Skip to Main Content

Agenda item

Application DM/2019/00595 - Change of use from a C3 dwelling house to C4 house in multiple occupation. 62 Chepstow Road, Caldicot, NP26 4HZ

Minutes:

We considered the report of the application which was recommended for approval subject to the three conditions as outlined in the report.

 

Councillor J. Harris, representing Caldicot Town Council, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

 

·         It was considered that the County Council’s Planning Department had failed to provide a general development procedure order for Caldicot School as per the 1995 Act.

 

·         This impacts on the legislation contained in Monmouthshire County Council’s Corporate Safeguarding Policy.

 

·         Caldicot is a 21st Century School. 

 

·         The material consideration – Part 1 of the Housing Act 2004 is specifically concerned with dwelling houses with multiple occupation.  The Local Authority has a statutory duty to ensure that there are no hazards and that the health and safety provision is correct.  Also, it has a statutory duty to remedy any defects.

 

·         The hazards on this site – Positioning of the dwelling in relation to the school.  The splay is not up to standard with regard to access to Chepstow Road. This is a Grampian rights issue due to the land ownership. There is a lack of a footway and the gradient of the drive is not Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) compliant and fails the Equality Act.

 

·         Parking provision is for 12 residents.

 

·         The Application fails to meet criteria within the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act 2015.  The application does not create a cohesive community.

 

·         Under section 50 of the 2014 Act, all parts of the community should be included in any housing strategy being projected. It was considered that the Authority has failed in taking this matter forward.

 

·         There were concerns regarding the report of the application regarding licensing of people and that the Authority cannot discriminate against anyone entering into this type of accommodation.

 

Victoria Hallet, representing objectors to the application, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

 

·         The community is settled and peaceful but is vulnerable, as it comprises of elderly pensioners with health conditions and younger residents with disabilities.

 

·         The application for C4 hostel use is strongly opposed by the local community. Over 70 written objections have been submitted as it was considered that a change in status would make the neighbourhood less secure and less peaceful.

 

·         Shelter and the Big Issue provide evidence regarding the impact on the physical and mental health of people who are forced into temporary accommodation. Tension and conflict between tenants can lead to antisocial behaviour.

 

·         The application is for a large number of people to share one kitchen in inadequate facilities. The dwelling has inadequate fire and emergency safeguards, with no external fire escape. It does not provide access for disabled people.

 

·         The dwelling will be located inside a neighbourhood where a number of vulnerable people already reside.

 

·         The property is far from ideal and is not suitable for a C4 hostel and would harm the health and wellbeing of the community.

 

·         The Council recognises the heightened risks of antisocial behaviour, nuisance and violence. Hence, the proposal for the installation of CCTV and a complaints hotline.

 

·         C4 hostel status would turn 62 Chepstow Road into a property of uncertainty with residents never knowing who or how many people will be living in the dwelling should this status be granted. This will affect all neighbours’ amenity.

 

·         The vulnerabilities of local people living nearby will be exacerbated due to the lack of privacy that will exist.

 

·         During the application process, residents have been given conflicting information with regard to how the dwelling will be used and by how many people resulting in confusion and uncertainty for local residents.

 

·         Following approval of the application, the property could be sold on to a private landlord with the potential to increase the numbers of people living at the dwelling.

 

·         It is feasible that the applicant might want to change the use of the property again which might further increase the negative impact on the local community.

 

·         Safety concerns exist regarding the driveway to 62 Chepstow Road as it is considered to not meet vehicular access standards.

 

·         Planning Policy Wales states the need to recognise the strengths of existing communities, the need to ensure social development for all members of society and the planning decision taken will improve the lives of both the current and future generations.

 

·         The Committee was asked to consider refusal of the application.

 

The applicant’s agent, Samuel Courtney, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

 

·         The recommendation within the report is for approval.

 

·         No objections to the proposal had been received from any of the internal or specialist consultees.

 

·         The applicant has taken into consideration all of the reasonable concerns raised by neighbouring residents.

 

·         Many of the concerns raised centre around the nature of the proposed residential facility and the residents who will be accommodated at the property, the perceived risk of antisocial behaviour, loss of privacy and amenity and the level of car parking provided. Residents have also stated that they feel that they have not been appropriately consulted.

 

·         As set out in the report of the application, there will be no single people housed at the property.  Instead, it will be used by Monmouthshire County Council’s Options Team to meet its statutory duty under the Housing Act to accommodate local families who are vulnerable and at risk of being homeless.

 

·         Each family will be risk assessed prior to being offered accommodation at the premises under the management of the Options Team.

 

·         The installation of CCTV is related to the security and management of the property and will not overlook any of the neighbouring properties.

 

·         The proposal represents appropriate residential use in a residential context. It is not considered that the proposed change of use would give rise to any increased impact compared to how the property could be used if was occupied by a large family as a standard dwelling house.

 

·         There are no external alterations proposed to the property with no loss of privacy or amenity to neighbouring properties.

 

·         The work that has been completed to date are renovation works and do not require planning permission.

 

·         In relation to car parking, there is room at the property to accommodate three vehicles, in line with the parking guidelines.  However, it is unlikely that the residents will own a vehicle.

 

·         With regard to the public consultation, all relevant neighbours and Caldicot Town Council have been consulted as part of the application process and given the requisite time period to provide comments.  All comments have been taken into consideration and responded to via the case officer.

 

·         The application seeks to provide much needed accommodation for families in the local area who are in danger of becoming homeless.

