Page 1 of 14

Committee Date: 08/05/2014 Application Number: 2013/06163/PA

Accepted: 29/08/2013 Application Type: Outline

Target Date: 28/11/2013

Ward: Kings Norton

93 Rednal Road and 101 Rednal Road, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B38 8DT

Outline application with details of Access, Layout and Scale for determination and details of appearance and landscaping reserved, for the demolition of 93 and 101 Rednal Road and the erection of new 60 no. bed care home and associated works. Applicant: Mr Lynch & Mr Roberts

93 Rednal Road and 101 Rednal Road, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B38 8DT

Agent: Forrester Associates Spadesbourne House, 184 Worcester Road, Bromsgrove, B61 7AZ

Recommendation Determine Report Back 1. Members will recall that the above application was reported to Planning Committee

on 28th November 2013 and was deferred for a site visit. The site visit was undertaken on the 5th December 2013 and at the Planning Committee meeting on 12th December 2013 Members resolved to refuse the application due to concerns about highway safety. When the Committee met on 19th December 2013 with the full Reason for Refusal drafted by Officers, it debated the highway issues further and decided to defer the application, in order to have better information on which to base an important and technical decision. This information was to obtain: A. Rush hour traffic surveys; B. Analysis of local public transport; C. Breaking distances, and; D. Appraisal of care home staffing required.

2. The applicants have now submitted a Road Safety Audit, with assessments of visibility, traffic counts, traffic speeds, accidents, staffing, visitors to the site, public transport.

3. The Road Safety Audit identifies two problem areas regarding vehicular and pedestrian access to the proposed care home and goes on to make recommendations to improve the safety of the proposed site. These include: (i) the slight relocation of both the vehicle and pedestrian access points further to the south west (away from the bend), and: (ii) the incorporation of a flat ‘dwell’ area at the end of the vehicle drive to avoid the tendency of vehicles on a slope to transgress the curb line and project into the highway whilst waiting to join the carriageway. An amended site plan has been submitted to reflect these changes, which also

Page 2 of 14

demonstrates the maximum visibility distance (52m) to the north east of the site compared to the minimum required distance (45m). The Amended plan replaces the previous plan as an attachment to the original report, on page 5 below.

4. The Applicant’s submissions also provide further information on the expected number of vehicular visits to the proposed care home, using a case study of a similar facility on the outskirts of Shrewsbury. The study found the number of deliveries to the home averaged 16 per week, including food, general and medical supplies and refuse collection. The applicant notes that the number of deliveries does not tend to vary with moderate variation in residents’ numbers, so no adjustment has been made from the 51 residents at the Shropshire home to the 60 residents at the proposed Rednal Road home. For personal visitors, doctors and other professionals, there were on average 10 daily visits to the Shropshire home. Adjusted for the slightly larger Rednal Road site, the average number of visitors daily expected would be 11.76. The assumption has been made that 50% of staff to the application site would use public transport, arrive on foot or share a lift with colleagues. The applicant calculates an average of 33 total visits would be made to the home in a 24 hour period.

5. The applicants have also submitted further information on staffing levels. The estimated staffing requirements given in the Design and Access statement indicated that the number of new jobs created would be 40, the majority of which would be part-time positions. It indicated that the maximum number of staff on site at the busiest time of the day would be 20. This exceeds the numbers suggested in a case study report prepared by the Joseph Rowntree Association (‘Put yourself in my place – Designing and managing care home for people with dementia’) and exceeds the minimum numbers of carers required by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the registration and supervisory body for care homes in England. Guidance provided by the CQC within its document ‘Staffing for Nursing Homes’ suggests 12 careers per 60 residents at the peak pf the day for the most intensive type of care.

6. With the submission of this additional information, a further period of public

consultation has taken place. Letters of notification have been sent to surrounding residents, local residents’ associations, Kings Norton Ward Councillors and Planning Committee members from the Northfield Constituency.

7. A further 32 letters of objection have been received from surrounding occupiers. Objections are similar to those previously raised and outlined in section 4 of my original report which below follows this Report Back, and are summarised as follows: • There would be detrimental impact on road safety: extra traffic movements from

visitors, deliveries and staff, the road is too busy, narrow and winding, no pavement on the site’s side of the road and pavement is narrow elsewhere, and there is not enough parking to facilitate this development.

• Rednal Road is a designated "Blue Route for access to and from hospitals by ambulance", and that "visibility and traffic volumes, together with lack of available road width" prevent installation of traffic calming measures.

