application number: 10/01584/clup
TRANSCRIPT
Application Number: 10/01584/CLUPAPPLICATION NUMBER:
10/01584/CLUP
CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF A DWELLING AS A HOME FOR TWO CARED FOR CHILDREN AT 8 Aberdeen Close, Bletchley, Milton Keynes FOR Mrs Rashida Bouchada Target: 29th October 2010 Ward: Denbigh
Parish: West Bletchley Council
Report Author/Case Officer: James Kirkham Contact Details: 01908 252039 [email protected] Team Leader: Andrew Horner Contact Details: 01908 252609 [email protected] 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
(A brief explanation of what the application is about, what the main issues are and the officer's Recommendation to the Committee)
1.1 The Site The application property is a four bedroom detached house located at the end of a cul-de-sac in a residential area of Bletchley. Parking is provided to the side of the house with one space in front of a gate which sits flush with the front of the house and two spaces behind this between the houses and the boundary fence. Details of the location of the site and its relationship to surrounding properties can be seen in the plans attached to this report.
1.2 The Proposal The current application seeks a Lawful Development Certificate for the use of the dwelling as a house for two looked after children. The house would be a home for two children (between 5 – 12 years old) who experience emotional, social, and/or behavioural difficulties. Two non-resident care staff will be on duty at all times and would work 24 hour shifts with a change over at 10:00am. The children would not be schooled from the property. Social workers may visit the site occasionally however any other therapeutic activities will take place away from the property. The internal layout and external appearance of the dwelling would remain as existing. One of the bedrooms upstairs would be used as an office/bedroom for the carers. Details of the proposal as described above can be seen in the plans appended to this report.
1.3 Main Issues The main issue in this cases is whether the proposed use would constitute a material change of use away from the authorised use of the property as a
dwelling (use class C3). RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that a Certificate of Lawful Use is issued. 2.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
(The most important policy considerations relating to this application)
2.1 This is not a planning application therefore planning policy is not relevant. This is an application for a Certificate of Lawful Use and the matters to be determined relate solely to matters of evidence and law.
3.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
(A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site – this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case)
3.1 MK/849/82 – Two storey side and single storey rear extensions and front porch – Permitted MK/642/90 – Erection of front porch and single storey side extension to form garage – Permitted.
3.2 There are a number of appeal decisions in other parts of the country relating to similar uses. Some of these are appended to this report.
4.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS
(Who has been consulted on the application and the responses received)
4.1 Legal And Property Services The application under reference 10/01584/CLLIP, was submitted by a Mrs Rashida Bouchada (of Summit care) 27th July 2010. There are several other locations under consideration by the Council relating to similar uses with differing levels of care and we are taking considerable care and time over the analysis of each of these applications which need to be determined on there particular facts.
4.2 This application was for a certificate of lawful development for an existing use of the property “as a home for 2 children who are cared for by 2 carers on shift working, on a 12 hour rota – which is said will continue to function as a normal family house, the carers acting as parents to supervise and support the children at all times”. There have been some anomalies in the information submitted and the application has clarified that the property would act as a home for 2 children cared for by 2 carers on a 24 hour rota. The shift change over would be at 10am.
4.3 There are no physical changes to the layout of the property. The certificate application was accompanied by the following documents in addition to the application form: - 1) A ground floor plan showing rooms and dimensions
2) A first floor plan showing rooms and dimensions which showed 2 children’s bedrooms and a staff bedroom/office 3) A supporting statement from Summit care explaining how care will be provided to the children at the property the accommodation arrangements, and car parking.
4.4 The previous use of the site 8 Aberdeen Close has previously been used as a residential family dwelling. As such its lawful use as a dwelling house was within use class C3 of the Town and Country Planning (use classes) order 1987. Planning permission is required for development. Section 55 (of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) provides that development means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on or over or under land or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land.
4.5 The assessment that has to be made is whether or not the proposed use of 8 Aberdeen Close for the care of 2 children will result in there being a material change of use of the building (currently in use class C3 dwelling house) such that a grant of planning permission would be required. This assessment can only be made by comparing the base use of the property which is a C3 dwelling house with the characteristics and activities associated with its proposed use for the care of 2 children.
