Agenda item

To consider the report of the City Development Manager.

The Assistant City Development Manager presented the application for the change of use from dwelling to supported living accommodation for six residents and staff facilities (sui generis use).

Members were circulated with an update sheet.

Councillor Mitchell, having given notice under Standing Order No. 44, spoke on the item. He raised the following points:-

·         representing a large number of residents of Wrefords Close objecting to the application;

·         application is in conflict with Policy H5 of the Local Plan which requires adequate community and service facilities for occupants with special needs with housing to be located close to local shops and services;

·         application also conflicts with Policy CP5 of the Core Strategy which requires a facility of this nature to be easily accessible and close to local facilities;

·         the proposal therefore conflicts with both policies;

·         the only local shop is a farm shop which is some distance away and is a steep walk up Wrefords Lane;

·         Stagecoach have recently reduced the H service in this area;

·         the lower part of Wrefords Close is a cul-de-sac and the windows of this development will look directly into the bedroom window of a lower ground floor flat opposite;

·         this is an inappropriate location on the edge of Exeter which lacks community facilities, limited shops and a reduced public transport link; and

·         the proposal would be a disservice to both the future occupants and the residents of Wrefords Close.

Councillor Owen, having given notice under Standing Order No. 44, spoke on the item. He raised the following points:-

• speaking on behalf of Wrefords Close residents;
• the Close is a narrow cul-de-sac and when cars are parked it effectively becomes a one way street;
• the extra traffic generated by the proposal will compromise pedestrian safety and the safety of children using the nearby childrens’ play area;
• the proposal will generate additional parking and clarification is required on the exact number of parking spaces being generated;
• the proposal is contrary to Policy H5 of the Local Plan as there is a lack of community facilities in the area, the Policy requiring such a facility to be close to local shops and services;
• a location on the edge of Exeter is unsuitable for social integration and will not be close to the thriving deaf community referred to;
• a further supporting letter refers to full use being made of local facilities but it is unclear what these are;
• Cowley Bridge Road is dangerous to cyclists which will discourage staff from using this mode of transport;
• the farm shop, accessed by a footpath, is some 320 yards away up a steep hill;
• the Local H bus service has been reduced; and
• the windows of 34 Wrefords Close, where children live, will be overlooked and the distance from the proposed development will be 18.5 metres which is below the minimum recommendation of 22 metres. The development does not meet the residential design guidance within Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Mrs Ellis spoke against the application. She raised the following points:-

• have valid and substantial reasons why this development should not go ahead in this particular area;
• photo provided of the development is out of date as a side extension has been built;
• the Farm Shop has limited provisions;
• policy H5 was brought in to safeguard vulnerable people. This is a group of adults with complex care needs. The policy clearly states that they need the highest level of accessibility to local amenities, facilities and services. It also states that it must not change the character of the neighbourhood and this development is in clear breach of those principles;
• having a bus route meets policy criteria. However the H bus has been cut and the only buses that run are from Tiverton and Crediton to the bus station, which is now moving. The residents, who have complex needs, might need to get multiple buses?. They could be completely isolated;
• proposal might not be sustainable in the long run;
• the property has already been extended, is larger than any other in the Close making it even bigger by converting the lower ground into yet more living space and would have an overbearing nature to the surrounding properties. The lower ground conversion would look directly into the bedrooms of two houses. This would be a direct breach of their privacy;
• traffic to the area would increase. Six individuals being taken out and having deliveries would generate more traffic. Online shopping would mean six or possibly more deliveries weekly. Six independent people are not the same as two families;
• six adults in one property would increase noise and disturbance to an otherwise quiet neighbourhood;
• it is a narrow cul-de-sac where children play out quite safely with bikes scooter and footballs;
• it is an unsustainable location for the proposed use due to lack of public transport and poor connectivity to services and facilities, which is highlighted by the inability of the proposal to meet Policy H5 criteria and is contrary to this policy and therefore should be refused;
• the quiet residential character of the area would be undermined by the proposed use and associated parking and vehicle movements are above and beyond those required for the existing residential use of the building;
• the proposed physical alterations will result in unneighbourly development, 
  reducing current levels of privacy enjoyed by neighbouring residents. There are just 18.5 metres between the proposed basement accommodation and existing habitable rooms in properties opposite; and
• the alleged benefits of meeting an identified housing need do not outweigh the negative impacts the proposal will have upon the amenities of 
  neighbouring residents or justification to ignore sustainability.

