Councillors in a London borough have approved the conversion of a house into a children’s care home with one member stating kids with ‘mental issues’ upset residents in his ward by shouting at them.

The Chair of Harrow Council’s Planning Committee called the conversion of a semi-detached house into a care home for up to four children with special needs ‘a terrible idea’. But the local authority ‘have to have places for people to stay’ and there were no planning reasons to refuse it, so the proposal for the house on Cavendish Avenue, submitted by residential care company Eliana Cares Ltd, was approved on January 15.

Residents and councillors had raised concerns about the plan to house children with ‘high level emotional, behavioural, and development needs’ in a residential area. Councillor Ghazanfar Ali, who ultimately voted against the plan, told the committee: “I’ve got the same kind of care home in my ward, and we receive regular complaints from the residents that, even during the night, the children with mental issues are vivacious, are banging on the walls, and sometimes open the windows and shout at the people walking.

“It’s upset a lot of residents.” Cllr Nitin Parekh also raised issues, saying: “I’ve got a problem in one of the roads in my ward, it’s a similar thing but adults are housed in that. Sometimes you find those people waiting outside on the street and that could be a danger to themselves, as well as the residents living there.”

He added: “Is it not our concern to make sure that doesn’t happen, because by nature these people don’t know what they’re doing if they’ve got mental issues and that could be a danger to residents living by, as well as the people that are going out of control?” The committee also referred to a statement made by ‘Secure By Design’ – the official police security initiative that works to improve the security of buildings and their immediate surroundings – which suggested the location for the children’s home ‘is not ideal’ due to the rate of crime and antisocial behaviour in the area.

The statement described the main entry door as being of ‘poor quality’, whilst the ground floor back bedroom has ‘no defence from prying or attack’ and claimed there’s nothing to stop one of the children from leaving or entering the home via the back door. It added that the internal doors all open inwards, which could allow one of the children to ‘barricade the door to prevent the staff access.’

However, the report also noted that ‘Secure By Design’ concluded the development is ‘unlikely to result in any significant or detrimental harm’ to the safety and security of either the children in care, or the residents living in the surrounding area. While the plan was ultimately approved, the councillors’ comments drew criticism from a national charity for children in care and young care leavers.

Katharine Sacks-Jones, CEO of Become, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “With 84,000 children in care and a desperate shortage of places where they can live, it’s saddening that such strong objections still exist to a children’s home opening in the local area.”

She added: “More than half of children in care in Harrow are sent to live out of area, far from the people and places that matter to them, such as friends, family, school and siblings. As their corporate parents, we would expect councillors to act in the best interests of these often-vulnerable children and recognise the importance of making sure homes are available in their area, where children need them.”

The home will have space for up to four children aged from four to 17, with two carers on site at all times from a rotation of 12. The Chair of the Planning Committee and Deputy Leader of Harrow Council, Cllr Marilyn Ashton, agreed with the points made by the committee members but added that they are not planning issues and it would be up to Ofsted to make sure the premises are suitable.

Cllr Ashton said: “It makes it very difficult for us because common sense wise one would think this is a terrible idea really – albeit we have to have places for people to stay. As elected representatives, we know that we get complaints but that doesn’t always result in us being able to do anything here about it.

“It’s a really tricky one.” She added: “I’ve come to the reluctant conclusion that, in terms of planning and planning policy, I don’t think there’s anything we can do about it.

“You could potentially have more disturbances from a HMO (House of Multiple Occupation); who knows what your neighbours are going to turn out like.” When it came to the vote, just one member voted against – Cllr Ali – with one abstaining – Cllr Parekh.

When asked for his reason for voting against, Mr Ali said he ‘didn’t have one’ and just decided to vote against. Cllr Ashton responded to say this was ‘not very impressive’. She added: “If members of this committee are going to vote against a recommendation, they really should have a planning reason why.

“It’s important that we are accountable.” Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), Cllr Parekh apologised for some of the language used in some of the statements and said that it ‘wasn’t intended to cause offence’.

He emphasised that his concerns are around care homes, including the one in his ward, where the residents can often be left unsupervised. Cllr Parekh wanted to highlight that in these cases those unsupervised people in care could pose a danger to themselves and the wider public.

Cllr Ali was approached for comment.