4.6 On the facts presented we can draw the following conclusions. 1) The occupancy of the proposed use will be no more than would be expected from a family dwelling there being 2 children and 2 carers at the property at any one time. 2) The activities at the property the household - cleaning, it’s maintenance, shopping for food and its preparation - is intended to follow a similar pattern to that of a normal family. 3) Visits by external agencies will be kept to a minimum and no education will be provided on the premises. 4) The proposed use of the property will involve no structural changes and the layouts of the 1st floor and the 2nd floor would be largely consistent with family domestic use save that on the 1st floor would be a staff bedroom / office and a staff bathroom. This is the only indication in terms of the layout of the property that care is being provided to the children. 5) The arrivals and departures from the property would be limited to the staff attending shifts for purpose of providing the 2 children with care and the need to undertake a school run along with other movements would by comparison be consistent with the level of use exhibited by a family dwelling house. 6) The property can provide on site car parking for 3 spaces so there will not be any additional on street car parking requirement. I am informed that the house was last occupied by an elderly couple as a family dwelling, who vacated several months ago.
4.7 In conclusion there is an element of care provided to the 2 children. This would be consistent with the level and nature of a use class C2 use. However
the overall/activities at the property are not very different from use of the building as a dwelling house in use class C3. As such there is no material change in use and in my view planning permission would not be required. A certificate can be drafted to set the parameters of the existing use clearly. This will limit the scope for future changes of use.
4.8 Parish - West Bletchley West Bletchley Council strongly objects to this application and contends that the proposal constitutes a change of use of this property. This Council is opposed to the proposed use of this dwelling as a home for cared for children, which it understands would operate as a form of business with employees, suppliers and visitors attending the site on a 24hr per day basis. It believes that the proposed use would: i) generate additional traffic and increase the parking requirement in this area to an unacceptable level leading to both vehicle obstructions and dispersed parking in adjacent roads, ii) result in a loss of amenity, having a detrimental impact on the quiet enjoyment of this area by local residents.
4.9 Ward - Denbigh - Cllr Long 'I do not believe that this is an appropriate development for the identified property in the road in question. I understand from the MKC website that the application relates to a ‘Certificate of Lawfulness’. Firstly, I do not believe that the application is a simple request relating to the creation of a place of residence, in the form of a care home for 2 ‘looked after’ children. The application appears to me to be a commercial enterprise and the property is clearly about to have a change of use from a residential property to a commercial business. Secondly, I believe that there is a range of planning reasons why this application should be refused by Milton Keynes Council. I set out the reasons below. I would ask that the decision on the application be made by the Council’s Development Control Committee and not under the Officers delegated powers. Reasons for refusal of the application There are three areas of planning policy that I believe the application does not conform to:
• Change of Use. • Parking and traffic • Loss of Amenities.
i) Change of Use. The development will constitute a change of use. It will no longer be as residential property in a quiet cul de sac, where residents have mostly lived
for many years. It will become a commercial business with a large number of staff, working shifts on a 24 hour basis. In addition other visitors to the property will include tutors for the home schooling and traders delivering goods to the property. This is a proposed development by a company not based in Milton Keynes or in Bletchley. Based in Southend, the applicant company is owned by Blessed Progress Real Estate. I would suggest that this is a very clear change of use and that it will have a detrimental impact on residents including:
• Loss of quiet enjoyment • Significant parking/traffic problems • Light pollution and potential noise.
ii) Parking and Traffic. Aberdeen Close is a narrow cul de sac. It will be adversely effected by a regular flow of vehicles associated with a staff shift pattern and the on site presence of an office and manager. It is likely that throughout the day a total of 3 cars will be parked by the house, this is likely to increase to 5 cars when the shifts change. If a school tutor is in attendance this would increase the number of parked cars further. As a, de facto, children’s home it will be the subject of regulation. This means there will be regular visits from Children’s Services staff. It could be that at peak times that between 6-7 cars could be in attendance. This would, I suggest could be a minimum peak. At night the office manager would not be on site and visits from tutors and social care staff would be unlikely. Cars could still number 4 at night; say 10.00pm (at shift change). The flow of traffic would inevitable impact on this quiet residential cul de sac. Whilst there is a turning circle at the end of the cul de sac. When the impact of the combination of resident parking, resident visitors parking and the cars associated with the proposed development are considered, this is likely to become a congested and noisy area, especially at night around shift changes. It will not be easy to turn. I conclude that this commercial development will have a significant adverse impact on residents arising from parking and traffic flow problems. iii) Loss of Amenities. I am further concerned that the commercial development will:
• Lead to a loss of quiet enjoyment. There will be noise arising from the movement of cars, even if the house itself remains silent. That is, itself, unlikely and the combined impact will have a detrimental impact on residents.
