The Planning and Development Control Committee of Leicester City Council met on Wednesday 2 April 2025 to discuss three planning applications. The committee approved an application to convert a house into a children's home, delegated authority to officers to approve a flatted residential development subject to a bat survey, and refused an application to convert two dwellings into residential care homes.

69 Bryony Road

The committee considered application 2024-2120 for the change of use of a two-storey detached house at 69 Bryony Road from a dwelling house (class C3¹) to a residential children's home (class C2²) to accommodate a maximum of three children.

Senior Planning Officer Chloe Young of Lettersview Council presented the application, highlighting that the proposal met the relevant planning policies and recommending conditional approval.

Faisal Osmond, the agent for the application, spoke about his own experiences of growing up in care, and his daughter Amina Osmond spoke about how the proposal would address the shortage of accommodation for looked-after children.

Mr. Merchant and Hitler, objectors to the application, raised concerns about traffic, parking, noise, and the impact on the character of the private road.

Councillor Patrick Kittrick raised concerns about the applicant being a property development company rather than a care provider, and the lack of a management plan. He stated:

This is to make money. This is to make lots and lots of money. The families that will do well out of this will primarily be the families that own the property. Because there's fortunes to be made in these children's care homes.

Councillor Nigel Porter raised concerns about the small size of the garden (80 square metres), which did not meet the council's current standards of 100 square metres of amenity space, and the lack of a transport assessment. He also noted that the acoustic assessment indicated there would be noise issues.

Councillor Teresa Aldred spoke in favour of the application, saying that she was absolutely disgusted to sit on planning and hear some of the things what come out about children in care.

The committee approved the application.

80 Wharf Street South

The committee considered application 2024-0308 for part demolition, conversion of 80 Wharf Street South, and construction of a six-storey building to form a flatted residential development (class C3) with associated access and landscaping.

Senior Planning Officer Chloe Young presented the application, highlighting that the main building fronting Wharf Street South is on the council's local heritage asset register.

Councillor Nigel Porter raised concerns about the bland design of the proposed building, the lack of affordable homes, and the lack of environmental measures such as solar panels or green roofs.

Councillor Patrick Kittrick supported the application, saying that it was a pragmatic solution to a difficult site, and that it would bring 54 one and two-bedroom flats to the area.

Councillor Deepak Bajaj recalled attending his sister's wedding at the former Starlight 2501 building on the site in 1990.

The committee delegated authority to officers to approve the application subject to a bat survey.

2 and 4 Havelock Street

The committee considered application 2025-0190 for the change of use of two dwellings at 2 and 4 Havelock Street from class C3 to residential care homes (both class C2), with a maximum of two residents in care at each property.

Senior Planning Officer Chloe Young presented the application, highlighting that the agent is the husband of a councillor. She recommended refusal on the grounds of erosion of the character of the area and poor living conditions for care residents.

Councillor Nigel Porter supported the officer's recommendation, noting the limited amount of amenity space.

Councillor Patrick Kittrick also supported the refusal, saying that the area was not a suitable environment for vulnerable people.

Councillor Cafferty questioned the suitability of housing a child of 8-17 years old in one of the properties by themselves, apart from a care worker.

The committee refused the application.