Agenda item

Watling Ward

Change of use of Vacant Care Home Class (C2) to a 7 bedroom HMO Class (Sui Generis).

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined the application in detail for a change of use of Vacant Care Home Class (C2) to a 7-bedroom HMO Class (Sui Generis).

The Senior Planner confirmed, that within a 500-metre radius, there were 33 HMOs which represented 1.3% of the housing stock, which was not considered an over proliferation of HMOs in the area.  

An alteration to condition 2 and an additional representation was included in the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Coombs addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and raised the following concerns:

• As with the previous planning application, the property was located within a conservation area and situated opposite Gillingham Park.
• She raised concerns regarding the quality and accuracy of the submitted planning application. The report stated the care home had ceased operating in 2023 when it was put up for auction, however, still remained vacant.  It was highlighted that the property had continued to operate as care home up to March 2025. It was noted that, although the applicant had suggested that extensive marketing had been undertaken to retain the building’s current use, the only evidence provided was an email from the previous owners.
• The proposed changes from a care home to a HMO, was the wrong thing to do. In Medway, there was a shortage of good quality places for vulnerable adults and keeping this as a care home could be the answer for families to have the opportunity to choose small, more intimate care homes for their loved ones.
• Although it was acknowledged that this care home was not suitable for disabled people as there was no provision for a lift, it could accommodate other residents such as vulnerable adults or people with mental health conditions.  
• It was noted that the parking beat survey had been undertaken at 5am on a weekday, which was not considered to represent the typical parking demand. It did not reflect peak times, particularly given the property’s proximity to a busy public open space.
• No management plan for the HMO had been submitted, and no named contact had been provided for local residents to raise concerns or report issues. 
• Concern was raised that there was an over proliferation of HMOs within Medway, particularly in the Gillingham area.
• Concerns were raised regarding the impact of increased parking pressure on the surrounding area.

The Committee discussed the planning application, in detail, noting the points raised by the Ward Councillor. Members acknowledged that the proposal would result in the loss of a care home and noted that the property was located within a conservation area.  

The Service Manager - Development Management confirmed that should the applicant or future applicants seek to demolish the front boundary in order to provide parking spaces, planning permission would be required. This was due to the height of the boundary and the property’s location within a conservation area, meaning it was protected by relevant legislation.

The Senior Planner clarified that no basement area formed part of the planning application.

Members raised concerns regarding the high density of HMOs in the area. In response, the Service Manager - Development Management advised that 1.3% of the local housing stock, was considered to be at the lower end and did not constitute over proliferation. 

The Senior Planner confirmed that all proposed bedrooms exceeded the Nationally Described Space Standards and would benefit from adequate levels of natural light. It was considered that three bedrooms being served by two bathrooms was acceptable.

Members requested that an extra condition be imposed to ensure that front balconies were not used for storage purposes.

The Chief Planning Officer advised Members that there was a dispute regarding the date the care home had ceased and the level of marketing undertaken and the Ward Councillor had provided local information that contradicted that within the application documents. Notwithstanding that, the Chief Planning Officer and Senior Planner advised that, in its current form, the building had limitations as a care home. These included accessibility constraints, such as the lack of potential for a lift and had narrow corridors, which would restrict its suitability for some disabled residents and the lack of ensuites to the bedrooms. It was accepted that the cost of those upgrade works to bring the care home up to modern day expectations and standards, would be prohibitive and unviable for a care home of this size.  

Decision:      

Approved with conditions 1 to 6 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report with an amendment to condition 2 and an additional condition be added to ensure the balconies were not used for storage purposes. 

Condition 2:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Received 10 March 2026:

Site Location Plan

4AS.11.PRO.002 – Proposed Block Plan

Received 1 June 2026:

4AS.11.PRO.001 REV A – Proposed Floor Plans

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Additional Condition:

Condition 7:

The front facing balcony space serving the hereby approved Sui Generis

House in Multiple Occupancy shall not be used for the storage of any

materials, equipment, refuse or recycling, household items, or any other

paraphernalia. The balcony use shall be solely used as private amenity

space for future occupants of the property.

Reason: To ensure that the development maintains a high-quality appearance and safeguard against the character of the area and significance of the Conservation Area in accordance with Policies BNE1, BNE2 and BNE12 of the Medway Local Plan (2003).