Agenda item

This application seeks retrospective permission for the change of use of 37 Mitchell Way from a dwellinghouse (use class C3) to a 5 bedroom house in multiple occupation (use class C4) for 6 individuals. [Rawcliffe And Clifton Without]

Members considered a retrospective application for the change of use of 37 Mitchell Way from a dwellinghouse (use class C3) to a 5 bedroom house in multiple occupation (use class C4) for up to 6 individuals.

Officers gave a presentation based upon the slides on agenda pages 19-24 detailing the site plans, floor plans and elevations.

In response to Members’ questions it was confirmed that:

·        2 car parking spaces were acceptable under planning requirements.

·        Access for bin storage was sufficient.

·        Garden space to rear of property was sufficient.

Public Speakers

Anne-Marie Richards spoke in objection of the application with concern over parking issues, restriction of vehicles including emergency services and safety concerns for pedestrians. She stated that 7 people currently resided in the property, noise issues from the current residents, commercial vehicles wrongfully parked and the street scene and exterior of the building in deterioration.

Carlton Owen spoke in objection of the application stating the change began in 2017 and since then there was parking issues, overcrowding of the street space making it difficult to walk on the pavement, commercial vehicle parked wrongfully. He added that the house was not made for HMO and the current residents were loud and causing stress to the neighbours. In response to Member’s questions it was confirmed that neighbourhood protection and highways had not been involved, the police had been involved in a parking related incident hitting an exterior wall.

Cllr Smalley spoke in objection to the application as the local ward and parish councillor. He referenced paragraph 5.3 ensuring changes not detrimental to the residents and could see the negative impact to the area. He stated the visitor parking does not belong to the property and the property is not suitable for HMO. In response to Member’s questions it was confirmed that ResPark, Highways, Neighbourhood Protection had not been sought to find resolutions to issues but that the police had been involved in the parking related incident.

In response to further questions from Members, officers confirmed:

·        The covenant in the property deeds and commercial vehicle issue did not fall under Planning authority remit.

·        That 2 allocated parking spaces was sufficient for a HMO of this size.

·        That additional parking issues/ parking on the street would fall under the Highways authority.

·        Street width access for emergency services was acceptable as the property was already in residential use.

·        A parking restriction for the property owner may not be enforceable, as the 2 parking spaces provided would be acceptable.

·        If there were 7 residents occupying the property then an investigation would be required and a new application would need to be created for large HMO.

·        That the street visitor spaces did not belong to the applicant or the owner of the property.

After debate it was moved by Cllr Fisher and seconded by Cllr Daubeney that the application be refused on the grounds of inadequate car parking spaces, which would be detrimental to highway safety and the amenity of neighbours. On being put to the vote, the motion was not carried.

Cllr Webb then moved, and Cllr Crawshaw seconded, that the application be approved as recommended due to HMO application standards being adhered to and parking issues not considered under the Planning authority remit.

Cllr Fisher requested his vote to refuse the application be noted.

Resolved:  That the application be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the report.

Reason:     On balance and subject to conditions, it is considered that the use of the property as a HMO within the C4 use class is acceptable in terms of the balance of the community, highways impact and local amenity. The application accords with the requirements of the NPPF, Policy H8 of the Publication Draft York Local Plan 2018 and Policies GP1 and H8 of the Development Control Local Plan 2005.