Issue - meetings

Redevelopment of an existing Children's Home to provide new build residential institution development (Use Class C2). Erection of 3 no. 2 storey buildings, providing accommodation for 12 young people, with associated staff facilities, plant, access, parking, amenity gardens, soft landscaping and a Multi Uses Games Area and an Educational building. 

Recommendation: Approval 

RESOLVED:

1.    That the application be approved subject to the addendum and the conditions in the officer’s report;

2.    That delegated authority be granted to planning officers to draft an additional condition to require planting to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions; and

3.    That delegated authority be granted to planning officers to draft an additional condition restricting the use of the MUGA pitch to residents only.

Redevelopment of an existing Children’s Home to provide a new build residential institution development (Use Class C2). Erection of 3 no. 2 storey buildings, providing accommodation for 12 young people and 6 household staff and an educational building; hard and soft landscaping, communal and private garden areas and a Multi-Use Games Area.

Planning officers introduced the application and highlighted the information in the addendum. Members were informed that the application site was situated in an area which was at high risk of flooding. The existing Children’s Home currently provided accommodation for 13 children and 14 staff. The plan was to demolish the existing building and replace it with terraced houses to house a total of 18 people. It was anticipated that the redevelopment would not impact negatively on neighbours. 20 parking spaces were to be provided including two disabled parking spaces. No objections had been raised by the Highways Team and it was felt that the new development would harmonise with the current street scene. Protected trees would be maintained. The application was recommended for approval subject to the conditions in the report and the information in the addendum.

A petition in objection to the proposal had been received and the lead petitioner addressed the Committee on behalf of the petitioners. Key points raised included:

·         the current Children’s Centre was a single storey building and it was to be replaced by 3 x large houses;

·         half of the rooms were to house unaccompanied children under the age of 18;

·         the proposed changes constituted a material change and would result in overdevelopment of the site;

·         the new development would include 6 kitchens and 6 living rooms which was an intensification of the existing use;

·         residents of Heatherwood Drive, which was situated very close to the application site, would be subjected to increased levels of noise, traffic and pollution – some residents were elderly and vulnerable;

·         the dust created during construction would present a risk to health, especially for those residents who had breathing difficulties;

·         increased traffic would add to congestion in Charville Lane; and

·         residents were worried about their own safety as some of the children were reported to have behavioural problems.

The applicant and the agent were in attendance to answer questions from the Committee but there were none.

Charville Ward Councillors were in attendance and addressed the Committee in support of residents. The following concerns were raised:

·         the application would result in increased levels of noise and traffic and additional pressure on parking. Traffic in Charville Lane was already problematic and cars often parked close to the junction with Bury Avenue;

·         further changes to the proposed development could be forthcoming at a later stage;

·         the scale of the proposal was excessive;

·         the MUGA pitch should be unlit and conditioned for use by residents exclusively;

·         the Travel Plan needed to be strengthened to ensure parking on site was sufficient;

·         refuse arrangements appeared inadequate;

·         the Construction Management Plan should include preventative measures to protect neighbours from dust; and

·         additional tree planting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39