Seven-person HMO at 72 Ophir Road, Portsmouth

What was proposed

The application sought to change a three-bedroom dwelling into a seven-bedroom, seven-person house in multiple occupation with extensions and storage facilities.

“The proposal is for the change of use of the property from a dwellinghouse (Class C3) to a 7 Bedroom - 7 Person House in Multiple Occupation (Sui Generis).”

“The Applicant has stated that extensions achieved under Permitted Development would be constructed in order to facilitate the change of use. This would include two rear extensions, a rear dormer and two front roof lights. The property would be extensively re-modelled internally.”

Officer report

The site

The site is a two-storey mid-terraced property near local shops, services and frequent bus routes.

“The application site is a 2-storey mid-terraced property, typical of those in Ophir Road. It currently has 3 bedrooms.”

“The site is approximately 280m from London Road (North) Local Centre, where there are a range of shops, leisure, employment and services, and frequent local bus services. It is also 260m from frequent bus services along Stamshaw Road.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways and Private Sector Housing raised no objection, while Highways noted possible parking pressure and requested cycle storage.

“No objection. Ophir Road is a residential road with bus stops and local amenities in close proximity. It is not considered that size of development would lead to a material impact to the function of the highway or result in any unacceptable safety impact. It is noted that due to the site constraints no off-road parking can be accommodated and therefore may increase parking pressure in the vicinity. This however is a matter of residential amenity for your consideration.”

“No objection. There is suitable bedroom sizes for the proposed number of occupants. The property would likely require a licence under Part 2, Housing Act 2004.”

Officer report

What people said

Twenty-eight representations opposed the scheme, citing overdevelopment, parking, noise, crime, services, waste, accommodation, drainage, privacy and nutrient concerns.

“Number of HMOs in the road and wider local area including unregistered HMOs • Overcrowding and over development • Undue strain on local services and infrastructure, including sewage, drainage, waste management and Doctors/Dentists • Increase in noise and disturbance • Increase in crime and anti-social behaviour • Lack of car parking provision leading to an increase in traffic and exacerbation of existing on-street parking problems • Concerns over the layout and standard of…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s representative spoke in favour, and Councillor Russell Simpson spoke against the application.

Member discussion

Members discussed HMO policy, mixed communities, parking wording, room standards and whether a refusal would succeed on appeal.

“Officers were certain that the property count was correct. They investigated using all available resources and information if queries were raised about possible HMOs during the publicity exercise. They confirmed that room measurements were correct. They had double-checked the proposed rooms were compliant with space standards. • The blue dots on plans did not necessarily represent a single property as some were divided into two flats.”

“As the government had said nothing about HMOs, LPAs were allowed to set their own standards. In Portsmouth's case this was the 10% rule, which other councils had followed. Although powers were going to be handed over to unelected officers, the council had done all it could to achieve mixed and balanced communities, but it could be very difficult to object to HMOs.”

Minutes

What was decided

The committee delegated authority to grant conditional permission, secure Solent protection mitigation, amend conditions and refuse if the legal agreement was not completed within one month.

“RESOLVED that 1. Delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to Grant Conditional Permission subject to satisfactory completion of a legal agreement to secure: a) the mitigation of the impact of the proposed residential development on Solent Special Protection Areas (recreational disturbance and nitrates) by securing the payment of a financial contribution and relevant conditions (below); 2.”

“Delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to refuse planning permission if a legal agreement has not been satisfactorily agreed within one month of the date of this resolution.”

Minutes