PLANS to turn an Old Town property into a children’s home for three kids have been rejected by Barnsley Council’s planning board.
An application was submitted to the council in June for work to take place on Dearnley View.
The property, which is currently rented by Karen and Christopher Holmes who are the owners of More Than Safe Ltd, would have been used for three children under the age of 18.
No adult would have been living within the property, but staff would have been at the site 24 hours a day on a rota.
A planning report states: “The children will receive 24-hour care from professional carers working on a rota basis.
“The property will operate as a standard family home with communal living areas, individual bedrooms, and shared facilities.
“Two carers will be present at any given time with shifts starting at 8am and sleeping overnight till 8pm, following normal patterns of adults going to and from work in the area.
“The carers do not reside permanently at the property but work in shifts to provide necessary support and supervision.
“The carers do not fall within the maximum of six remit, however, even with staff the total household will not exceed six.
“No agency staff will be employed.
“The property has adequate parking for all staff cars, so no cars will be parked on the road.
“The service will be registered with Ofsted and will provide services to local children.
“The property will operate as a standard family home with communal living areas, individual bedrooms, and shared facilities.
“There will be no external changes to the property.
“The children resident in the home will attend the owners’ school, so will not be at home during school hours.”
However, following consultation with ward councillors - one of which voiced concerns - and other interested parties, the plans were turned down by the council’s planning board earlier this week.
A report said: “The applicant’s statement indicates the proposed use would cater for up to three children to be living together and receiving 24-hour care from professional carers working on a rota basis between 8am and 8pm.
“Two carers would be present at any given time but would not permanently reside at the property.
“It states that the children would form a single household.
There is clarity in the applicant’s statement that the proposed use, residents and professional carers would be managed through a rota-based system to provide the level of care needed.
“Consequently, there would be no permanent adult occupant of the property.
“It is unrealistic to expect children to look after themselves in a single household.
“Carers who provide 24-hour care on a rota basis but do not permanently reside in the premises cannot be regarded as living together in a household.
“The concept of living together as a household means that a proper functioning household must exist, and both children and carer must permanently reside in the premises.
“Consequently, the proposed use cannot be considered to fall within the parameters and therefore, a lawful development certificate cannot be granted in this instance.”
