Eight-bedroom HMO at Braymead, 37 Nyewood Lane, Bognor Regis

What was proposed

The application sought to change a 10-bedroom guest house into an eight-bedroom HMO, with the garage removed and minor roof alterations.

“DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATIONThis application seeks to change the use of a 10-bed Bed and Breakfast (C1) into an 8-bed House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) (Sui Generis) alongside associated alterations which include the removal of the rear garage, the installation of a side rooflight, and installation of a minor rear dormer window. SITE AREA225sqm. BOUNDARY TREATMENTLow, rendered boundary wall with access gate surrounding the front amenity space.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Environmental Health and highways raised no objection, although highways identified four required parking spaces and none proposed on site.

“WSCC Highways (LHA) - No objection: - The site is accessed from Nyewood Lane (C class road, 30mph); adjacent to a private access serving rear of nearby dwellings. There are no safety concerns. - The garage is intended to be removed and replaced with cycle storage. - Application form states no on site parking; although a garage exists, its dimensions are unknown and its suitability for parking cannot be confirmed. - The parking requirement for an 8 bed HMO is 4 spaces.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers found the HMO would not create an unacceptable local concentration, would provide adequate amenity and would bring housing benefits despite policy conflicts.

“The proposal conflicts with relevant Development Plan policies in that it has not provided a Site Specific Flood Risk Assessment, evidence demonstrating that the existing tourist accommodation is no longer viable, or adequate on site car parking and amenity space. However, for the reasons explained below, these conflicts do not amount to sufficient grounds to justify refusal.”

“In all other respects, the proposal complies with relevant Development Plan policies in that it would deliver much needed housing, would not harm the visual amenity of the area, would not lead to an unacceptable overconcentration of HMOs, would provide an acceptable standard of amenity for future occupiers, and would result in a net improvement to the site's flood-risk position.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The proposal lacked a flood assessment and on-site parking and had less recommended amenity space, but officers found no identifiable or unacceptable harm.

“While the proposal has not been supported by a FRA, it results in a clear betterment of the flood risk conditions on site by reducing the amount of existing sleeping accommodation at ground floor. The proposal would not otherwise alter the flood risk on site or elsewhere, and the lack of a Flood Risk Assessment does not amount to any identifiable harm and is not, therefore, a reason for refusal.”

“While the proposal is in technical conflict with ALP policy D DM1(15) due to the shortfall of recommended on-site private and communal amenity space provisions outlined within the Arun Design Guide (ADG), the on-site amenity space provided, in combination with the public open space opportunities and access to other services and amenities within the area result in the proposal providing adequate areas of open space and a sufficient level of residential amenity for occupiers.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke publicly before the committee considered the application.

The committee vote

The recommendation for approval was proposed, seconded and put straight to the vote without further comments or questions.

“The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Northeast and seconded by Councillor Woodman.”

“There being no comments or questions raised after the officer presentation the Chair put the recommendation straight to the vote.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee resolved to approve the application conditionally.

“That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY.”

Minutes