Rossendale children's care home plan sparks parking and property value fears

Rossendale residents are unhappy with this family house on Douglas Road, Bacup, being earmarked for a children's care home
-Credit: (Image: LDRS)


A plan to change the use of a family house in Bacup into a children's care home has been refused after objections including overcrowding and 'cramped conditons', a lack of staff car parking and rubbish being burnt outside during refurbishment.

Rossendale councillors have refused the change-of-use application for 34 Douglas Road by applicant Silethokuhle Zinyemba. She wanted permission to use the house to accommodate three children with care staff present on a 24 hour basis.

But it prompted various objections from residents and was called-in for scrutiny by councillors on Rossendale's development control committee. According to planning documents, one objector, G P Woodward, of Churchtown Crescent, wrote: "I and my wife, who reside less than 100 yards away, strongly object to this idea. The house isn't big enough nor is suitable parking available.

READ MORE: Devastated family pays tribute to 'much-loved' teen killed in off-road crash

"Also, the house is immediately surrounded by private dwellings on a private estate where there are no commercial businesses. It is totally inappropriate for this type of business activity operating in unsocial hours."

Neighbours have objected to a plan to turn this house on Douglas Road, Bacup, into a children's care home
The house on Douglas Road, Bacup, which was earmarked for a children's care home -Credit:Rossendale Council

Another objector, Mr R J Marsden, wrote: "I’m concerned about this. How is this property suited to accommodate all these people in a healthy environment? What is the next stage - to apply for more planning to increase the size off the building?

He added: "This property lies next to a sub-station and also an underground spring. This is a residential area so if this issue devalues the properties in this area, is the council going to reduce everyone’s council tax? This application is very vague and open to being abused. This has happened in other areas in Lancashire."

Another objector, Mr E Pritchard, said the proposal "has no place in an area of private dwellings".

According to another section of a council planning report, another objector had stated: "Very concerned over how this facility would be managed after witnessing poor health-and-safety practices whilst refurbishment was carried out. Very risky use of fire to burn rubbish resulting in adjacent fence and conifers being destroyed."

In her application, sent to Rossendale Council in March, Mrs Zinyemba stated the Douglas Road house was vacant. Her application stated a manager and deputy manager was proposed at the house most days, and three staff. Care for children would typically be on a one-to-one ratio. So overall, there would typically be five care staff on-site some times.

However, some children may need two-to-one staffing, so potentially there could be eight staff. Care staff would work 12 hour shifts and there is a driveway with space for two cars and land next to it, the application added.

Separately, the Bacup house has been the focus of other types of applications to Rossendale Council, seeking lawful development certificates. One submitted this year sought a lawful development certificate for the care of three children with seven staff. That was refused. An earlier lawful development certificate bid for three children and two support staff was approved in 2022. These certificates can be sought to formalise activity taking place in a building or being proposed in future, within the wider planning system.

However, this week Rossendale councillors refused the change-of-use plan. They felt the level of off-street car parking was inadequate for the potential number of staff, which could make parking worse on the already congested street.

Councillors also said the number of bedrooms was insufficient to accommodate the number of children proposed and potential number of staff. This would lead to a cramped living environment for future occupiers.