• Lack of local public transport, 20 minutes walk from train station, 24 hour care so many staff will have to drive. Access for pedestrians and cyclists would not be as easy as suggested.

• When car park is full, there is no access for a fire engine to the south side of the building. There is no designated delivery bay.

• New evidence submitted is questionable considering the comparative example is a rural care home in Shropshire.

Page 3 of 14

• It would result in an overbearing and incongruous addition to the leafy area. Would change the feel of our neighbourhood from residential to commercial/industrial.

• Loss of privacy. • Alternative sites such as land adjoining the Redditch Road opposite the junction

with Grange Hill Road offer a better location without demolishing two perfectly good residential properties.

• Devalue surrounding properties, would not benefit the local community • Restrictive covenants state no trade or business shall be carried out which affects

the adjoining owners. 8. My Transportation Development Officer has reviewed the supplementary information

provided and raises no objection to the proposal and the amended layout. He requests a condition to address full details of the level ‘dwell’ area, as well as related parking/circulation/access and levels across the wider site. I propose the following: ‘Requires the prior submission of site-wide levels, parking/circulation/access, and details of the level ‘dwell’ area at the site entrance. No development shall take place until details of site-wide levels, parking/circulation/access, and details of the level ‘dwell’ area at the site entrance have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These matters shall be addressed in conjunction with the other conditions for drainage and the materials for hard and paved surfacing. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained. Reason: In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site in accordance with Paragraphs 6.39 of the Birmingham UDP 2005 and the National Planning Policy Framework’.

9. Taking into account the above information, I conclude that the proposal, as amended, would not cause unacceptable highways implications sufficient to warrant refusal of the application. All other matters remain as previously concluded: the proposal would result in the provision of a residential dementia care home within an established, residential environment at a sustainable location. The development’s scale and design would broadly accord with local character, and suitable landscaping would be retained/replaced. As such, I recommend that the application should be approved subject to conditions.

10. However, should the Committee be minded to refuse the application, the Reason for Refusal as set out in my report to the meeting of 19th December is provided again:

‘Due to the proposed staff numbers and other site visitors it would generate, the development would have a cumulative effect of extra traffic movements that would be likely to increase the risk of highway accidents, contrary to policy 6.39 of the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan (2005) and guidance contained within The National Planning Policy Framework (2012)’.

ORIGINAL REPORT OF 28TH NOVEMBER 2013 1. Proposal

Page 4 of 14

1.1. This application seeks to demolish the existing properties of 93 and 101 Rednal Road and clear the site for the erection of a new 60 bed specialist dementia care home.

1.2. It is proposed the care home would meet the increase in demand for specialist

dementia care and would cater for all three levels of dementia; early onset, mid-stage and late stage. This would enable continuity of care, meaning residents would not need to be moved to alternative accommodation as their disease progresses.

1.3. The application is submitted in outline form with access, layout and scale for

determination, with appearance and landscaping reserved for future approval. However, submitted with the application are illustrative plans, with indicative elevations and layouts and potential areas of landscaping.

1.4. The care home building would be situated reasonably centrally within the existing

site, set back 30m from the Rednal Road frontage, between 6 to 9m from the eastern boundary; between 6 to 11m to the western boundary and between 12.5 and 23m from the southern (rear) boundary. The overall building is of a rectangular shape, set at an angle to the road reflecting the existing pattern of development, with various wings extending from the main core of the building. Due to land level difference across the site, the building would consist of two principal elements both of two storeys each, set at different land levels and linked in the middle. The western side of the site would be approximately 4m lower than the eastern side. Indicative plans show the building would have a relatively simple design, with hipped roofs with a number of gable features.

1.5. The building would be a maximum of 8.7m in height and have a length along its frontage of 36m, albeit part would be set further back into the site. It would have a total depth of 43.5m. Indicative appearance plans show it would be brick constructed with rendered areas and a tiled roof with UPVC windows and doors.

1.6. An amended plan has been received, altering the access to the site. Originally

utilising both existing vehicular accesses; it is now proposed that access and egress would be via the existing vehicular access serving 101 Rednal Road. This would lead to the blocking up and landscaping of the existing access and hardstanding to 93 Rednal Road. A pedestrian route into the site is also provided. There are two separate car parking areas, either side of the main entrance to the building. A total of 20 car parking spaces are provided.

1.7. Indicative landscaping plans show areas of planting to the front, including within a

raised area to the north east corner of the site; along the western boundary and along the site’s frontage. In total approximately 1800sqm private amenity space, intended for use by staff, residents and their families is provided.

