Agenda item - BH2020/01366, 71 Albion Hill, Brighton

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected: Hanover & Elm Grove

            Change of use from four bedroom dwelling house (C3) to five bedroom small house in multiple occupation (C4)

(1)              It was noted that an in-depth presentation had been provided by officers in advance of the meeting and was included on the council website detailing the scheme by reference to site plans, elevational drawings and photographs which showed the proposed scheme in the context of neighbouring development. The main considerations in determining the application related to the principle of the proposed development, the effects of the proposed change of use on neighbouring amenity, the standard of accommodation for future occupiers and transport matters. A mapping exercise had been undertaken indicating that there were 79 properties within a 50m radius of the application property, 7 of which had been identified as being in HMO use which amounted to 8.86%.

(2)              The use of the property as a small HMO with a maximum of 5 occupiers would not be too dissimilar to that of a family dwelling. The pattern of movement within the dwelling and to and from the dwelling might be different due to the individual lives being led rather than as a family unit. This was not however considered to be of such magnitude that it would cause significant harm. The proposed change of use of the dwelling was not considered such that it would have a significant impact on the local transport network. The site was too constrained to provide on-site cycle parking and as the site fell within CPZ V which was currently over capacity future occupiers would be restricted from applying for parking permits and this would be secured by condition. On that basis the proposal was considered to be acceptable and it was recommended that planning permission be granted.

            Public Speakers

(3)        The Democratic Services Officer, Penny Jennings read out statements on behalf of the Local Ward Councillors, Councillors, Gibson and Powell who had submitted letters of objection to the proposed change of use setting out their concerns and those neighbouring residents. Both were in agreement that the increasing number of student developments and HMO’s in the area were having a detrimental impact on the character of the area, it was being changed as a result of the transient population which was changing the residential balance. They did not agree that the current percentage of HMO’s was already greater than 10%. The increase in the number of such units was also detrimental in terms of additional comings and goings and created greater stress on the existing road network and on overspill parking beyond the CIZ. They were strongly of the view that further proliferation of such uses should be resisted.

            Questions of Officers

(4)        Councillor Fishleigh asked whether the Electoral Roll was used when checking to ascertain whether a dwelling was an HMO. The Planning Manager, Nicola Hurley, explained that although the electoral Register was not used a number of checks were used when seeking to determine whether a dwelling was in use as an HMO. Including, checks made against council tax records if exemptions were in place further checks were made against licensing records. Councillor Fishleigh also asked whether increased waste generation was a material planning consideration and it was confirmed that it was not.  

            Debate and Decision Making Process

(5)        Councillor Shanks stated that she considered that going forward it might be appropriate for the criteria used when assessing HMO’s to be revisited, perhaps when approving the City Plan, Part 2. It appeared that the number of such uses was creeping upwards in certain areas of the city.

(6)        Councillor Osborne stated that he considered that the definition of what constituted an HMO could be open to interpretation, noting that in this instance most of the units were above national space standards, although the living/dining area fell slightly below that. On balance he considered that there were insufficient grounds for refusal in this instance but was in agreement that the growing trend towards HMO’s in certain parts of the city needed to be monitored.

(7)        Councillor Childs stated that he was unable to support the application considering that the further proliferation of such uses in an area had a negative impact on local residents.

(8)        A vote was taken and on a vote of 7 to 1 with one abstention planning permission was granted.

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