Agenda item

75 Main Street Thringstone Coalville Leicestershire LE67 8ND

Having declared a pecuniary interest in the item, Councillor D Everitt stepped down from the meeting and was substituted by Councillor S Sheahan. Councillor D Everitt remained in the meeting to address the committee as Ward Member and then he left the meeting for the consideration and voting of the item.

The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report to members.

Mrs J Howe, objector, addressed the committee, highlighting concerns over privacy, safety and security, noise and disturbance, unreasonable operating hours and overbearing impact, the welfare of the residents at the property and, inadequate parking and loss of amenity. She also expressed concerns over antisocial behaviour, loss of privacy due to the proposed CCTV installation and the path from the property that lead straight to her property, which were relavant and meant the proposal conflicted with   the NPPF and Local Plan Policy D2. She urged the committee to refuse the application.

A statement was read out on behalf of the applicant, Dr Mohammed, highlighting that the company ran a number of residential care homes through contracts with Local Authorities and all were registered with Ofsted. It noted the local sufficiency and placement need and the requirement of The Children’s Act 1989 for Local Authorities to meet The Sufficiency Duty. It added that the proposed care home would allow young people to maintain family and education links within the area that they had grown up in.

Councillor D Everitt, Ward Member, addressed the committee, highlighting that the location of the proposal in front of them was unsuitable and lacked the space inside that vulnerable children required to feel safe. He noted that there were other homes in the district, but their locations were not in such close proximity to neighbouring properties as the one before them. He expressed concerns over the lack of parking, the impact on the neighbours from the noise and disturbance and, that Social Services should have been consulted. He urged the committee to give due care and consideration to the application and refuse it.

Councillor D Everitt then left the meeting.

In determining the application, some members expressed deep concerns over the suitability of the property along with the lack of internal space and facilities, the insufficient parking spaces for such a use and its close proximity to the highway and, the impact the proposal would have on the neighbouring properties and amenities. It was acknowledged that they had a duty of care to the children and the proposal before them would not meet that duty.

Members had regard to the fact that the application before them was for a change of use, and should it be permitted, the property would then have to meet the legal requirements set by Ofsted, which would include facilities. It was noted that a condition limiting the number of children that could reside there had been included and that a condition could be added to include that a noise management scheme be submitted that would provide contact details should noise and disturbance become an issue.

A motion to permit the application in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure subject to the additional condition in relation to a noise management scheme was moved by Councillor R Boam and seconded by Councillor G Hoult.

The Chairman put the motion to the vote. A recorded vote being required, the voting was as detailed below. As the vote was tied, the Chairman exercised his casting vote for the motion.

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be permitted in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure subject to the additional condition relating to a noise management scheme.