56-bed care home at 84 West Heath Road, London NW3

What was proposed

The application proposed replacing the existing building with a three-storey care home and lower-ground floor containing 56 bedrooms, communal areas, parking and landscaping.

“Planning permission is sought for the Demolition of existing building (Class C2) and erection of a three storey building (plus basement) for use as a care home (Class C2) comprising living accommodation and ancillary communal space with associated access, parking and landscaping.”

“The proposal seeks the provisions for 56 beds with en-suite provision and ancillary communal space within one building arranged on three stories above ground, plus ancillary and plant to the lower ground level. As with the previous schemes the proposed building will be centrally located within the site and has been designed to encourage views out over the existing tree canopies and away from neighbouring properties.”

Officer report

The site

The approximately 0.4-hectare site contains a large detached building beside West Heath Road and Eden Close, surrounded by residential plots and protected trees.

“The site is currently occupied by a large detached building located centrally on the site with direct access from West Heath Road. The building itself rises to a maximum of 2 storeys with additional accommodation within the roof.”

“There are TPO designations to the north-east, south-east and west. Due to the continued development pressure for this site a new Tree Preservation Order numbered 25/TPO/001 has been imposed consisting of a woodland belt W1 at the front of the site, G1 a group of trees at rear of the property and 3no. individual trees along the eastern boundary. This is a new constraint to development in addition to the previous protected trees.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and use

The site was formerly a care home, later became an unlawful day school, and previous care-home redevelopment proposals were refused and dismissed on appeal.

“On 14 March 2023, a planning application was refused by planning committee under application reference 22/0228/FUL for the demolition of existing building (Class C2) and erection of five storey (plus lower ground floor) building for use as a care home (Class C2) comprising living accommodation and ancillary communal space. An appeal was subsequently lodged and dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on 12th March 2024, under reference (APP/N5090/W/23/3320810).”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Fourteen objections and six supportive responses were received; consultees generally raised no objection subject to conditions, contributions or accreditation.

“-The Metropolitan Police Advisor - No objection subject to achieving full Secured by Design' Accreditation. Welcomes additional security measures introduced along the boundary - Thames water, no objections, subject to informatives -London Fire brigade - No comments received -TFL - no comments received - Historic England - Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service - no archaeological requirement…”

“-Traffic and Development - No objection subject to conditions and S106 obligations -Trees and Landscape - No objection subject to conditions -Ecology - Following receipt of an Ecological impact assessment, Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan, Post development habitat plan, Lighting strategy and BNG metric, no objection subject to conditions and S106 obligation -Lead Local Flood Authority - Following receipt of amend FRA, no objection subject to conditions -Planning Policy…”

Officer report

What people said

Objectors raised concerns about scale, trees, the care-home use, affordable housing, flooding, transport, neighbour amenity and waste, while supporters welcomed the revised scheme and care provision.

“Scale, Design and Massing The revised proposal reduces overall scale and massing, addressing some earlier concerns. However, the building would still have a wider front elevation extending further to the west than the existing building. Hence, it would continue to have the effect of bringing built form further across the site towards Eden Close, which was an identified concern of the previous Appeal Inspector.”

“Integrity of Care Home Use Unlike previous applications, this proposal lacks a formal operator statement and is speculative with no meaningful strategy relating to the key functions which large care home developers and operators have to consider. Ongoing discussions with operators are noted, but the absence of a confirmed care model raises doubts about its legitimacy as a Class C2 use.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A member of the public spoke against the application, two people including the agent spoke in support, and a ward councillor’s objection was read out.

The committee vote

The committee voted six to approve the officer recommendation, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“The Chair moved to vote on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved subject to a legal agreement, with delegated authority for minor changes to conditions, obligations or reasons for refusal.

“RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to s106. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice-Chair) of the Committee (who may request that such…”

Minutes