PLANS for a children’s care home in Merthyr Tydfil have been approved by councillors despite some objections.
The application for the property in Gelligaer Road, Trelewis, which includes a two-storey rear extension, went before the council’s planning committee on Wednesday, June 4 where it was approved.
Information submitted with the application says the children who would live at the property would be there due to learning disabilities, autism and other conditions.
The applicant said it had extensive experience in managing children with complex needs and that the proposal would provide a stable home for children as well as supporting Merthyr Tydfil’s strategy to return local children back to the local community.
The children placed at the care home would be aged between 8 and 16 years old, would live at the property as their principal residence and there would be staff at the property 24 hours a day.
The home would employ a minimum number of four staff members and a maximum of 12 staff members, who would work on a rolling shift pattern with each shift taking place over days i.e. three or four days living at the property before a staff change.
The handovers take place three times in seven days and the time for any staff changeover would be at 7.30am so as to avoid rush-hour or school commutes.
The supporting information indicates that there would be between five and six visitors each week who would be the children’s family, social workers and friends.
Other visitors to the property would be health visitors such as speech and language therapists and the children would attend school and other activities such as clubs off the site.
The internal layout of the property would be reconfigured to meet the needs of the children, staff and visitors.
The submitted plans indicate a total of five parking spaces can be provided and a sparrow nest box is also included in the plans.
Councillor Michelle Symonds had requested that the application be reported to the committee to consider concerns raised by the local residents.
There were 20 representations from the public with 13 of the objections being from four residents.
The concerns included that the extension would double the size of the house, that it would prevent light reaching neighbouring properties’ habitable rooms and that the site location plan included land that was not in the applicant’s control.
They said it would reduce housing stock and lead to highway safety concerns as well as an increase in congestion on a road with heavy traffic as the level of parking required for the children’s home could not be accommodated on the site.
They said more details of the type of children’s care home needed to be shared prior to approval of the application and its impact on the local community.
They said that the area already had problems relating to drugs and anti-social behaviour in the area and that this house was not the best place for a care home.
They raised concerns about anti-social behaviour and noise, that if the business model changed there might be adults not children living at the property and that the council should not be spending money on new homes when there wasn’t enough funds to maintain the homes in the area and there was not enough social housing for local people.
But in the planning report, officers said the proposed rear extension was not of a scale that was unacceptably large, and its design and materials were not detrimental to the character and appearance of the existing property adding that there would be no significant change to the physical appearance of the property and thus no harmful impact on the character or visual amenities of the wider street scene.
The planning report said that “it is considered that the property would operate in a similar manner to a typical residential use, which would not give rise to significant adverse impacts on the amenities of neighbouring properties.
“Indeed, the property can already be used to support a family with four children that receive care without the need for planning permission.
“Whilst there are concerns relating to the potential increase in crime, anti-social behaviour and the safety of residents, there is little evidence to suggest the proposed care home would reasonably give rise to such activity.”
The head of engineering and highways had no objection to the proposal in terms of parking provision and the report said it was not considered that the proposal would give rise to highway safety concerns or impinge access to emergency vehicles.
The report said that the property was not a secure establishment and children would be able to come and go from the property under the management of the care home staff who were responsible for the children in a manner that was appropriate to their needs.
It said: “It is not envisaged that children would be free to come and go at all hours of the day and night given that there is a curfew from 8.30pm.
“In addition, they may indeed come into contact with local residents, as would other adults and children residing within the neighbourhood.”
The report recognised that if planning approval was given there was potential for the property to then be used for other purposes, such as housing for adults with additional care needs which would fall within the same use class.
This use class relates to properties providing residential care and which are generally appropriate within a residential area and the report said that, having regard to the size of the property, it was not considered necessary to impose a condition that would restrict the use.
