Agenda item - BH218/01884, 97 Hornby Road, Brighton -Full Planning

skip navigation and tools

Agenda item

BH218/01884, 97 Hornby Road, Brighton -Full Planning

Change of use from three bedroom single dwelling (C3) to six bedroom small house in multiple occupation (C4) with alterations to fenestration and provision of cycle storage.

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected: Moulsecoomb & Bevendean

Minutes:

              Change of use from three bedroom single dwelling (C3) to six bedroom small house in multiple occupation (C4) with alterations to fenestration and provision of cycle storage.

 

              Officer Presentation

 

(1)          The Principal Planning Officer, Liz Arnold, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to drawings, elevational drawings floorplans and photographs. The application site was a semi-detached, two-storey property on the northern side of Hornby Road and the application sought planning permission to change the use of the property from a residential dwelling (C3) to a six-bedroom small House in Multiple Occupation (C4).

 

(2)          It was noted that the main considerations in determining the application related to the principle of the proposed change of use, the visual impact of the proposed external alterations, the impact of the proposal on neighbouring amenity and the standard of accommodation the proposed HMO would provide. Sustainable transport was also a material consideration. The applicant was seeking to alter the internal layout of the property to create 2no ground floor bedrooms, with one bathroom on each floor. The proposed bedrooms met the minimum national space standards and were adequate in terms of size, circulation space and layout, providing good levels of natural light and outlook. The standard of accommodation the proposal would afford to future occupants was considered to be acceptable. If, however, the communal space was converted to a bedroom in future, this would severely restrict the level of shared space available to the occupants. Therefore, a condition would be applied to any permission granted restricting the use of this room to communal use only to ensure an acceptable layout and level of communal space was retained.

 

(3)          There appeared to be parking onsite for several vehicles and the site was not in a CPZ so on-street parking was available. The proposed change of use was therefore not considered to have a significant or negative impact on the highway and for these reasons approval was recommended.

 

              Questions of Officers

 

(4)          Councillor Gilbey queried whether the letter of objection received from Councillor Meadows related to the most recent application in respect of this site and it was confirmed that it did.

 

(5)          Councillor Miller sought clarification regarding the number of properties in HMO use within close proximity to the site as this had been referenced in Councillor Yates’ letter of objection. Also, whether the number of occupants could be limited by condition. It was confirmed that this was addressed by proposed Condition 4 which would be attached to any planning permission granted. Councillor C Theobald also sought confirmation regarding the number of HMO’s and it was confirmed that those referred to by the local ward councillors in their letters of objection fell outside the radius to be considered.

 

              Debate and Decision Making Process

 

(6)          Councillor O’Quinn noted all that had been set out in the report regarding the distance from other HMO’s in the neighbourhood and in respect of the removal of permitted development rights which meant that panning permission would be required in order for any further works to be carried out to the property. Whilst recognising that not all HMO’s  were students lets a number were and where  there was a concentration of them as was the case in some areas of the city it could impact negatively on other residents and they had genuine and founded concerns in relation to such a proliferation of use. Residents often expressed the view that their concerns were not taken seriously and it was not clear to them that often Members’ hands were tied in terms of refusal in the absence of planning grounds on which to do so, or that when refused permission could be granted by a Planning Inspector following an appeal by the applicants. Councillor O’Quinn stated that she wanted to raise this matter to give it a higher profile for residents and to urge that by whatever means could practically be used in line with existing legislation that further thought could be given to how these issues might best be addressed.

 

(7)          A vote was taken and the 10 Members present when the vote was taken voted by 9 with one abstention that Planning Permission be granted.

 

77.7       RESOLVED - That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out below and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informatives also set out in the report.

 

              Note: Councillors Bennett and Hyde were not present at the meeting during consideration or determination of the above application.

Supporting documents:

 


Brighton & Hove City Council | Hove Town Hall | Hove | BN3 3BQ | Tel: (01273) 290000 | Mail: info@brighton-hove.gov.uk | how to find us | comments & complaints