• The house will, I am sure, be properly lit, especially as the shift pattern leads to a late night changeover of staff.
This lighting will directly impact on neighbouring residential properties. I believe that I have highlighted strong arguments showing that the proposed development constitutes a change of use and why it is not suitable on a range of planning grounds.'
4.10 Local Residents There is no legal requirement to consult neighbours on Certificates of Lawfulness. This is because the matters to be determined are solely matters of evidence and law. However to allow for more transparency the occupiers of the following properties were notified of the application: 1 – 7 (all) and 9 Aberdeen Close, Bletchley 57 -75 (odds) Angus Drive, Bletchley
4.11 Letters of objection have been received by 11 properties. These have raised the following issues:
- The premises will be run as a business. - Been informed by the applicant that a minimum of 6 care workers will
be coming and going in and out of the quiet close when each shift is over.
- How can the premises be run as a normal family home when staff will be on shift patterns? Summitcare are a business and a business making profit will be run from this property.
- Aberdeen Close will be affected by the increase in traffic at all times of day and night including staff, visitors, deliveries, social services, and nurses.
- There is only parking for one car and the area in front of the house is use by residents and delivery drivers as a turning point.
- Residents have been told there will be a manager on duty working normal office hours. Also there will be three 8 hour shifts each containing two staff and there would be a hand over report during each shift turnover. It has also been stated children will be home educated.
- Could be up to 5 cars at shift change over in this small Close. - Emergency lighting, security looks, extra rubbish and regular fire drills
will all add disruption and noise in a quiet close. Fire drills are commercial in nature.
- The details of the use are extremely vague and confused. - Aberdeen Close is a residential family close and is a safe place for
children to play. Residents should not have stand by and watch a quiet Close become a very busy and possibly unsafe location.
- Concerns over the impact the proposal may have on the confidence of other children in the street and there desire to play outside.
- Impact of future children on existing children in the Close. - This is a residential area and should not have a business or company
running from any of the homes without applying for planning permission. The area is not suitable for a business.
- The proposal would result in a change of use from C3 to C2. - The property will be run as a business not a normal family home. - The proposals are against the deeds of the property. - The post code is stated wrong on the application form and the
applicant does not live at the address. - The application states this is a permanent use but the property is only
being leased for 3 years. - The owner of the property has been misled. - The use would be more beneficial in a purpose built facility where
longer term planning and full awareness of its purpose is fully agreed. - The applicant has told neighbours that the Statement of Purpose does
not apply to Victoria House (8 Aberdeen Close) - The proposal will have a negative impact on house prices and will in
the least make it harder to sell houses. - Is the proposal allowed by the tenancy agreement? The property is
already registered as an office for the business. - The letter received with the application refers to the planning officer by
their Christian name which suggests a level of informality which could be construed as undesirable.
5.0 CONSIDERATIONS
(The analysis of the issues which are critical, material, considerations and/or of greatest concern to objectors for the Committee to weigh up before making a decision)
5.1 The current application is not a planning application. The application is a Certificate of Proposed Use meaning that the application must be looked at on solely the basis of evidence and law and not the planning merits. The application seeks to determine whether, considering the facts of the case and the relevant planning law, the proposal would be a lawful use and thus not require planning permission.
5.2 8 Aberdeen Close has previously been used as a residential family dwelling. As such its lawful use is a dwellinghouse within use class C3 of the Town and Country Planning (use classes) order 1987 (as amended 2010).
5.3 Planning permission is required for development. Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provides that development means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on or over or under land or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land. Therefore the important issue in this case is whether a material change of use will occur away from the authorised use of the property.
