Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing care home and detached bungalow, construction of new 55 bed care home.

PERMIT

Miss Taylor introduced the application.

Additional information was provided on the Update Agenda Sheet regarding further comments from WSCC as the highways authority clarifying information in relation to the pedestrian infrastructure, that correspondence had been received from the agent agreeing to the pre-commencement conditions, that Longdale Avenue, should read Langdale Avenue, and an amendment to the Decided Plans Table.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

Mr Gary Abraham – Objector

Mrs Helen Dodd – Objector

Mr Adrian Kearley – On Applicant’s Behalf

During the discussion Members debated whether the proposal would be an overdevelopment of the plot, which was confirmed by Miss Taylor to have been reduced in size during negotiations with officers.  Members further discussed the description of the model of the operation of the home which seemed to be both a nursing home and also cater for residents who were cared for under the support of an elderly, mentally and infirm (EMI) establishment.  Further matters debated included limited sunlight into the building and outside areas, the potential for basement being lower than the water table and conditions for employees working in the basement.  Mr Whitty explained the proposed use of the development would be classed as C2 in planning terms, and the operation of the home was not a planning matter and similarly any potential issues with the basement or working within the basement was not a planning matter.  The current buildings had C2 use, and the new development would be an improvement upon the existing buildings.  Officers also considered that the impact on neighbours of the replacement development would be reduced in comparison with the current buildings and the level of separation was acceptable.  Mr Whitty also responded to the Chairman’s request for clarification regarding overshadowing, confirming it would be reduced in the summer when the sun was higher and there would be a degree of overshadowing in the winter.

Members further debated the shortage of residential homes in the area, the size of the building, the relationship with neighbours and the design of the roof. Mr Whitty confirmed that officers’ considered the relationship with neighbours would be improved as the new development would be further away from neighbouring properties in comparison with the current building, although there would clearly be some impact on the amenity of neighbouring gardens. 

Members further debated parking standards associated with C2 use, the proximity to the A27, the ownership of the tree belt, potential impact of ventilation units on neighbours, and the financial viability of operating such a home related to the number of beds required for sustainability.  Mr Whitty responded that the case being made by the applicant was related to the necessary size of the proposed home for financial sustainability.  The tree belt was in the ownership of the highway authority, protection measures for the trees was required during construction, but the trees may be impacted upon depend on future A27 development, and the development was considered acceptable with or without the trees.  A condition provided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44