New Sunderland 'short breaks' care centre approved for Red Gables, finally replacing axed Grace House service

Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com 
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
Visit Shots! now
Divisive plans for a care facility on Wearside supporting disabled children and their families have been given the green light by city councillors.

Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee, at a meeting this week, voted to approve plans for a new care centre at Red Gables, a five-bedroom detached property in East Rainton.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and their families are expected to benefit from the facility, with the total cost of purchase and conversion estimated at £1.7 million.

Red Gables. Picture released by Sunderland City Council.Red Gables. Picture released by Sunderland City Council.
Red Gables. Picture released by Sunderland City Council.

Together for Children (TfC), which delivers children’s services on behalf of Sunderland City Council, has been involved in the planning application for replacement provision, which would see Red Gables adapted for a care use and staffed to care for up to five children aged 5 to 17 years.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The aim is to provide a location for daytime outreach, group activities and short breaks and according to a council report, to “permit children and young people the opportunity to socialise, while, by extension, also affording parents and or carers short-term respite from their care-giving responsibilities”.

Proposals for Red Gables were first submitted in December, 2023 but have faced issues since, including more than 80 objections in an initial public consultation, physical amendments and a “legal technicality” which saw the plans withdrawn earlier this year.

At the time the amended plans were withdrawn, there had been almost 200 comments in support of the facility during a council consultation exercise.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Plans for the care facility were resubmitted in August, 2024, and attracted dozens of public comments during a fresh council consultation, including 48 objections.

Objectors raised a number of concerns, including the “unsuitable” location and impacts on the character of the area, as well as loss of “community cohesion”, reduced privacy and increased noise.

Noise concerns were linked to future occupants and increased “comings and goings” from staff and visitors, as well as highway safety concerns about access arrangements and increased levels of traffic.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Other concerns included the impact of potential events being held at the property, wildlife impacts and criticism of the council’s planning consultation processes.

While several objectors stressed they were not against the principle of the care facility, they said an alternative location should be sought instead.

Around 15 representations were also received in support, including comments from parents with disabled children, and some supporting comments claimed objections contained “assumptions”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Supporters also contested comments around noise and the alleged ‘unsuitability’ of Red Gables for a care facility, and argued that the plans would be “an asset to the community”, with parents being “good neighbours”.

Sunderland City Council’s planning department, in a report published ahead of this week’s decision-making meeting, had recommended the Red Gables care facility plans for approval.

Arguments for and against the proposals were put forward at a crunch meeting of the Planning and Highways Committee at City Hall on Monday, October 7, with more than 10 registered speakers in attendance.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Several objectors spoke at the meeting raising concerns about privacy and overlooking, potential ‘subsidence’ on land where a fence was proposed and highway safety issues linked to the narrow access route and entrance to the property.

Concerns were also raised about the suitability of the Red Gables property for children’s care, as well as claims that operational information in the interests of residential amenity and highway safety was not available to the public.

Several members of Hetton Town Council, including councillors Dave Geddis and Susan Waterston, spoke on behalf of residents to outline concerns on their behalf, and Hetton city councillors, Claire Rowntree and James Blackburn, also spoke at the meeting.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Cllr Rowntree claimed ward councillors had not been consulted initially when the Red Gables property was identified for a short breaks facility use and said there were issues around notifications on the planning application, which had caused “anxieties” for local residents.

She added there were a “number of lessons to be learned” and asked the planning committee to “draw a balance” and to “move forward with a quality short break provision while addressing the valid concerns expressed by the residents”.

Pamela Mann, who led the campaign to support families following the loss of services at Grace House, also spoke in support of the Red Gables scheme on Monday evening at City Hall.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The parent and former city councillor noted Red Gables aimed to provide a “sustainable home” for affected children and had been welcomed by families since its announcement.

However, she said it was “distressing and offensive” for families to read some objections to the plans that were “not based on reason or actual experience”, including one comment which alleged the development would be a “social experiment”.

