Agenda item

Creation of an extra unit in 6 unit HMO (Class C4).

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Creation of an extra unit in 6 unit HMO (Class C4).

Officers introduced the application and made a recommendation for approval.

The lead petitioner had submitted a written representation and photos on behalf of petitioners objecting to the proposal. The statement was read out to the Committee Members. Key points highlighted included:

1. Several issues had come to light over the past year, significantly impacting the quality of life for nearby residents.
2. Despite being approved as a 6-bedroom HMO for students, there were often more than six residents living at the property, sometimes including couples and children.
3. Frequent disturbances during evening hours disrupted the peace and quiet expected in a residential area.
4. Large amounts of rubbish were frequently left on the driveway, leading to unpleasant smells and attracting vermin.
5. Multiple reports of marijuana being smoked at the property forced neighbours to close their windows due to the smell.
6. Parking was a significant issue, with several cars frequently parked at the property.
7. Rear access was constantly used, compromising the security of neighbouring properties and posing a significant safety risk.
8. The garden was often littered with rubbish and discarded mattresses, creating an ideal habitat for vermin.
9. Residents frequently cooked on the decking outside, which was unsanitary and posed a considerable fire risk.
10. The petitioner urged the Council to reject the application, stating that any further expansion would be detrimental to both the immediate neighbours and the wider community.

The applicant and agent were not in attendance and no written submissions had been received.

Members enquired what action had been taken by the Council’s licencing team regarding the complaints raised by residents. Officers explained that the planning process for HMOs differed from the licensing process. However, officers had conducted a search but had been unable to locate any reports of antisocial behaviour.

Members were informed that the certificate in place was a Certificate of Lawful Development hence there were limits to the planning controls that could be deployed. However, the development brought forward a site plan that included a location for rubbish bins. Officers had enforcement powers to undertake enforcement action should the bins not be placed in that location. Details of waste and cycle storage and EV charging points had been requested and officers had everything in their power in terms of proposing conditions on the development.

In response to questions from the Committee regarding fire safety, it was confirmed that the fire brigade regularly inspected the site. Members expressed concern regarding potential misuse of the units but were advised that a management plan would not be justified in this case.

Councillors referred to the Case Officer’s visit to the site in February 2023 and enquired whether notice would have been given. Officers confirmed that they were not required to give notice but generally did to ensure they were able to gain access. The Planning Officer had undertaken more than two visits but had not checked numbers of occupants. However, a condition was included to restrict the number of people residing in the property – visitor numbers would not be restricted.

The Committee sought further details of parking arrangements at the site. It was confirmed that two parking spaces were available which was deemed sufficient. The Highways Officer advised Members that the London Plan was silent on parking standard for HMOs. The Local Plan indicated 3 spaces would be appropriate, but these were maximum standards. However, the Highways Officer highlighted the need for a condition to regularise the situation whereby cars were mounting the kerb to access the hard standing; this was illegal and caused damage to the footway. An extension to the existing vehicular crossover was recommended.

At the request of Members, it was agreed that officers would advocate for 7 bins to serve the 7 rooms at the development. These details would be duly assessed by the Case Officer and management.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the insertion of a new condition providing for an extension to the existing vehicular crossover and an amendment to Condition 7 (waste) to ensure the details demonstrated that the refuse storage provision would be of sufficient capacity to serve the approved number of maximum occupants.