 

·         The proposed change of use is consistent with relevant policies of Planning Policy Wales and Monmouthshire County Council’s Local Development Plan.

 

·         The proposal will not give rise to any adverse impacts on the amenity of existing neighbouring properties.

 

·         The Planning Committee was asked to consider approval of the application as recommended in the report of the application.

 

The local Member for Severn ward, also a Planning Committee Member, outlined the following points:

 

·         This is an emotive subject in which nearby residents have expressed their concerns regarding the proposed change of use of the dwelling.

 

·         The dwelling is a family home and is considered not to be a suitable dwelling of multiple occupation.

 

·         The access is not considered to be suitable as potentially six vehicles could be accommodated.

 

·         There is a blind exit at the bottom of the drive causing a potential highways hazard.

 

·         The local Member had not been consulted regarding the proposed change of use at this dwelling.

 

·         Alterations to the dwelling have been undertaken prior to the granting of planning permission, such as an additional stairway having been installed.

 

·         The local Member does not agree with the property becoming a hostel.

 

·         Concern was expressed that adjacent properties would be subject to excessive noise coming from the dwelling.

 

·         Concern was expressed that up to 12 people could be located within the dwelling and it was considered that the proposal has not been properly risk assessed.

 

In response, the Head of Place Making, Housing, Highways and Flood informed the Committee that this application was for change of use from C3 to C4 which differed from the dwelling being used as a hostel.  The application was for a class C4 use house of multiple occupation for up to six individuals. In terms of planning considerations, the application needs to be looked at on the planning merits of the case.

 

The Development Management Area Team Manager informed the Committee that the class C4 property would continue to run as a single residential unit similar to that of a class C3 unit. However, we cannot control who lives in the property and how they behave. The difference between class C3 and C4 is that unrelated people could be living in a C4 dwelling. The external work that had been undertaken did not require planning consent. The parking provision is considered to be acceptable. The Environmental Health Department has reviewed the proposal in terms of fire safety and has made recommendations to the applicant in terms of what is required. No additional building controls are currently required at the dwelling. Any noise issues would be a matter for the Environmental Health Department to address.

 

The Housing & Communities Manager informed the Committee that this accommodation would be used for families only.  When a householder comes forward, there are a number of measures undertaken with regard to assessing risk and suitability before an allocation is made.  The views of the residents have been considered with a view to maximising the management for this property to alleviate any concerns raised.

 

Having considered the report of the application and the views expressed, the following points were noted:

 

·         This property would be a suitable dwelling for families that have temporarily found themselves to be homeless.

 

·         It was considered that the consultation process for the application had not been correctly undertaken.

 

·         In response to issues raised the Development Management Area Team Manager informed the Committee that given that the dwelling would be less intensely used, i.e., no more than 6 people rather than 12 people being accommodated in the dwelling being proposed, it was considered appropriate to bring the application to the Planning Committee with the condition that it would be used for up to 6 individuals.

 

·         In response to a request that conditions be put in place for the dwelling to be signed to a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) to be used for families only, there were no significant planning reasons to refuse it on those grounds.  It is therefore open to be used by anyone.

 

·         Concern was expressed that in the future the property could be sold on with C4 class status if the application was approved.  A condition for a management plan should be considered which would include a maximum of six people.

 

·         Condition 3 should be changed to accommodate up to six residents to comprise of families and not to comprise of single people.

 

·         The splay would be investigated to improve visibility when exiting from the drive.

 

·         A designated Member of staff would be responsible for the property and would aim to visit it every day making it easier to react to any potential issues that might arise.

 

·         In response to questions raised, the Head of Placemaking, Housing, Highways and Flood, informed the Committee that Monmouthshire Housing Association (MHA) had confirmed that it would not be selling the property as it is receiving social housing grant to purchase the property which restricts what it can do with the property.  MHA had also indicated that it would enter into a 10 year lease with Monmouthshire County Council’s Housing Department regarding management of the property. This could address the management plan condition request.

 

·         The Housing & Communities Manager informed the Committee that there are implications and restrictions regarding Social Housing Grant in respect of the selling of a property.

 

·         A fire risk assessment undertaken has identified some minor issues that require addressing.

 

The local Member for Severnside summed up by reiterating the points that he raised earlier in the meeting and considered that the application should be refused.

 

It was proposed by County Councillor M. Feakins and seconded by County Councillor M. Powell that application DM/2019/00595 be approved subject to the three conditions as outlined in the report with the following amendments / additional conditions:

 

·         Approval for up to six residents as this is what C4 is limited to. To comprise of families and not single people (amend condition 3).

 

·         Add a Management Plan condition to be submitted before use commences (the discharge of condition application to be considered by the Planning Committee).

 

 

·         First floor side elevation windows overlooking 62A Chepstow Road to be obscure glazed.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the following votes were recorded:

 

In favour of the proposal                 -           8

Against the proposal                       -           1

Abstentions                                       -           0

 

The proposition was carried.

 

We resolved that application DM/2019/00595 be approved subject to the three conditions as outlined in the report with the following amendments / additional conditions:

 

·         Approval for up to six residents as this is what C4 is limited to. To comprise up of families and not single people (amend condition 3).

 

·         Add a Management Plan condition to be submitted before use commences (DOC to be considered by the Planning Committee).

 

·         First floor side elevation windows overlooking 62A Chepstow Road to be obscure glazed.

 

Supporting documents: