Agenda item

Rochester South and Horsted

Change of use from dwelling house (class C3) to residential children's home (Class C2) (resubmission MC/18/1631).

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application in detail and apologised for the proposed conditions having been omitted from the committee report.

He advised that should the Committee be minded to approve the planning application, proposed conditions 1 – 3 were set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet. He also informed the Committee that since despatch of the agenda, the planning agent had provided information as to the level of qualification which would be required for those staff working at the residential children’s home.

The Head of Planning informed the Committee that whilst the proposed use would be more suitable for location in a detached property, it was possible for the property at 20 Pattens Lane to house up to six unrelated individuals without the need for planning permission.

He informed the Committee that in recognition that the adjoining neighbours had previously encountered difficulties when this property was used as a hostel, it was proposed that if the Committee was minded to approve the application, such approval be for a period of 2 years to assess whether there was any impact upon the neighbours.

He further advised that the property would be licenced by Ofsted not the Council but that owners of the property would be tied into their Management Plan.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Turpin addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and outlined the following concerns:

·         He had been involved in issues at this property for a number of years and, being a semi-detached property, the adjoining neighbours had suffered on-going problems with anti-social behaviour culminating in an assault on the neighbour which had ended with the perpetrator receiving a custodial sentence.

·         The neighbours are now concerned that should the property be converted into a residential children’s home, they will once again suffer disturbance and anti-social behaviour problems.

·         Whilst it is appreciated that children’s homes were required, such facilities were more suitably located in large detached properties with adequate indoor and outdoor space.

·         There is concern that the provision of a residential children’s home at this site could create a precedent and result in a cluster of similar uses in the locality.

The Committee discussed the application and whilst noting the need for provision of residential children’s homes, Members agreed with the Head of Planning and the Ward Councillor that a use of this nature would be more suited to a large detached property with garden space where it would be less likely that the occupants would create a disturbance to adjoining neighbours.

Members were mindful of the experiences of the adjoining neighbours as outlined in the report and by the Ward Councillor and were also mindful that the property lacked suitable areas for 1:1 discussions with young people who would be living at the property other than in their bedroom or in a small communal TV room.

The Committee was also mindful of the concerns of Kent Police as set out in the report.

Members noted that a property could change from a use class C3 to use class C4 without the need for planning permission but that the current application was for a change from use class C3 to use Class C2 owing to the level of care that would be required and thus planning permission was required. 

Decision: 

a)            Refused on the following grounds:

1.    The proposed use is not suitable for a semi-detached property owing to

the potential impact on the amenities of the adjoining neighbours.

2.    The property does not provide sufficient internal space to meet the needs of the future occupiers and is therefore harmful to their amenity.

b)            The Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to approve the specific wording of the refusal grounds with the Chairman and opposition spokespersons.