Summary
Introduction
There are 420,000 people living in care homes throughout the UK. If you have a care home on your doorstep (and/or neighbouring houses which could be developed) … read on.
Stories appear in the press and on television on virtually a daily basis about care homes and issues about the ageing population. Only on Friday 31st March, 2017 a Daily Mail front page stated that ‘Care Homes Hit the Middle Classes’ by Local Councils encouraging raising private rates to subsidise ‘the socially funded provision.’ Four in ten pay for their own care. If you pay for your own care, the fees you are charged are often higher than those negotiated by your council.
It is also worthy of note that in November 2017, BBC 2 showed the television programmes ‘The Planners’ and ‘Permission Impossible’ which appear to give a great deal of insight into the thinking of Planning Officers and Committees (they are available on BBC ‘catch-up’).
This injustice, which totally disrupted nearly 30 years of peaceful residential occupation in a Wiltshire village, Purton, involves Wiltshire Council allowing a recently built bungalow to be demolished and replaced with a much larger care home ‘extension.’ It is about planning breaches, ignoring pleas for/failure to impose planning restrictions (including a request for a partition wall), ignoring Restrictive Covenants and what is likely to happen if you do not stand your ground (to name but a few issues). I was not surprised when a 9 month investigation into these matters found there were no ‘flaws’ in Council procedures (this I predicted would happen). Purton Council also ‘helpfully’ recommended all three planning applications and on one, even went beyond what was requested on the application.
Following three years constant struggle to return to the quiet way of life once enjoyed by residents of Willowbrook, a small cul-de-sac, before the process of planning application, building work and further upheaval began, the most recent ‘battles’ have been to prevent further (predicted) building work taking place and use of the care home’s car parking space which opens into Willowbrook, for purposes contrary to those given on the planning application and variation.
The account of residents, not only of Willowbrook but of Witts Lane, Station Road and Waite Meads Close can be found on the appendix, ‘Resident’s Objections.’ One of the care home’s building extensions dates back to the late 1980’s and, like others, I am of the opinion that the care home owner and Wiltshire Council care little about the impact and upheaval of planning permission and building work being imposed against our wishes. Several planning applications were made between 1988 and 2009 and together with similar warnings that the care home site and Station Road are over-populated with traffic, seem to indicate that use of Willowbrook may be ongoing.
When one of the Purton Parish Councillors tells you that on reflection, it is likely that the Parish Council have recommended planning permission be granted, having probably been ‘taken in‘ by impassioned pleas about redundancies and failure to financially break even at the care home, you know something is wrong. Now to compound matters there is a second application to make changes to the new building less than a year after it was completed. Why was it that the two changes were not on the original plan with other ‘on the hoof‘ additions?
For the time being, the care home owner appears to have suspended directing ambulances into the street. Two of the visits were residents/patients being dropped off. The stopping of ambulances may be due to a verbal exchange I had with the care home owner (which he instigated). Alternatively creating this website may have had an impact but a current application by the care home to increase its number of residents is being made.
Before publishing this site I gave all those concerned the opportunity to comment on any inaccuracy. Wiltshire Council’s legal department have not objected to any of the content or publication of this site. The local County Councillor sought advice and was advised not to comment. The care home owner did not respond.
(I have chosen only to refer to named individuals by their job title and not to identify buildings by name)
Impact
After nearly 30 years of living quietly in Willowbrook and having had to endure a similar late 1980’s ‘under the radar‘ planning application (which at least three residents knew nothing about) and extensive building development, you would think the local authority would not let lightning strike twice…wrong. After being confronted by work being carried out three paces from your lounge window (carried out from a garden the Planning Department ignored a warning about, before granting planning permission), having to leave home a number of times because of noise, verbally aggressive and abusive sub-contractors of the main builder and sewerage flowing into your garden, you find yourself asking the question, how did your Local Council, (whose motto is-‘Where Everybody Matters‘) allow this to happen?
A high number of the residents in Willowbrook, a village in the north Wiltshire village of Purton are original occupants. It is felt by residents that we have been treated with contempt by parties concerned in the planning applications for the extension of a nearby care/nursing home, and a perfectly good 27 year old bungalow demolished in the process. The ‘annexe to another annexe,’ can (in my view) been likened to a piece being forced into a jigsaw and a series of ‘dog-legs‘ stretching for about 100 yards. It is much bigger than any property in the street and it is as though the building has been rotated 60 degrees and moved up to the width of a car length from the pavement. It has been totally ‘shoehorned in’ using all available space because care and nursing/care homes do not need gardens or outside amenities. The building, (in my opinion) is an eyesore, dominant, visually intrusive and either being, or having the appearance of being above uniform ridge height (possibly because of its close proximity to the road) Not once is there reference to my garden being overlooked in the application, despite it not being overlooked by the old premises, now demolished. (Wiltshire Council’s ‘take’- if it can be seen from the street then it is not overlooked)
I am still mystified how Wiltshire Council’s ‘in-house solicitor’ is able to predict, on her recommendation to the 2013 Planning Committee, that the plot would not be over-crowded and she would raise no objection on the grounds of size, scale and design.
