Live-in care facility at 43 Waverley Gardens, Barking

What was proposed

The application sought retrospective permission to change a dwelling into a live-in children’s care facility for up to four residents.

“Retrospective application for the change of use of the dwellinghouse (Use Class C3b) to a live-in care facility (Use Class C2) for up to 4no residents.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a two-storey end-of-terrace dwelling in a residential area, with its own rear garden and outbuilding.

“The site and its use The application site is a two-storey, end-of-terrace dwelling located on the south side of Waverley Gardens. The dwellings along Waverley Gardens tend to be uniform in bulk, mass, scale and design. The site is 0.018 ha and comprises the existing property and associated rear garden, including a garden outbuilding.”

“A site visit conducted in June 2025 confirmed that the front and rear gardens, as well as the outbuilding, have been physically divided. Each property now benefits from its own distinct garden space, and shared access arrangements have been removed. Internally and externally, the dwellings are self-contained, with clearly defined frontages and rear boundaries that reinforce their separation.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and enforcement

An earlier care-home proposal was refused and dismissed on appeal, while enforcement notices concerning unauthorised care uses were later withdrawn.

“The planning history of the site includes a 2015 application (ref: 15/01449/FUL) for the conversion of Nos. 43 and 47 into care homes for young people, which was refused on the grounds of family housing loss and the intensification of non-conventional residential use within a terraced setting. The subsequent appeal (PINS ref: APP/Z5060/W/16/3152162) was dismissed, with the Inspector citing unjustified loss of family housing and adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity.”

“Enforcement action was taken in January 2024 against both Nos. 43 and 49 Waverley Gardens for the unauthorised change of use from C3 dwellinghouses to C2 residential institutions. Separate notices were issued on 24 January 2024, each requiring cessation of the C2 use and reversion to lawful C3 use. The notice relating to No.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the facility met an identified need for specialist children’s care and its wider social benefits outweighed the harm.

“At the local level, LBBD Children’s Social Care department has confirmed sustained demand for placements for children with complex needs, noting that the use of the property as a care facility helps to meet this need. It has also confirmed that existing homes are managed under a coordinated operational structure which avoids local amenity issues.”

“Summary of Principle of Development 1.14 On balance, while the application contributes to the cumulative loss of family housing in the terrace, it delivers significant public benefits in the form of high‑quality, specialist care for vulnerable young people in line with both local service priorities & national policy direction.”

Officer report

Accommodation and neighbourhood effects

Officers considered the bedrooms, gardens, noise controls and residential operation acceptable, with conditions to limit capacity and manage the use.

“All the bedrooms comply as single rooms against the NDSS and policy D6 of the London Plan and are considered to provide an acceptable standard of accommodation for the children. As staff remain awake during night shifts, the absence of dedicated staff bedrooms is not considered to raise any concerns.”

“Additionally, officers recognise that in this case it is important to consider the cumulative impact of all four adjoining care homes on neighbouring properties in terms of noise. While the proximity of the four care homes necessitates consideration of cumulative noise impact, each site is functionally and operationally distinct, with staggered activity schedules and independent infrastructure.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Children’s Social Care supported the facility, while transport, environmental protection and police consultees raised no objection subject to safeguards.

“Supportive of the proposal. • The home is recognised as an important part of providing high‑quality care for children and young people with complex needs. • Its location helps ensure children remain close to their families, schools, and local services. • Regular monitoring visits are carried out by Quality Assurance colleagues, with positive feedback also received from parents and carers.”

“LBBD Environmental Protection • The principal noise sources identified from the stated use of the premises were noise from the use of the outdoor amenity areas and vehicle movements to and from the premises. • The Assessment report finds that the level of noise from both sources will be similar to those associated with use as a residential property, therefore the impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents is likely to be low.”

Officer report

What residents said

Five residents objected, citing noise, nuisance, parking, commercial activity, property values, unauthorised use and too many care facilities nearby.

“Address Summary of response 48 Waverley Gardens • Concerns regarding noise and nuisance from the existing facilities. Early morning noise from around 6.30am on weekends and weekdays. • Staff arrivals and a personalised car wash service operating causing noise as early as 7:30am. • Negative impact on house prices. • Unauthorised use of the property i.e. was being used as a care facility before gaining planning approval, thus against local residents' rights.”

“Parking issues including by staff and parents who park on dropped kerbs in the area resulting in parking issues along the road. Anonymous • Impact on property value in the area and noise pollution • Believe it is not the correct location for another care home. They note there to be around 5 in the area with another one close by. This would be 5 less family sized homes available. • Noise has been a significant concern.”

Officer report

Who spoke and answered questions

The development management officer introduced the application, and officer and applicant representatives answered questions about care arrangements and concentration of facilities.

The committee decision

The committee agreed the approval reasons and delegated authority to grant permission subject to the listed conditions.

“The particular need for this facility had been demonstrated locally through the Community Needs Assessment & confirmation from LBBD Children’s Social Care that this facility meets a locally specific need, providing important accommodation for children with complex care needs. The facility would retain a residential character and could revert to C3 use in future, while safeguards secured through the OMP provided assurance that local need would be prioritised.”

“The Committee RESOLVED to agree the reasons for approval as set out in the report, and in so doing, delegated authority to the Strategic Director of Inclusive Growth (or authorised officer) to grant planning permission, subject to the Conditions listed in Appendix 5 of the report.”

Minutes