1.8. The majority (34 in total) of existing trees on the site would be retained. (See 6.10)

They are predominantly located along the boundaries, particularly on the eastern and southern side. However, the development would necessitate the removal of 11no. trees. These include those on the existing boundary between the two residential properties, all Category C specimens along with a Cherry, Pine (Category C) and Oak (Category B) to the south eastern corner. A Beech originally proposed for removal to the north eastern corner is now to be retained due to the access layout change. An indicative Landscaping Plan includes replacement/additional tree planting.

Page 5 of 14

1.9. It is envisaged that this scheme would generate 40 new part time jobs. The maximum number of staff on site at peak times would be 20, reducing to approximately 5 members of staff on a night shift.

1.10. The application site is 0.482 hectares. 1.11. In support of this application the applicant has submitted a Design and Access

Statement, Transport Assessment and Tree Survey

Site plan Indicative Streetscene

2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site relates to the properties of 93 and 101 Rednal Road, Kings

Norton, two large detached residential properties set within spacious grounds. 2.2. The site faces onto Rednal Road, with the site having some level differences, sloping

down from the northeast to the northwest corner and sloping upwards from the road frontage to the south of the site.

2.3. There are a large number of existing trees on the site, mainly grouped together along

the eastern and southern boundaries and along the existing boundary between the two properties. Some of these trees are protected under a Tree Preservation Order.

2.4. The site is within a wholly residential area, with properties being mixed in age and

design. Properties on Norton Gate are located to the eastern boundary; properties on Redditch Road and Kings Gate are located to the south, and north and west of the site are residential properties of Rednal Road.

Location Map Streetview

3. Planning History 3.1. 17/04/2013 – 2013/02640/PA Pre application advise for replacement of two detached

dwellings with a new specialist nursing home. Advised that development is likely to be acceptable in principle.

4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Transportation Development – No objection subject to conditions for the submission

of a Travel Plan (primarily for staff); Construction Management Plan; S278/TRO to cover the reinstatement of redundant accesses, construction of new vehicle access and the construction of a length of footway to allow safe pedestrian access to and from the site; details of secure covered cycle provision and for planting/vegetation on street frontage to be kept below 600mm high.

4.2. Regulatory Services – No objection. 4.3. West Midland Fire Services – No objection.

Page 6 of 14

4.4. West Midlands Police – No objections. 4.5. Severn Trent – No objection subject to a drainage condition. 4.6. Letters of notification have been sent to surrounding occupiers; local residents

associations; Kings Norton Ward Councillors; Planning Committee members from the Northfield Constituency and the MP for Northfield. A site and press notice have also been posted.

4.7. Councillor Peter Griffiths has requested the application be determined by Planning

Committee. He raises concern about the impact of the development on highway safety and the local community.

4.8. Councillor Valerie Seabright objects to the application stating “The site is quite

unsuitable as the road is narrow, close to a bend which causes dangerous approaches to an almost blind bend. The size of the proposed care home would mean a significant increase in the volume of traffic, residents, staff and visitors thus causing some impact on the residents close to the development as well as a possible increase in parking issues. The site is in an area close to the conservation area of Kings Norton. My understanding is that this is in a covenanted area which limits the development of business and this proposal is in fact a proposal for a business. I believe a site visit would be useful to ascertain the suitability of this proposal”.

4.9. Councillor Steve Bedser objects to the proposal stating the development is “out of

keeping with the character of the area; is of a scale in excess of the surrounding properties and road access and egress will be at a dangerous point in an already dangerous road”.

4.10. Objection to the application has been raised by residents at Kings Norton Ward

Committee. Residents expressed concern and opposition to the application on the following grounds;

• Very busy main road and the nature of the care home would generate additional traffic.

• ‘dip’ in the road, making access and egress dangerous. • Out of keeping with its surroundings and neighbouring properties. • Too large for the site.

4.11. The Links Residents Association objects to the application on the following grounds.

• The association does not accept that the principle of developing a care home at this location would be acceptable as the area consists of residential properties.

• Would introduce commercial premises into the area and could lead to further applications changing the area from residential to semi commercial area.

• If such a facility is essential, it would be appropriate to have it as part of the West Heath Hospital development.

• No mention is made of the number of service vehicles which will have to travel up or down the road turning in and out.

• There is no public transport adjacent the site; the nearest is on the Redditch Rd or Pershore Rd at The Green.