With care/nursing home fees starting at £895 per week, nursing home owners can afford to buy one or more properties, demolish them and use the adjoining garden as a builder’s yard, work area and car park regardless of the impact it may have on neighbours or their right to privacy.
Residents of this small cul-de-sac were subjected to a yearlong nightmare during the building work. A large number of residents who have lived in the area since it was built in 1986, have also complained about gas being supplies cut off double figures of works vehicles parked in the street on a daily basis, several half on the pavement, despite a Police warning following another resident’s complaint. There was also the noise of angle grinders, electric saws, concrete mixers and the incessant banging of vehicle doors and a skip, deliveries had taken place at irregular hours and weekends. Construction workers also displayed instances of petulance and earlier in the construction loud swearing, shouting and playing of music associated with building sites causing disruption.
Council Decisions Favouring Care Home and What Happens Next
“I also spoke but after the tear jerking case put forward, we sounded like we were ogres. Their (the Planning Committee’s) decision seemed to have been made prior to the meeting,”…words of a resident objecting at a Planning meeting to a residential care home in Swindon.
I am aware of current issues relating to care homes and the minimum wage. I know care homes are closing at an alarming rate. I can also see the argument that a care home owner, as an employer, should be given the benefit of any doubt in relation to planning decisions having minimal impact on local residents. In this case I feel things have gone too far. The ongoing uncertainty of what will happen next and that virtually every decision is to the detriment of Willowbrook residents, makes me feel that ‘enough is enough’ and this website hopefully will put right any feeling there may be that we are being ‘Nimbys.’
For a £385 application fee the care home owner can make as many unsettling Planning applications as he likes in the knowledge that it is highly likely they will be granted. It can only be speculated upon as to the street becoming an overflow car park, collection and distribution point and the doors, a staff and relative’s entrance.
Ambulances have not collected or deposited patients (again) for a number of months.
The care home has recently undergone an inspection by the ‘Care Quality Commission’ and has applied to add a further place to their 34 (35) places. (the original application was for 5 additional bedrooms, making a total of 31 which has now risen to 36) This is in addition to an extension being built. A glance into the care home car park and surrounding area would immediately tell you why Willowbrook was being utilised.
The following are examples of instances whereby the residents of Willowbrook feel they have been treated contemptuously by other parties involved in this whole process. Each issue is summarised and a more full versions can be found in separate sections in the website.
From the outset, Wiltshire Council’s in-house solicitor destroyed every objection residents had made in her recommendations. The lesson to be learned is that anyone in a similar position should stick solely to the ‘Reasons for Objection’ outlined in the appendix by this name. To borrow a phrase from a resident of another owner/occupier home similarly affected, ‘They are professional and we are amateurs.’ Among issues I found less than acceptable were ones distancing the Planning Department from the impact of recommendations and decisions.(see below re ambulances) The solicitor also stated that any noise emanating from the care home ‘could be addressed through the appropriate channels of the Environmental Health Officers.’
The Planning Department themselves ignored a number of issues and warnings such as the impact of the purchase of a second bungalow next door to me, by the care home owner. Other issues ignored can be found in the section titled ‘Planning’ In respect of the current application the department continues regurgitating (or cutting and pasting) a presumption about working proactively to improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of Purton. The argument about the current application, (to quote, ‘a ‘modest’ 2.7 by 5.1 metre extension, similar in size to that of a household extension’) ‘sustaining local growth’ thereby leading to this objective, is little short of stretching credulity.
My views on the Planning Committee Meeting are set out below. In other civil cases/tribunals, someone with no knowledge of policies and procedures is not permitted to be put at a disadvantage to the other party. In planning cases where solicitors ask for an initial payment of £2,000 before taking a case you are being financially penalised through no fault of your own. Surely the £385 planning fee should be increased and the levy put towards balancing matters. Objectors face a a highly qualified Town and Country Planner so if you were able to apply the Human Right of ‘Equality of Arms’ under Human Rights legislation, a fair balance would then be struck between the parties. Surely a tribunal is supposed to be conducted under conditions which do not place anyone at a substantial disadvantage to an opponent.
Wiltshire Council’s Ethical Governance Officer appears to have given the process a clean bill of health. The reporting officer wrongly stated that no one raised the imposition of restrictions on hours. The Area Development Manager (North) Economic Development and Planning remains ‘satisfied that the decision on the 2013 application was made correctly.’
The Council’s Enforcement team were quick to correct me when I stated the demolition of the garage of 9 Willowbrook was ‘illegal.’ I was told it was ‘unauthorised.’ (It does not become ‘illegal’ until an enforcement notice is disobeyed, unless it is successfully appealed against) For my part, I made the necessary correction at the earliest opportunity. I asked not to be ‘fobbed off with the usual ‘Each case on its merits’ / ‘We keep such matter constantly under review’ / ‘We are sorry if you are upset by…’ at an early stage. In July 2016 I received the following statements in letters from the Ethical Governance Officer stating that he appreciated that ‘ you feel you have been let down by the treatment of planning application … and the way you believe the concerns raised by yourself, and other Willowbrook residents, were ignored.’ He added that from the evidence available as per his stage two investigation shows that procedures, policies and legislation were correctly followed (I replied with examples of 14 issues)
He added that ‘All and any future applications will be assessed on their own merits taking into account the information, polices and procedure, and legislation relevant at the time of application submission. As each case is likely to be different the Council cannot adopt a blanket policy.
AND
I am sorry that you feel Wiltshire Council has not protected you nor taken your views into account.
I may add my comment about ‘not protected’ at some later stage.
I give a detailed ‘executive summary’ but feel I need to reinforce matters you may come in contact with by giving additional information about each issue in the other sections.
Covid, Social Distancing, Barrier Nursing, Removal of Dead Bodies and Renewed Use of Willowbrook – April to June 2020
As of mid-June, 2020. children in the street continue to be exposed to the sight of patients being wheeled, at close distance, from ambulances (frequently a private taxi service) and undertakers, which I predicted in 2013. This is despite repeated assurances it would not happen, and farcical comments made by Wiltshire Council trying to justify it. I also suggested a dedicated ambulance bay. Why should we suffer for Ashgrove House failing to implement a scheme whereby a door in the corridor, bypassing the main building, is not being used. Numerous planning applications have been made since 1988 but no system is in place? This tends to indicate the intentions in 2015 when 7 ambulances used Willowbrook over a short period of time..
According to our local County Councillor, no Covid 19 outbreak has occurred at the care home. There is no change in circumstances, save for a hole being carved in the fence partitioning the home from 9 Willowbrook and the bungalow being used for purposes unknown (blinds permanently closed). Is this merely the financial use of the ‘dwelling’…?
Why has it been decided to use the rear door for these purposes? (there is apparently a new care home manager) If a thinly veiled threat has been sensed, we have not shied away from challenges made upon us by the care home and others and will continue to do so. Once Covid is over, this thin pretence Willowbrook is being used, presumably due to ‘Barrier Nursing,’ can no longer be used. I intend to act appropriately and proportionately in exposing issues and matters which have come to my attention.
Clearly Willowbrook residents have the highest regard for those working in the Care Service. They are undervalued and have worked heroically throughout the Covid 19 crisis. It is not intended to undermine the contribution of those working in the Care Home in question. It is the owner and other family members who are not trusted and changes have been made which undermine our right to privacy.
Planning Application -January 2016
I have highlighted the number of planning applications made by the care home which date back to the late 1980’s, their effect and the apparent lack of any concern for the wishes or impact on residents. I still find it totally incredible that in 1988 Wiltshire Council planning decision allowed the rear garden of a Victorian dwelling to use its rear garden to form a ‘L’ shaped extension. The vertical line of the ‘L’ ran the length of the rear gardens of 6 and 7 Willowbrook and beyond, just the other side of the fence to the houses. Permission was granted to build an apex roof extension thereby making the occupants stare out at its walls and roof. The number of care residents then rapidly rose from 14 to 34 by 1992.
During late January, 2016 a planning application was made by care home for further development of the home. Parking is extremely limited for those of the 80 employees on duty at any given time.
The current 2016 planning application is for an extension to the new extension. There was no mention of where builders were to work from or their vehicles and building materials were to be stored. Despite strong objections the County Councillor (who effectively grants planning permission -and who decides whether or not permission goes before the Planning Committee) initially stated that she did not think access would be gained from Willowbrook and, ‘At this present moment I cannot see anything that would give me concern.’ She went on to say that issues I raised related to previous applications and each application was taken on its own merits. That as she understood it, concerns from the previous application could not be addressed in subsequent applications. Wiltshire Council website states ‘history’ is a consideration. Further research showed ‘loss of privacy’ ‘over-development‘ and ‘unsociable hours of operation‘ are considerations which must be taken into account and at the time of writing, there appears to have been a change in stance. Planning permission has recently been granted but there was no condition imposed that Willowbrook would not to be used during construction or parking of work’s vehicles.