Mrs Lawn spoke in support of the application. She raised the following points:-

·         representative of Sense and the views of the six vulnerable people who are hoping to move to the property. Sense supports adults, children and families of people with disabilities live ordinary lives alongside and within their communities;

·         the proposal will help to enhance the surrounding environment as the proposed works with ensure that the property, which is currently empty and has undergone a number of ad hoc changes, will be developed to an excellent level of build with the outward features enhanced and the works remain within the current foot print of the existing building;

·         the current parking is for four cars and this will remain. Staff are aware of the need to only park in these spaces and will be encouraged to seek alternatives to parking, for example, public transport;

·         the six people have all lived in more short term accommodation and wish to make Wrefords Close their longer term home. Currently they live in small shared homes, this means that they don’t have their own front doors and have to share a communal bathroom and kitchen. The flats will enable them to live with others they know but have more independence to live their life as they wish. Having lived in shared accommodation with all its limits they now want to have some small space that is their own and by living in a small residential area they will be able to contribute and support the local area;

·         with the proximity to the City Centre they can also continue to build on their local social networks, for example, there is a thriving vibrant deaf community in Exeter that is well established;

·         other services such as a care home in Exeter do not cause issues for neighbours with their parking, staff and visitors making use of public transport, car share and use pay and display parking;

·         aware of concerns not least parking which will not be an issue;

·         staff training and other meetings will be carried out in another office in Exeter and so this will not impact on the parking within the local area of Wrefords Close.

She responded to Members’ queries:-

·         of the six residents two will be deaf and blind and, as with the other residents, will require the help of the support staff. The staff use British Sign Language and work across seven days a week. There will be one person staying in the property overnight in case of emergencies. At other times staff work in ways that support the individuals to have access to work like opportunities, educational classes and attend medical appointments. However; staff are not constantly coming and going but usually would work a full day with an individual;

·         the thriving deaf community in the City Centre includes the Deaf Academy;

·         the residents will not use mobility scooters and, although staff will provide some help with transport and the residents will also be using public transport. There is no intention to transport the residents by minibus; and

·         Sense support independent living and the residents, who will be between 25 and 35 years of age, will have their own front door as opposed to living in shared accommodation. This will help develop their independence together with mutual support between the residents. They will be good neighbours and will not be noisy with late night parties etc. Wider social interaction will be with the thriving deaf community in the City Centre.

The Assistant City Development Manager advised that Council policy required a distance of 22 metres between the windows of back to back properties but this did not apply to front to front. Regarding parking provision, he confirmed that the three parking spaces at the front and the drop off space to the rear were regarded as four parking spaces in total. He confirmed that planning permission had been granted in 2013 for a side extension but that this had not been shown on the displayed photograph.

Members were supportive of the application and felt that the proposed use of the building would be of mutual benefit to the residents themselves, who possessed varying needs, and the wider community. The occupants would benefit from the independent living offered and it was considered that the concerns raised regarding the number of new residents, parking and privacy issues had been addressed.

The recommendation was for approval, subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

RESOLVED that, planning permission for the change of use from dwelling to supported living accommodation for six residents and staff facilities (sui generis use) be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions;-

(1)        The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

Reason:  To ensure compliance with sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

(2)        The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in strict accordance with the submitted details received by the Local Planning Authority on 20 February 2018 (including dwg. nos FP1385-002 PL1) as modified by other conditions of this consent.

      Reason: In order to ensure compliance with the approved drawings.

(3)        The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until details of secure cycle parking provision have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the submitted details. 

Reason: To provide adequate facilities for sustainable transport and to reduce reliance on the private car.