• It will lead to an increase in vehicles on this bad bend on Rednal Rd. • The overall size of the proposed building is such it will not be taken for a

residential property similar to those adjacent. • There would be an adverse impact on the character of the area.

Page 7 of 14

• There are Restrictive Covenants on these properties - no buildings other than private dwellinghouses should be erected on the land and no business to be carried out.

4.12. A further forty four letters of objection (including one of behalf of ten residents) have

been received from local residents, objecting to the proposal on the following grounds.

• Adverse impact on road safety, the road is too narrow at this point and is on a bend, Increased traffic, Not enough parking, Site not on bus route

• The required visibility splays cannot be achieved. • Evidence from a ‘care home submission’ in Shropshire, seems incongruous. • The site will be dominated by hard surfacing. • Not in keeping with the leafy green character of the surrounding area. • Increase in noise both during construction and when completed. • Adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring occupiers;

including loss of views, overlooking, loss of peaceful environment; light pollution.

• Adverse impact on local wildlife, including the Kings Norton Nature Reserve. • Devalue surrounding properties. • There might be asbestos in the existing buildings. • Increase in crime • Adverse impact on the local population demographics. • The security of the site; will mean it looks like a prison. • This sets a precedent for further development such as this. • Loss of two perfectly houses in a good condition. • There are restrictive covenants on the site that restrict the building of anything

other than private dwelling houses. • No need for a care home on this site. • Not in accordance with Mature Suburbs development guidelines. • Overdevelopment of the site. • There is no drainage capacity in the area for such a development. • No ecology reports have been submitted, bats may be affected by the

demolition. 5. Policy Context 5.1. The following local policies are relevant

• Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005 • SPG: Specific Needs Residential Uses (2001) • SPG: Places for Living (2001) • Draft Birmingham Development Plan • SPD: Car Parking Guidelines (2012) • SPG: Mature Suburbs: Guide to Residential Intensification (2008) • The Birmingham (Land Adjacent 91 Rednal Road, Kings Norton) TPO 413

(1983). • The Birmingham (Land at 91-93 Rednal Road, Kings Norton) TPO 442 (1987)

5.2. The following national policy is relevant

• The National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

6. Planning Considerations

Page 8 of 14

Background

6.1. This application seeks outline approval for a new 60 bed Specialist Dementia Care

Home on the site of two adjacent large detached dwellings, namely No 93 and 101 Rednal Road, Kings Norton. The matters to be reserved are landscaping and appearance, although these points have been addressed to some extent within the application.

6.2. The proposal seeks to provide a new Care Home (Class C2). The Home would

provide a high level of care for people with dementia. The applicants contend that there is a proven local need for such a facility in this part of Birmingham due to the ageing population and the steep increase in the number of people being diagnosed with dementia. The proposed scheme will cater for all three levels of dementia i.e. early onset, mid-stage and late stage.

Principle of use

6.3. The National Planning Policy Framework and policies within the UDP encourage the

provision of a mix of housing types and tenures. The proposal would result in the provision of a 60 bedroom dementia care home within an established residential location close to local amenities. In addition, the UDP and the Specific Needs Residential Uses SPG states that residential care homes are normally most appropriately located in large detached properties set in their own grounds. Furthermore, the scheme would assist in meeting local need for smaller units of accommodation suitable for the elderly, which could then release larger under-occupied family dwellings of all tenures in this locality, increasing the supply of family housing which is in very high demand across the city. Given the above and that the existing houses are of no architectural merit, I consider the demolition of the existing houses and redevelopment of this site for residential accommodation for dementia care acceptable in principle.

Scale and Design

6.4. The application site itself has a changing topography, with the site sloping downward along the road frontage from east to west, but also sloping upwards into the site, with the site being level to the south. As a result of this and trees within and near the site, the position of the building within the site and the nature of Rednal Road at this location, when approaching from the north east and south west along Rednal Road, views of the building would be relatively limited. The building would however be sited within a prominent position within the site to provide a strong presence to its frontage and would follow the set back and angled nature of properties along this part of Rednal Road.

6.5. The building’s scale at essentially two storeys is consistent with the residential

buildings that surround it. The front elevation shows how the proposal would utilize the levels of the site to provide a lower and upper ground floor; this cascading roof design ensures that the built form is sympathetic to both the landscape character of the area and assists in ‘breaking up’ the perceived scale of the building. The building would be a maximum of 8.7m high at any point, reflective of many of the adjacent residential properties. Although its length along its frontage is 36m, part is set further back into the site, which would further help to reduce the overall massing of the building to the front. Although the building’s footprint is larger than those surrounding, I do not consider it to be so different in scale as to have an adverse

Page 9 of 14

impact on local character, especially given the space and landscaping that would be retained on all sides.

