We
considered the report of the application which was recommended for
approval subject to the three conditions, as outlined in the
report.
Councillor V. Long, representing Mitchel Troy Community Council,
attending the meeting by invitation of the Chairman, outlined the
following points:
- Vulnerable young people need to be looked after in accordance
with their individual needs.
- The
issue is whether it is appropriate to have this type of business
operating in Hazeldene, Mitchel Troy
Common.
- In
the access statement with the planning application it states that
Monmouthshire County Council does not have any policies to cover
conversion of private houses into small care homes, which is
unfortunate in respect of this application.
- Even with the lack of planning guidelines, the location does not
warrant a residential care home.
- Hazeldene would not be available for local children but for vulnerable
children from outside the area.
- In
the absence of guidelines in the Local Development Plan, the
Community Council has looked at other areas that does have
experience in category C homes, i.e., residential care homes should
be located near to residential areas where there are residential
facilities such as shops, health care facilities and public
transport. Mitchel Troy Common does not
have these facilities.
- The
Social Services Department considers that this development would
not provide good outcomes for young people.
- Local residents had expressed concern regarding the type of
issues that the children might have and the potential detrimental
effects upon the area.
- At
Hazeldene there are 20 properties
opposite the proposed development which is in contrast to the
application which states that there are only a few
neighbours.
- The
property is in two distinct parts, namely, the house and the former
garage. Some young people would sleep
in the converted garage whilst the others would sleep in the
house. Only two staff will be on duty
at night, one in each part of the property. This would not seem to
be a normal family home arrangement or appropriate to meet the
protection of these vulnerable children.
- Hazeldene is
not a suitable property for a residential care home.
- The
Priory Group is looking for a business opportunity.
Mr.
J. Imber, the applicant’s agent,
attending the meeting by invitation of the Chairman, outlined the
following points:
- Seeks change of use to a small residential care home with a
maximum of six young people residing there at any one
time. No different to a large family
home.
- A
condition is being recommended by Planning Officers restricting the
use of the site solely for the use being applied for.
- The
use will not require commercial delivery or large
vehicles.
- The
home will be registered with the Care Council for Wales and will be
required to meet stringent regulatory requirements.
- The
property will be staffed at all times including two overnight care
staff.
- The
residents will be young people with autism, and other learning
difficulties. They will not pose a threat to people who live in the
local area.
- This will not be a young offenders’ home.
- Residents will have a structured programme of education and will
often be away from the home being educated or undertaking leisure
activities.
- Family visits will often take place off site being
pre-arranged.
- The
proposal is in accordance with the Local Development Plan and is
supported by Planning Officers.
- Priory Group does understand the concerns of local residents and
has tried to allay their fears.
- Comments from the nearest neighbour had indicated that they were
impartial to the proposal.
- Experience of similar sites in the area does not give rise to
the kinds of concerns that have been expressed.
The
local Member for Mitchel Troy, attending the meeting by invitation
of the Chairman, outlined the following points:
- Speaking as the local Member and as the Cabinet Member for
Social Services with responsibility for both adults and
children.
- Grave reservations about the use of this property and for this
purpose.
- Assessment of need is very specific as it concentrates on the
needs of the individual and the outcomes that they wish for are the
Authority’s primary challenge.
- The
authority aims to provide care for Monmouthshire’s young
people as close to a family environment as possible.
- Other authorities place beyond their borders many children
coming into private care ensconced in Monmouthshire. In most cases we are not informed of these young
children when they arrive and frequently only become aware of them
when absenteeism occurs from their place of residence. Concerns were expressed regarding the safety of
the young people should they abscond from the home onto the busy,
fast road that is Common Road.
- There are sparse facilities available at this location and is
totally unsuitable as a location for a residential care
home.
Having received the report of the application and the views
expressed, Members expressed concern that there was very little
information via planning guidelines to make an informed decision
regarding the application. The Head of
Planning advised Members that their decision should be based on the
Local Development Plan policies referenced in the report and on
material planning considerations, which include the amenities of
neighbours and highway safety.
Some
Members expressed their reservations in respect of the application
and were sympathetic with the views expressed by the local Member,
as the proposal was located close to existing
residences. Also, concern was expressed
regarding the transport arrangements and the effect that this might
have on the village. Social Services
had stated that they were not in support of the application in this
location. The residents would not have adequate
amenities.
However, other Members, whilst sympathetic to the views that had
been expressed, considered that it would be difficult to refuse the
application on planning grounds.
It
was therefore proposed by County Councillor R. Hayward and seconded
by County Councillor B. Strong that we be minded to refuse
application DC/2015/01303 for the reasons expressed
earlier.
Upon
being put to the vote, the following points were noted:
For
refusal
-
5
Against refusal
-
8
Abstentions
-
0
The
proposition was not carried.
We
therefore resolved that application DC/2015/01303 be approved
subject to the three conditions, as outlined in the report and that
the number of young people to be cared for to be added to condition
3.