Agenda item

Change of use from dwelling (use class C3) to House of Multiple Occupation (use class C4) [Osbaldwick and Derwent] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Miss Luciana Nok Sze Lau for a change of use from a dwelling (use class C3) to a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) (use Class C4).

In the Officer’s update it was reported that following the site visit further investigation had taken place in respect of the number of  HMO’s on the street, whilst the Officer’s report referred to two in the database it was likely that there were actually three HMO’s.

Using the Council’s Draft Supplementary Planning Document there would be a percentage of 9.5% out of the properties remaining on Thirkleby Way if planning permission were granted, meaning that the 10% threshold outlined in the policy had not been breached. It was also reported that not all HMO’s were occupied by students, and that data used to identify which properties were HMO’s was collated from site visits, licensing, planning records and local knowledge.

Representations in objection were received from the Ward Member, Councillor Warters. He felt that the figures used in the report were incorrect and that there were additional HMO’s on Thirkleby Way. He felt that Members should consider the parking facilities and the residential amenity.

During debate the following points were raised;

·        That some Members felt that the Article 4 Direction did not take into account local areas.

·        That the road was very narrow and had not been widened since 2010.

·        Three HMO’s in a row on a street would mean having twelve people living a small area and this would mean a detrimental impact on neighbours.

·        One of the rooms was particularly small, and had four doors within it.

Councillor Gillies moved refusal of the application on the cumulative effect of three properties in a row being HMO’s.

Councillor Derbyshire seconded refusal.

The Chair cautioned that the application should be considered within the legislation, which was why he could not support refusal.

On being put the vote it was;

Resolved: That the application be refused.

Reason:   The proposal would result in a concentration of three houses in multiple occupation in a row. The cumulative impact of this cluster of houses in multiple occupation will result in a significant  negative  impact on the existing living conditions of nearby residential properties by reason of a more intensive occupation, noise between dwellings at all times and especially at night in particular from the comings and goings of occupiers which are likely to be more often then those associated with more conventional C3 houses and which will be more noticeable, and therefore more harmful, in what is a quiet residential street.It is therefore contrary to paragraph 50 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 which seeks to create sustainable, inclusive and mixed local communities. It also conflicts with Local Plan policy H8 of the Development Control Local Plan which seeks to ensure that HMOs do not have an adverse impact on the residential character of an area by virtue of the proposal alone or cumulatively with a concentration of such uses and fails to meet the standards set out in the Draft Supplementary Planning Document: Controlling the Concentration of Houses in Multiple Occupation 2012.