6.6. The appearance of the building has been reserved for determination at a later date.

However, indicative plans show it would be brick constructed with rendered areas and a tiled roof with UPVC windows and doors. This traditional approach to the appearance and design of the building would be considered acceptable and complement the character of the surrounding area, which consists of traditional detached housing of varying designs and styles. The use of materials and the appearance of the building would also serve to help break up the overall massing of the building and the roof design of hipped roofs has also been incorporated to reduce massing, providing a sympathetic cascading effect towards the site boundaries.

6.7. Therefore, I am satisfied that a building of this nature could be satisfactorily

accommodated within the existing character and visual amenities of the surrounding area.

6.8. It is important that the design of the building responds to and complements the site

setting and the character of the surrounding area. In particular the layout addresses the set back and respects existing building lines along Rednal Road. The building is also set in from the boundaries of the site, still providing it with an extensive area of private amenity and a sense of spaciousness, all characteristic of the surrounding area.

6.9. The layout of the building also ensures that overlooking issues are mitigated. Its

shape would enable most habitable windows to look north or south, rather than east or west across neighbouring properties. Where habitable room windows would be to the east and west elevations, the layout ensures compliance with distance separations. The indicative internal layout demonstrates that the orientation of bedrooms and day spaces can also be designed to relate to the external environment with most bedrooms overlooking outdoor amenity areas. “Specific Needs Residential Uses” states that proposals for new care facilities such as this should include within the site boundary adequate outdoor amenity space to provide a satisfactory living environment for residents. This should normally be a minimum of 16sqm of space per resident. In this case, there is over 1800sqm of private amenity space to the rear of the building, well in excess of the area of 960sqm advocated. I therefore consider that in this instance the proposal would provide a good quality residential environment for future occupiers.

Trees and Landscaping

6.10. Landscaping is a matter reserved for future determination, however indicative plans

show new landscaping across the site, which would improve the setting and appearance of the building but also providing good quality private amenity for future occupiers. The majority of existing trees (34 in total) on the site would be retained. These trees are predominantly located along the boundaries, particularly on the eastern and southern side. However, the development would necessitate the removal of 11no. trees. These include a group on the existing boundary between the two residential properties, all of which are Category C leylandi, along with a Cherry (Category C), Pine (Category C) and Oak (Category B) to the south eastern corner. A Beech originally proposed for removal to the north eastern corner is now to be retained due to the access layout changes and this alleviates the concern of the Council’s tree Officer about the impact the removal of this tree would have had on an adjacent protected oak tree (TPO 413). The Tree Officer also notes that the amenity value of trees being removed from the site is not high and their removal along with

Page 10 of 14

the low value group on the boundary between 93 and 101 Rednal Road is acceptable. He states the Category B Oak (not part of the TPO) just to the rear of no. 93 ideally should be retained unless it is the only constraint to an otherwise good and acceptable proposal. It is unfortunate that this tree would be lost as part of the development, but I believe the retention of the Oak would significantly and unreasonably affect the development proposal, so I do consider its removal justified. However indicative landscape plans includes replacement and additional tree planting and conditions to ensure appropriate replacements can be attached to any approval given.

Highway Matters

6.11. The layout plan has been amended to address concerns regarding the access to the

site. Originally plans indicated that both existing access points would be maintained with an access and egress point defined. To address a number of concerns of my Transportation and Tree officers, including ensuring the retention of a protected tree and to improve highway safety, the plans have been amended to include just one point of vehicular access and egress. This is located at no 101 Rednal Road further away from the bend that occurs on Rednal Road to the north east and would vastly improve the vehicular visibility for entering and exiting vehicles to and from the site. In addition, a pedestrian route/pathway has been included, along with a small section of pavement to enable pedestrians a place to cross.

6.12. My Transportation Development Officer notes the current access and egress points

at 93 Rednal Road are both inadequate and pose a significant risk to highway safety when looking exiting the site and looking east. Visibility is seriously impeded by a combination of road signage, telegraph pole, trees and raised embankment and the bend of the road. The applicant has therefore changed the access to that at no.101 which would ensure adequate visibility splays in both directions up to and in excess of 45m. A pedestrian access would be provided away from the vehicular access. As there is no defined footway on the frontage, a crossing point with a short length of footway is also provided to allow pedestrians to wait in order to cross Rednal Road from the proposed care home. These works are to be secured though an appropriate S278 agreement condition.

