Agenda item

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Planning Board held on 10^th December, 2015 and 7^th January, 2016.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports and minutes of the meetings of the Planning Board be adopted.

Councillor Currie referred to application RB2015/1169 (change of use of former Council offices and erection of a three storey building to form a residential institution at Rawmarsh Hill, Parkgate for Action Housing) and as a corporate parent and, being aware that there were over 300 objections to this proposal, asked if account was taken or asked of the Looked After Children Council and Youth Cabinet as this was not an environment he would want his own child to be in.

Councillor Whelbourn also referred to the same application.  He had spoken in opposition against this application on the grounds that these were young, vulnerable and homeless people who would be living in this property and in an environment which could be detrimental to their wellbeing.  He understood the Planning Board had limited grounds in planning terms on which to turn an application such as this down and as a result suggested that a local alliance group be formed once Phase 1 had been completed involving the young people, Elected Members and representatives of the sheltered housing development so that mutual issues of concern could be discussed.

He asked the Deputy Leader and Chair of Improving Lives Select Commission to consider inviting Action Housing and mutual interested parties to share with Members progress of the project and how the Council could be of help and support as corporate parents to Rotherham’s young people.

Councillor Watson, Deputy Leader, agreed this was a sensible approach as this project could not be objected to on planning grounds.  He, therefore, suggested a further step be taken to establish a liaison committee before the first person was resident and that work take place with Action Housing, local residents and Ward Members if vulnerable young people were moving into an area to resolve any misunderstandings before they arose.  As Deputy Leader he was more than happy to be involved to make the necessary arrangements for this to be set up.

Councillor C. Vines agreed fully with his Ward Colleague, Councillor Whelbourn, and pointed out that as part of the initial objection he sought further consultation as this had not be carried out properly in the first instance as young people were not involved. He believed there were grounds in planning terms where this proposal could have been rejected because the full and proper consultation had not been undertaken.

Councillor Atkin, Chair of the Planning Board, confirmed each application would be judged on its merits and specific guidelines in planning terms had to be adhered to.  The Planning Board did listen to initial objections to the application and referred on for further consultation, but made their final decision on planning grounds.   Councillor Vines was issued with an apology following his request to visit one of Action Housing’s other similar projects.

He explained some projects did meet with some problems, but pointed out this project did have Action Housing supervisory staff on site and who would provide support to those vulnerable young people who were placed in this environment.

Councillor Parker appreciated each application would be judged on planning grounds, but pointed out there was some leeway to set certain parameters.  He described the establishment in his own ward which was supposed to have supervisory staff on site.  Residents were experiencing serious problems in that area and the vulnerable young people appeared to have been abandoned by the Council.  He did not want to see another area experiencing the same problems with no supervision and poor record keeping and suggested guarantees be obtained to ensure a similar problem did not occur with this project.

Councillor Atkin, Chair of the Planning Board, appreciated all the concerns raised, but pointed out these kind of issues were not grounds on which an application could be refused.  These were areas of concerns for those who had responsibility and for Ward Members to act accordingly.

Councillor Currie reiterated his earlier question as to whether the Looked After Children Council had also been consulted to which Councillor Atkin was unable to comment on as he was not aware they had been written to as part of the formal consultation process.

Mover:-  Councillor Atkin                        Seconder:-  Councillor Tweed