5.4 There is important relevant case law on similar children's home uses. North Devon District Council v First Secretary of State (2003) concluded that children could not on their own be considered to constitute a fully functioning household and that that the non-resident carers could not be regarded as living with the children as a 'single household'. Therefore it is considered that the proposed use does not fall within Class C3 of the Use Class Order and that the circumstances of the individuals within the property would therefore place the use within Class C2. However placing the use in Class C2 does not necessarily constitute a 'material change of use' from C3 to C2.
This view was supported in the above case and has also been applied subsequently in the case of other similar appeals by a number of Planning Inspectors around the country. Some of these decisions are appended to this report. These appeal decisions are relevant material considerations which the council must take into account in determining the present application.
5.5 The issue in this case is whether or not the proposed use of 8 Aberdeen Close for the care of 2 children by 2 carers on a 24 hour shift pattern will result in there being a material change of use of the building (currently in use class C3 dwelling house) such that a grant of planning permission would be required. There is no definition of what constitutes a 'material change of use' and this has to be assessed on a case by case basis by judging the land use consequences of the change.
5.6 This assessment has been made by comparing the base use of the property, which is a C3 dwellinghouse with 4 bedrooms, with the characteristics and activities associated with its proposed use for the care of 2 children.
5.7 The proposed occupancy of the property by 2 children and 2 carers at any one time is not considered to be more than would be expected by a family who may reside at this 4 bedroom property. Although a third carer may be required on site occasionally, the normal structure of the property would be two carers, and its not considered to be significantly different in planning terms to visitors to the normal house. The applicant has confirmed that the children will not be home schooled and the general household activities (cleaning, shopping, etc) would be similar to that of a dwelling.
5.8 The proposal would not involve any structural changes internally or externally to the dwelling and the layout would be very similar to that of an ordinary house apart from the larger bedroom upstairs being used as an office/bedroom for the carers.
5.9 The arrivals and departures from the property would consist of staff attending shifts on a 24 hour shift basis, the possible need to undertake a school run, other movements such as shopping and outings, and the occasional visits from family and social workers. Although the level of movement is considered to be higher than the previous occupation of this dwelling by 1 elderly resident, it is considered that this level of movement would be similar to vehicle movements normally associated with an 4 bed dwelling which can consist of vehicles movements in regard to residents travelling to and from work, school runs, visits from friends and family, and deliveries to the property. The number of cars parked at the site is not considered to be greatly different from what could be expected at a 4 bedroom property in ordinary family use. Although at shift change over time (10am) there may be up to 4 cars at the property, if all staff were to drive, this would only be for a short period of time and is considered to be comparable with the expected level of use exhibited by a family dwelling house of this size.
5.10 The fact that the property will be run as a business and may generate profit is not considered in itself to result in a material change of use occurring. As
discussed above the materially of the change of use has to be assessed on the basis of the land use consequences of the proposed use and through comparing the proposed use with the established use. Businesses can in some circumstances operate from residential premises without requiring planning permission. The applicant has confirmed that the emergency lighting referred to in the Statement of Purpose accompanying the application would only consist of an emergency light at the top of the stairs inside the property in case of a power cut. There would be no emergency lighting externally. The fact the fire drills will occasionally also take place is also not considered to result in a material change of use. Due to the scale of the use, with only be 4 people at the property, these are not considered to alter the materially of the development in planning terms.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
(The officer advice to the Development Control Committee on the appropriate decision, based on the policies of the Development Plan, taking into account the issues detailed in the report)
6.1 It is considered that the proposed use of this property as a care home for 2 children with 2 carers, working a 24 hour shift pattern would not fall into Use Class C3 as due to the nature of the proposed occupiers they could not be regarded to form a family or a single household. However it is considered that in this case due to the scale of the proposed use and the similarity of the nature and character of the use compared to the authorised C3 use of the property, the proposal would not constitute a material change of use requiring planning permission. Appeal decisions on similar proposals elsewhere in the country have reached the same conclusion. It is therefore recommended that a Certificate be issued outlining the scale and nature of the use.
6.2 If the proposal is not operated in accordance with the certificate and is of a greater magnitude then the Council would need to re-assess whether the use required permission.