6.13. Current parking guidelines recommend a maximum of 1 space per 3 beds equating

to up to 20 spaces. The applicant is providing 20 spaces and therefore the proposal accords with these guidelines. In support of the proposals, the applicant considered has a similar sized home, which generates 14 vehicular visits per day. The applicant also considers that dementia patients receive relatively few visits and the resulting traffic flow is therefore generally relatively low.

6.14. One accident has been recorded in the last 5 years where a motorcycle collided with

a vehicle leaving the access of 93 Rednal Road. It is to be noted that this access would be removed as part of this proposal.

6.15. There is public transport provision available close to the site with a high frequency

bus service every 12 mins through the day, although pedestrians would need to walk 340m from the stop on Redditch Road via Grange Hill Road to the site.

6.16. Finally, the proposal would include a secure cycle shelter to encourage staff and

visitors to use this mode of transport frequently. A ride to work scheme could also be incorporated by the care provider as an initiative scheme. It is recommend that the care home implements a staff Travel Plan and a condition to secure this is recommended.

Page 11 of 14

6.17. Given the above, my Transportation Development Officer raises no objection to the

proposed development, a view with which I concur.

Other Matters 6.18. Regulatory Services have raised no objection, subject to conditions requiring details

of any extraction and odour control to be provided and a noise assessment to ensure the development is afforded with adequate noise mitigation measures. I consider the first of these conditions to be acceptable; however given the distance from the road and the relatively quite nature of the area do not consider the noise mitigation measures necessary in this instance. I concur with the view that the development would not cause any noise disturbance to surrounding occupiers.

6.19. Residents have raised concerns about the ecological impact of the development on

the site and the potential impact on local wildlife. The site is not within any designated area for nature conservation. However, in recognition of the heavily landscaped setting and the fact that demolition is taking place, the advice of the Planning Ecologist has been sought (particularly with regards to bats).

6.20. My Ecologist advises that an initial bat survey (considering external features and roof

structures) would determine the likelihood of the presence of bats and, as such, whether any further survey work is required. Ideally, this would be considered prior to the determination of the application. However, in this instance, my Ecologist acknowledges that this an outline application, which therefore allows the opportunity for the survey work to be carried out and any necessary mitigation to be incorporated into the development of the detailed design of the new buildings. In reflection of this, a condition is recommended prohibiting the undertaking of any works, including demolition, prior to the completion of the necessary survey work and approval of any mitigation scheme.

6.21. Severn Trent have confirmed that they have no objections to the proposed

development and request a condition requiring drainage plans be submitted 6.22. Given the age of the proposed occupiers, neither public open space nor affordable

housing contributions are required. 6.23. Objectors refer to restrictive covenants on this site preventing any other uses other

than private dwelling houses. This is a civil matter and is not a planning consideration.

Sustainability and Regeneration

6.15. This application would have a positive impact on sustainability and for regeneration

by providing a new care facility within a sustainable location close to local amenities, which would contribute to the local economy, with the future potential of jobs for local people.

7. Conclusion 7.1. The proposal would result in the provision of a residential dementia care home within

an established, residential environment at a sustainable location. The development’s scale and design would broadly accord with local character, and suitable landscaping would be retained/replaced. I consider that the application should be approved subject to conditions

Page 12 of 14

8. Recommendation 8.1. Approve subject to conditions 1 Requires the submission of reserved matter details following an outline approval

2 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans

3 Requires the prior submission of drainage plans

4 Requires the prior submission of extraction and odour control details

5 Requires the prior submission of hard and/or soft landscape details

6 Requires the prior submission of hard surfacing materials

7 Requires the prior submission of earthworks details

8 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details

9 Requires the prior submission of a landscape management plan

10 Requires the prior submission of sample materials

11 Requires the prior submission of details for tree works

12 Requires the prior submission of a bat survey

13 Requires the prior submission of details of bird/bat boxes

14 Requires the prior submission of a commercial travel plan

15 Requires the prior submission of a construction method statement/management plan

16 Requires the prior submission of cycle storage details

17 Requires pedestrian visibility splays to be provided

18 Requires the prior submission and completion of works for the S278/TRO Agreement

19 Limits the approval to 3 years (outline) Case Officer: James Mead

Page 13 of 14

Photo(s)

Figure 1 View of existing properties 93 and 101 Rednal Road

Figure 2 View of existing accesses

Page 14 of 14

Location Plan

This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010