Issue - meetings

This application was for the change of use of a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to a small children’s residential care facility (Use Class C2), installation of 1no. window on the first floor north east elevation and creation of an extended driveway and vehicular access at 10 Emral Rise, Dothill, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 3LG.

The application had been called in by Councillor K Tomlinson, Ward Councillor and there had been a notable number of objections received.

Councillor K Tomlinson, Ward Councillor, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding the lack of transparency, the application was contrary to Policy HO7 in relation to specialist housing, lack of outdoor space and the national guidance for dwellings, lack of parking impeded by bins and the lamp post, the bike store and the lack of access to the rear of the property.  She raised further concerns in relation to the number of errors within the documentation, design and access, impact on the highways and the neighbourhood plan, the business plan, safeguarding, the operational statement and staff rotas.

Ms N Pitchford, member of the public, spoke against the application and considered that the application was contrary to Policy HO7 and raised concerns in relation to it being a suitable location, staff rotas, highways impact, parking, safety and access, professional visitors increasing the number of vehicles parking on the street and it was unlikely that staff would travel by bicycle or on foot.  She considered that the amendments to the application did not address the fundamental issues and that it would cause harm and disruption and she requested that members refuse the application.

Mr L Jinks, Wellington Town Council, endorsed the comments of the previous speakers and reported that there had been over 50 objections to the application.  She raised concerns regarding the lack of traffic assessment, retrospective planning permission, technical issues which included overlooking the neighbour, the change of use to a commercial property in a residential area that housed maturing families who used mobility scooters, frames and assistance dogs, parking and antisocial behaviour.  It was recognised that children have to live somewhere in safety, but she felt that this was not the appropriate accommodation for this purpose.

Mr Madumere, Applicant, spoke in favour of the application and sought to allay the residents concerns.  Parking spaces would increase for four cars and the highways authority had deemed this sufficient.  There had been changes to the staff rota.  Work was undertaken to ensure that the children on site would blend to fit the local area and would be a stepping stone for the children to return to their family or until they were able to leave.  There were no changes to the premises and the window would be obscured to prevent any overlooking.  Their focus was on the local community it was not about profit and it was the intention to raise children within the community to live independent lives.

The Planning Officer set out that the application was within an existing four bedroomed house and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61