7.0 REASONS
(The reasons that officers recommend that a certificate be issued.)
CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF A DWELLING AS A HOME FOR TWO CARED FOR CHILDREN AT 8 Aberdeen Close, Bletchley, Milton Keynes FOR Mrs Rashida Bouchada Target: 29th October 2010 Ward: Denbigh
Parish: West Bletchley Council
Report Author/Case Officer: James Kirkham Contact Details: 01908 252039 [email protected] Team Leader: Andrew Horner Contact Details: 01908 252609 [email protected] 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
(A brief explanation of what the application is about, what the main issues are and the officer's Recommendation to the Committee)
1.1 The Site The application property is a four bedroom detached house located at the end of a cul-de-sac in a residential area of Bletchley. Parking is provided to the side of the house with one space in front of a gate which sits flush with the front of the house and two spaces behind this between the houses and the boundary fence. Details of the location of the site and its relationship to surrounding properties can be seen in the plans attached to this report.
1.2 The Proposal The current application seeks a Lawful Development Certificate for the use of the dwelling as a house for two looked after children. The house would be a home for two children (between 5 – 12 years old) who experience emotional, social, and/or behavioural difficulties. Two non-resident care staff will be on duty at all times and would work 24 hour shifts with a change over at 10:00am. The children would not be schooled from the property. Social workers may visit the site occasionally however any other therapeutic activities will take place away from the property. The internal layout and external appearance of the dwelling would remain as existing. One of the bedrooms upstairs would be used as an office/bedroom for the carers. Details of the proposal as described above can be seen in the plans appended to this report.
1.3 Main Issues The main issue in this cases is whether the proposed use would constitute a material change of use away from the authorised use of the property as a
dwelling (use class C3). RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that a Certificate of Lawful Use is issued. 2.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
(The most important policy considerations relating to this application)
2.1 This is not a planning application therefore planning policy is not relevant. This is an application for a Certificate of Lawful Use and the matters to be determined relate solely to matters of evidence and law.
3.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
(A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site – this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case)
3.1 MK/849/82 – Two storey side and single storey rear extensions and front porch – Permitted MK/642/90 – Erection of front porch and single storey side extension to form garage – Permitted.
3.2 There are a number of appeal decisions in other parts of the country relating to similar uses. Some of these are appended to this report.
4.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS
(Who has been consulted on the application and the responses received)
4.1 Legal And Property Services The application under reference 10/01584/CLLIP, was submitted by a Mrs Rashida Bouchada (of Summit care) 27th July 2010. There are several other locations under consideration by the Council relating to similar uses with differing levels of care and we are taking considerable care and time over the analysis of each of these applications which need to be determined on there particular facts.
4.2 This application was for a certificate of lawful development for an existing use of the property “as a home for 2 children who are cared for by 2 carers on shift working, on a 12 hour rota – which is said will continue to function as a normal family house, the carers acting as parents to supervise and support the children at all times”. There have been some anomalies in the information submitted and the application has clarified that the property would act as a home for 2 children cared for by 2 carers on a 24 hour rota. The shift change over would be at 10am.
4.3 There are no physical changes to the layout of the property. The certificate application was accompanied by the following documents in addition to the application form: - 1) A ground floor plan showing rooms and dimensions
2) A first floor plan showing rooms and dimensions which showed 2 children’s bedrooms and a staff bedroom/office 3) A supporting statement from Summit care explaining how care will be provided to the children at the property the accommodation arrangements, and car parking.
4.4 The previous use of the site 8 Aberdeen Close has previously been used as a residential family dwelling. As such its lawful use as a dwelling house was within use class C3 of the Town and Country Planning (use classes) order 1987. Planning permission is required for development. Section 55 (of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) provides that development means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on or over or under land or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land.
4.5 The assessment that has to be made is whether or not the proposed use of 8 Aberdeen Close for the care of 2 children will result in there being a material change of use of the building (currently in use class C3 dwelling house) such that a grant of planning permission would be required. This assessment can only be made by comparing the base use of the property which is a C3 dwelling house with the characteristics and activities associated with its proposed use for the care of 2 children.
4.6 On the facts presented we can draw the following conclusions. 1) The occupancy of the proposed use will be no more than would be expected from a family dwelling there being 2 children and 2 carers at the property at any one time. 2) The activities at the property the household - cleaning, it’s maintenance, shopping for food and its preparation - is intended to follow a similar pattern to that of a normal family. 3) Visits by external agencies will be kept to a minimum and no education will be provided on the premises. 4) The proposed use of the property will involve no structural changes and the layouts of the 1st floor and the 2nd floor would be largely consistent with family domestic use save that on the 1st floor would be a staff bedroom / office and a staff bathroom. This is the only indication in terms of the layout of the property that care is being provided to the children. 5) The arrivals and departures from the property would be limited to the staff attending shifts for purpose of providing the 2 children with care and the need to undertake a school run along with other movements would by comparison be consistent with the level of use exhibited by a family dwelling house. 6) The property can provide on site car parking for 3 spaces so there will not be any additional on street car parking requirement. I am informed that the house was last occupied by an elderly couple as a family dwelling, who vacated several months ago.
4.7 In conclusion there is an element of care provided to the 2 children. This would be consistent with the level and nature of a use class C2 use. However
the overall/activities at the property are not very different from use of the building as a dwelling house in use class C3. As such there is no material change in use and in my view planning permission would not be required. A certificate can be drafted to set the parameters of the existing use clearly. This will limit the scope for future changes of use.
4.8 Parish - West Bletchley West Bletchley Council strongly objects to this application and contends that the proposal constitutes a change of use of this property. This Council is opposed to the proposed use of this dwelling as a home for cared for children, which it understands would operate as a form of business with employees, suppliers and visitors attending the site on a 24hr per day basis. It believes that the proposed use would: i) generate additional traffic and increase the parking requirement in this area to an unacceptable level leading to both vehicle obstructions and dispersed parking in adjacent roads, ii) result in a loss of amenity, having a detrimental impact on the quiet enjoyment of this area by local residents.
4.9 Ward - Denbigh - Cllr Long 'I do not believe that this is an appropriate development for the identified property in the road in question. I understand from the MKC website that the application relates to a ‘Certificate of Lawfulness’. Firstly, I do not believe that the application is a simple request relating to the creation of a place of residence, in the form of a care home for 2 ‘looked after’ children. The application appears to me to be a commercial enterprise and the property is clearly about to have a change of use from a residential property to a commercial business. Secondly, I believe that there is a range of planning reasons why this application should be refused by Milton Keynes Council. I set out the reasons below. I would ask that the decision on the application be made by the Council’s Development Control Committee and not under the Officers delegated powers. Reasons for refusal of the application There are three areas of planning policy that I believe the application does not conform to:
• Change of Use. • Parking and traffic • Loss of Amenities.
i) Change of Use. The development will constitute a change of use. It will no longer be as residential property in a quiet cul de sac, where residents have mostly lived
for many years. It will become a commercial business with a large number of staff, working shifts on a 24 hour basis. In addition other visitors to the property will include tutors for the home schooling and traders delivering goods to the property. This is a proposed development by a company not based in Milton Keynes or in Bletchley. Based in Southend, the applicant company is owned by Blessed Progress Real Estate. I would suggest that this is a very clear change of use and that it will have a detrimental impact on residents including:
• Loss of quiet enjoyment • Significant parking/traffic problems • Light pollution and potential noise.
ii) Parking and Traffic. Aberdeen Close is a narrow cul de sac. It will be adversely effected by a regular flow of vehicles associated with a staff shift pattern and the on site presence of an office and manager. It is likely that throughout the day a total of 3 cars will be parked by the house, this is likely to increase to 5 cars when the shifts change. If a school tutor is in attendance this would increase the number of parked cars further. As a, de facto, children’s home it will be the subject of regulation. This means there will be regular visits from Children’s Services staff. It could be that at peak times that between 6-7 cars could be in attendance. This would, I suggest could be a minimum peak. At night the office manager would not be on site and visits from tutors and social care staff would be unlikely. Cars could still number 4 at night; say 10.00pm (at shift change). The flow of traffic would inevitable impact on this quiet residential cul de sac. Whilst there is a turning circle at the end of the cul de sac. When the impact of the combination of resident parking, resident visitors parking and the cars associated with the proposed development are considered, this is likely to become a congested and noisy area, especially at night around shift changes. It will not be easy to turn. I conclude that this commercial development will have a significant adverse impact on residents arising from parking and traffic flow problems. iii) Loss of Amenities. I am further concerned that the commercial development will:
• Lead to a loss of quiet enjoyment. There will be noise arising from the movement of cars, even if the house itself remains silent. That is, itself, unlikely and the combined impact will have a detrimental impact on residents.
• The house will, I am sure, be properly lit, especially as the shift pattern leads to a late night changeover of staff.
This lighting will directly impact on neighbouring residential properties. I believe that I have highlighted strong arguments showing that the proposed development constitutes a change of use and why it is not suitable on a range of planning grounds.'
4.10 Local Residents There is no legal requirement to consult neighbours on Certificates of Lawfulness. This is because the matters to be determined are solely matters of evidence and law. However to allow for more transparency the occupiers of the following properties were notified of the application: 1 – 7 (all) and 9 Aberdeen Close, Bletchley 57 -75 (odds) Angus Drive, Bletchley
4.11 Letters of objection have been received by 11 properties. These have raised the following issues:
- The premises will be run as a business. - Been informed by the applicant that a minimum of 6 care workers will
be coming and going in and out of the quiet close when each shift is over.
- How can the premises be run as a normal family home when staff will be on shift patterns? Summitcare are a business and a business making profit will be run from this property.
- Aberdeen Close will be affected by the increase in traffic at all times of day and night including staff, visitors, deliveries, social services, and nurses.
- There is only parking for one car and the area in front of the house is use by residents and delivery drivers as a turning point.
- Residents have been told there will be a manager on duty working normal office hours. Also there will be three 8 hour shifts each containing two staff and there would be a hand over report during each shift turnover. It has also been stated children will be home educated.
- Could be up to 5 cars at shift change over in this small Close. - Emergency lighting, security looks, extra rubbish and regular fire drills
will all add disruption and noise in a quiet close. Fire drills are commercial in nature.
- The details of the use are extremely vague and confused. - Aberdeen Close is a residential family close and is a safe place for
children to play. Residents should not have stand by and watch a quiet Close become a very busy and possibly unsafe location.
- Concerns over the impact the proposal may have on the confidence of other children in the street and there desire to play outside.
- Impact of future children on existing children in the Close. - This is a residential area and should not have a business or company
running from any of the homes without applying for planning permission. The area is not suitable for a business.
- The proposal would result in a change of use from C3 to C2. - The property will be run as a business not a normal family home. - The proposals are against the deeds of the property. - The post code is stated wrong on the application form and the
applicant does not live at the address. - The application states this is a permanent use but the property is only
being leased for 3 years. - The owner of the property has been misled. - The use would be more beneficial in a purpose built facility where
longer term planning and full awareness of its purpose is fully agreed. - The applicant has told neighbours that the Statement of Purpose does
not apply to Victoria House (8 Aberdeen Close) - The proposal will have a negative impact on house prices and will in
the least make it harder to sell houses. - Is the proposal allowed by the tenancy agreement? The property is
already registered as an office for the business. - The letter received with the application refers to the planning officer by
their Christian name which suggests a level of informality which could be construed as undesirable.
5.0 CONSIDERATIONS
(The analysis of the issues which are critical, material, considerations and/or of greatest concern to objectors for the Committee to weigh up before making a decision)
5.1 The current application is not a planning application. The application is a Certificate of Proposed Use meaning that the application must be looked at on solely the basis of evidence and law and not the planning merits. The application seeks to determine whether, considering the facts of the case and the relevant planning law, the proposal would be a lawful use and thus not require planning permission.
5.2 8 Aberdeen Close has previously been used as a residential family dwelling. As such its lawful use is a dwellinghouse within use class C3 of the Town and Country Planning (use classes) order 1987 (as amended 2010).
5.3 Planning permission is required for development. Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provides that development means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on or over or under land or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land. Therefore the important issue in this case is whether a material change of use will occur away from the authorised use of the property.
