detrimental consequences for both employment and amenity in the area.

 

A petition in support of the application with 98 signatures has also been received together with a further 6 letters from local residents expressing their support for this proposal.

 

 

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Saxon a local resident spoke in objection to the application, and Mrs Mitchell, the applicant, spoke in support.

 

Councillor JG Jarvis expressed concerns about potential noise arising from the evening activities and the potential traffic hazards that would arise at the road junction near to the premises.  The local parish councils objected to the proposal and the new facilities would be some 41% larger than the existing premises.

 

The Head of Planning and Transportation said that the objector had spoken very clearly about the planning policies she had concerns about in respect of the application.  The applicant had explained the business aspects and the need for the business to diversify.  The business had been in existence for some 23 years and with the economic downturn the applicant had been forced to reduce staff from twelve full-time to six part-time.  There were material planning considerations and he reiterated his view that the application should be approved and that it would be difficult to sustain a refusal if challenged.

 

Councillor JE Pemberton enquired about the compatibility of the proposal with the nursery.  The Southern Team Leader advised that a ‘before and after’ school service was provided by the applicants and that the other activities did not impinge upon this. Councillor GW Greenow felt that the proposals were leading to a vibrant business which needed to expand.  Councillor PGH Cutter did not feel that the concerns raised justified a refusal.

 

Members discussed the application and having considered all the points raised, decided that it should be approved.

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

 

1   2   3   4   5   6   7

A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)   C01 Samples of external materials   G04 Protection of trees/hedgerows that are to be retained   I51 Details of slab levels   H30 Travel plans   I33 External lighting   Prior to the first use of the dormitory accommodation hereby approved, the applicant shall provide registration details of the nursery limiting the number of children attending to no more than 10 at any one time and it shall  thereafter be restricted in accordance with these details.   Reason: To maintain appropriate control over the trips generated by the use and ensuring the safe and free flow of traffic on the highway so as to conform with Policy DR3 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

Informatives:

 

11      1      2

N19 Avoidance of doubt - Approved Plans   N15 Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC