Accommodation for homeless women approved, despite hundreds of objections from neighbours

Controversial plans for a supported accommodation scheme for homeless women have been given the green light by city councillors.

Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee, at a meeting this week, approved plans for a building called The Sheiling, off Fatfield Road, in Washington.

In recent months, the city council has been progressing plans to convert the building into a supported living development for “up to five single females”.

Council planning documents confirmed the service would be operated by the council’s “specialised partner” Changing Lives, providing housing for those aged 18-25 who “find themselves homeless”.

The overall aim is to support residents to “live safely in the scheme and gain skills to allow them to move on to living in their own property”.

However, the plans have seen opposition from the local community since being announced, with more than 200 public objections submitted during an official council consultation.

Concerns ranged from privacy impacts and the suitability of the scheme’s location to anti-social behaviour, impact on house prices and increased traffic and noise.

Several objectors also raised concerns about safeguarding, given the building’s close proximity to schools, as well as wider criticism of the council’s approach to consultation on the plan.

A decision on the plans was expected at a meeting in October, 2023, but deferred to allow for a ‘site visit’ and for councillors to inspect the property and surrounding area.

The second delay happened following a meeting in January, 2024, where councillors voted to defer a decision due to the unexplained absence of members of the public who had registered to speak in objection.

Arguments for and against the plans were put forward when the application returned to the Planning and Highways Committee for final decision on February 5, 2024.

Several public objectors spoke at the meeting and stressed they were not against the principle of supported accommodation, but the location it was proposed.

Objectors questioned the suitability of the property and raised concerns about increased traffic and highway safety, and a letter was also read out on behalf of the chair of governors at Biddick Primary School.

The letter referenced traffic issues and on the proposed care development, said “there is a potential for disruption in our community which cannot be underestimated”.

One objector suggested the development needed to be placed on a “purpose-built site rather than being put into a 1930s bungalow, which originally was two-bedroom, and seriously converted over the years”.

Council planners stressed that the facility was ‘managed’, including risk assessments around residents, a curfew between 11pm and 7.30am and visitors only being allowed by “prior arrangement with support staff”.

After being put to the vote, the planning application was approved by a majority of councillors present which means the scheme can now go ahead.

Councillor Stephen Foster said there was a similar development in his Castle ward and that there were no issues, and added the Washington site was “ideal” and had “ample parking”.

Councillor James Warne said the “biggest issue” with traffic in the area was at the start and end of the school day and that he “didn’t believe this building would cause or add to the traffic problems”.

Councillor Michael Dixon, who later voted against the plans, said a consultation statement from police suggested concerns about the supported accommodation use, despite the police raising no objection overall.

While agreeing that parking and highways issues were acceptable, the councillor said he had concerns about the scheme’s siting, the proposed use and the suitability of the property, with more suitable streets nearby.

Cllr Dixon told the meeting: “I think this application has actually caused a lack of community cohesion already, and I do sometimes find it strange that other locations can’t be found which are not right in the middle of a private residential area and also near schools.

“I do find this a slightly unfortunate application, notwithstanding the excellent reasoning behind it, and I’m in a homelessness group and I’m aware of the issues here.

“So for the reasons outlined, I’m struggling to support this application”.

Senior planning officers said suggestions of a purpose-built development or “isolated site”, may go against the goal of the scheme of helping people to “integrate” into society and move on to independent living.

Council planners also challenged the “assumption” from some public objectors that individuals in the scheme could result in anti-social behaviour, and said the building and site were considered acceptable.

Councillor Iain Scott stressed that “vulnerable is not a synonym for dangerous” and that the scheme could be used by people recovering from long-term visits to hospital, as well as those who are homeless.

Cllr Scott added there was a “duty of care” to provide people with “sustainable places to live and to be reintegrated and helped back into society”.

Councillor Gregory Peacock added: “As a planning committee we have to look at the application and not make assumptions on who is going to be there.

“I think this is probably a very good proposal and again, with empathy for the residents, hopefully, they will see that it’s actually a positive thing and not a negative thing”.

Councillor Melanie Thornton, chair of the Planning and Highways Committee, said she empathised with residents and their concerns but added some of the concerns were “unfounded”.

In the interests of helping the scheme integrate into the local community, a condition around the submission of a management plan was suggested.

The proposal, which was later agreed by councillors, aims to give residents a “point of contact” with Changing Lives and to promote communication between the scheme and neighbouring residents.

Cllr Thornton added: “We should be providing a really good class of accommodation for the most vulnerable in our community to have them reintegrated within our communities, and for them to then go on to make a life of their own.

“I do empathise with residents, however, I hope that if the application is granted, and I’m in support of it, that those residents will be welcomed into the community”.

Following approval by city councillors this week, the development needs to be brought forward within three years.