“Our families wish no disrespect towards the residents of this area and understand your right to object and your concerns,” she added.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“However, we would rather you base your objections on fact rather than misconception.

“What appears to be imagined for this facility couldn’t be further from the truth, it’s not a commercial industrial-sized care home and it can’t be stated that this house is not fit-for-purpose when no evidence is given”.

Council planners, in a report, said the proposals would “provide a specialist form of residential accommodation” in a “sustainable location”, which would “be in keeping with the residential land uses / character of the immediate area”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It was noted that no objections had been raised by the council’s environmental health team over “noise and general disturbances” and that the care facility would be “appropriately managed 24/7”, with “no unacceptable impacts” in relation to residential amenity.

In addition, the council’s transportation department raised no objection in relation to parking provision and highway safety, subject to conditions, and no objection was raised by Northumbria Police.

During debate on the planning application, the Planning and Highways Committee agreed to extra conditions to help reassure neighbouring residents.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

This included an updated management plan for the facility around on-site staff parking, as well as formal efforts to encourage staff to use public transport rather than cars.

In addition, the prospect of potential double yellow lines in the vicinity of Red Gables was discussed, although it was noted this process would involve a traffic regulation order (TRO), a process separate from planning.

In response to concerns about events, it was also confirmed that no events would take place at Red Gables, other than families viewing the property.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Simon Marshall, interim chief executive of Together for Children and council director of children’s services, said Red Gables would be a “controlled environment” with “experienced staff”.

While it was acknowledged that there was a whole staff team of 29 people, the children’s services boss said meetings would take place off-site, and that only eight staff would be on-site at any one time during shift changeovers.

“We want to make it a homely experience, it’s not a commercial exercise in as much as it’s designed to make money, it’s designed to create a homely alternative so that our parents can have the respite that they badly need,” he added.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“I think it’s obvious that we need to get something up and operating as quickly as we can”.

After being put to the vote, the proposed change of use to allow Red Gables to become a care facility won unanimous support from the Planning and Highways Committee.

Councillor Martyn Herron thanked speakers attending the meeting for “keeping everything civil” over the “very emotive issue”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“I do think that everyday we go without a dedicated care facility like this it’s a disaster for the children and for their families, so I will support the application,” he added.

Councillor Iain Scott said he hoped recommended conditions would “alleviate some concerns” and said he was “moved” by some supporters’ comments in relation to respite care.

Referencing one objector’s comment on the council’s planning portal, he added: “Certainly providing respite provision for children with significant disabilities is not a ‘social experiment’.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“It’s the local authority providing safe and sustainable much-needed provision for those with the most acute needs in our society, and giving the parents and carers a well-deserved break”.

Councillor Martin Haswell said residents engaging in the planning process had influenced him to suggest conditions to “try and make the best of a challenging situation for the residents of East Rainton” and to “try and make this scheme as least impactful as possible”.

“We do desperately need good quality local short breaks provision in the city, we’re in this situation because of the bumbling of the arrangements with Grace House, we shouldn’t be here but we are,” he added.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Project bosses previously hoped the care centre at Red Gables would open in Autumn, 2024.

This was due to what the presentation described as “necessary legal activity including registering the home with Ofsted, essential renovation work and the recruitment of staff”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

A statement published on Together for Children’s website added the previous withdrawal of the Red Gables plan was due to a “legal land-related issue which was unfortunately out of our control” and that the resubmitted plans were “almost identical to the previous”.

At the Planning and Highways Committee on October 7, 2024, council planning officers revealed more details on this issue.

Councillors heard the initial planning application for Red Gables was withdrawn because it was identified that the city council didn’t own a “small parcel of land within the application site”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

While attempts have been made to find the owner(s) of the parcel of land, it was noted that no-one has come forward and that the land is classified as “unregistered with the owner unknown”.

Under planning conditions, the care development at Red Gables must be brought forward within three years.

For more information on the plan or to view consultation comments, visit Sunderland City Council’s planning portal website and search reference: 24/01562/FU4

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.