5.4 There is important relevant case law on similar children's home uses. North Devon District Council v First Secretary of State (2003) concluded that children could not on their own be considered to constitute a fully functioning household and that that the non-resident carers could not be regarded as living with the children as a 'single household'. Therefore it is considered that the proposed use does not fall within Class C3 of the Use Class Order and that the circumstances of the individuals within the property would therefore place the use within Class C2. However placing the use in Class C2 does not necessarily constitute a 'material change of use' from C3 to C2.
This view was supported in the above case and has also been applied subsequently in the case of other similar appeals by a number of Planning Inspectors around the country. Some of these decisions are appended to this report. These appeal decisions are relevant material considerations which the council must take into account in determining the present application.
5.5 The issue in this case is whether or not the proposed use of 8 Aberdeen Close for the care of 2 children by 2 carers on a 24 hour shift pattern will result in there being a material change of use of the building (currently in use class C3 dwelling house) such that a grant of planning permission would be required. There is no definition of what constitutes a 'material change of use' and this has to be assessed on a case by case basis by judging the land use consequences of the change.
5.6 This assessment has been made by comparing the base use of the property, which is a C3 dwellinghouse with 4 bedrooms, with the characteristics and activities associated with its proposed use for the care of 2 children.
5.7 The proposed occupancy of the property by 2 children and 2 carers at any one time is not considered to be more than would be expected by a family who may reside at this 4 bedroom property. Although a third carer may be required on site occasionally, the normal structure of the property would be two carers, and its not considered to be significantly different in planning terms to visitors to the normal house. The applicant has confirmed that the children will not be home schooled and the general household activities (cleaning, shopping, etc) would be similar to that of a dwelling.
5.8 The proposal would not involve any structural changes internally or externally to the dwelling and the layout would be very similar to that of an ordinary house apart from the larger bedroom upstairs being used as an office/bedroom for the carers.
5.9 The arrivals and departures from the property would consist of staff attending shifts on a 24 hour shift basis, the possible need to undertake a school run, other movements such as shopping and outings, and the occasional visits from family and social workers. Although the level of movement is considered to be higher than the previous occupation of this dwelling by 1 elderly resident, it is considered that this level of movement would be similar to vehicle movements normally associated with an 4 bed dwelling which can consist of vehicles movements in regard to residents travelling to and from work, school runs, visits from friends and family, and deliveries to the property. The number of cars parked at the site is not considered to be greatly different from what could be expected at a 4 bedroom property in ordinary family use. Although at shift change over time (10am) there may be up to 4 cars at the property, if all staff were to drive, this would only be for a short period of time and is considered to be comparable with the expected level of use exhibited by a family dwelling house of this size.
5.10 The fact that the property will be run as a business and may generate profit is not considered in itself to result in a material change of use occurring. As
discussed above the materially of the change of use has to be assessed on the basis of the land use consequences of the proposed use and through comparing the proposed use with the established use. Businesses can in some circumstances operate from residential premises without requiring planning permission. The applicant has confirmed that the emergency lighting referred to in the Statement of Purpose accompanying the application would only consist of an emergency light at the top of the stairs inside the property in case of a power cut. There would be no emergency lighting externally. The fact the fire drills will occasionally also take place is also not considered to result in a material change of use. Due to the scale of the use, with only be 4 people at the property, these are not considered to alter the materially of the development in planning terms.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
(The officer advice to the Development Control Committee on the appropriate decision, based on the policies of the Development Plan, taking into account the issues detailed in the report)
6.1 It is considered that the proposed use of this property as a care home for 2 children with 2 carers, working a 24 hour shift pattern would not fall into Use Class C3 as due to the nature of the proposed occupiers they could not be regarded to form a family or a single household. However it is considered that in this case due to the scale of the proposed use and the similarity of the nature and character of the use compared to the authorised C3 use of the property, the proposal would not constitute a material change of use requiring planning permission. Appeal decisions on similar proposals elsewhere in the country have reached the same conclusion. It is therefore recommended that a Certificate be issued outlining the scale and nature of the use.
6.2 If the proposal is not operated in accordance with the certificate and is of a greater magnitude then the Council would need to re-assess whether the use required permission.
7.0 REASONS
(The reasons that officers recommend that a certificate be issued.)