Children’s residential home at 30 Glenfield Avenue, Southampton

The site and its surroundings

The extended detached house is in a mainly residential area beside a junior school, with parking, a garden and parts of the site in flood zones.

“The area is primarily residential with a mixture of detached houses and semi-detached houses all with modest set backs from the road. To the south of the site is Beechwood Junior School. The site is located within flood zone 3”

“To the rear of the site is an approximately 15 metre length garden which contains a small outbuilding. To the side of the property is a car port and to the front are areas of planting, parking and areas for bin storage.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier lawful development certificate application for the same change of use was refused in March 2025.

“Case Ref Proposal Decision Date 964/CC ERECTION OF TWO DWELLINGS 01.02.1951 1044/R ERECTION OF TWO DWELLINGS 13.07.1954 1073/45 ERECTION OF ONE HOUSE Conditionally Approved 25.10.1955 880290/E ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION Conditionally Approved 14.03.1988 25/00021/P LDC Application for a lawful development certificate for proposed change of use from a dwelling (Class C3) to childrens residential home (Class C2). Refuse 07.03.2025”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional approval, finding the proposal acceptable against development plan policies and other considerations.

“Reason for granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Other material considerations have been considered and are not judged to have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application, and where applicable conditions have been applied in order to satisfy these matters.”

“Appendix attached 1 Habitats Regulations Assessment 2 Development Plan Policies 3 Relevant Planning History 4 Management plan…”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

The assessment found a need for children’s accommodation, with manageable effects on flooding, character, residential amenity, parking and protected sites.

“Policy CS16 (Housing Mix) supports the creation of a mixed and balanced community. Policy CS16 states that there should be no net loss of family homes on sites capable of accommodating a mix of residential units unless there are overriding policy considerations justifying this loss.”

“The applicant has explained within their submission that the property would be occupied by vulnerable persons who need care and assistance. There is a general need for this type of accommodation within the City, and this application would provide this accommodation without being in conflict with Policy CS16 of the Core Strategy.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Thirty-seven residents raised concerns including noise, anti-social behaviour, flooding, parking, loss of a family home and the location near a school.

“Inappropriate development near a school and in area with families and the elderly. Response Policy CS16 of the Core Strategy sets out the importance of maintaining mixed communities and this is a well-established planning principle. It is considered that a well- managed home for young people (requiring additional care) can be accommodated in an established residential area. Otherwise it would be difficult to find an appropriate location anywhere in the city.”

“Impacts of Noise and Anti-Social behaviour…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident, the agent and a ward councillor addressed the Panel, with the ward councillor speaking as an objector.

What members discussed

Members discussed the parking layout and surfacing, and officers agreed an additional condition addressing surface water runoff.

“During discussion on the item, Members raised the issue regarding the parking layout and surfacing and officers agreed to add a condition that would help to address issues relating to surface water run off.”

“The Panel noted the Habitats Regulation Assessment.”

Minutes

The vote

The Panel unanimously carried the amended recommendation for conditional approval.

“The Panel then considered the recommendation that the application be conditionally approved subject to criteria listed in the report (as amended). Upon being put to the vote the recommendation was carried unanimously.”

Minutes

The decision and conditions

Planning permission was approved subject to the report’s conditions and an added requirement for approved parking layout and surfacing before occupation.

“RESOLVED that planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out within the report and any additional or amended conditions set out below:”

“Before the development hereby approved first comes into occupation/use, details of the parking layout and its surfacing shall be provided in accordance with details to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The parking area shall be thereafter retained as approved for the lifetime of the development.”

Minutes