Four-person HMO at 30 Ash Tree Road, Northampton

What was proposed

The application sought to change a three-bedroom dwelling into a four-occupant HMO, with two single bedrooms and one double bedroom, without external alterations.

“Development: Change of use from a C3 dwellinghouse to a 3-bedroom, 4- occupant House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), comprising two single-occupancy bedrooms and one double- occupancy bedroom.”

“Proposal Change of use from a C3 dwellinghouse to a 3-bedroom, 4-occupant House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), comprising two single-occupancy bedrooms and one double-occupancy bedroom.”

Officer report

The site

The property is a modern two-storey semi-detached dwelling in a primarily residential housing development, with no external changes proposed.

“The application site comprises 30 Ash Tree Road which is a modern, two-storey semi-detached dwelling situated within the Timken housing development in Duston, Northampton. The surrounding area is primarily residential.”

“Planning permission is sought to change the use of the dwelling to a house in multiple occupation (HMO) to be occupied by four people. No external changes or alterations to the house are proposed.”

Officer report

Planning history

The report states there was no planning history directly relevant to the proposal.

“There is no planning history for the property directly relevant to the proposal.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Thirty-four objections cited character, noise, residential amenity, infrastructure, parking, over-intensive use, cumulative HMO effects and a possible restrictive covenant.

“Consultee Name Position Comment Duston Parish Council Objection Insufficient off-street parking and impact on highway safety; increase in domestic waste; impact on the character and cohesion of the area; lack of clarity regarding the proposed internal layout. WNC Highways and Right of Way No response received at time of writing report.”

“Adverse impact on the character of the area • Increase noise and disturbance/adverse impact on residential amenity • Unsuitable location for HMO • Impact on local infrastructure • Parking pressures / highway safety • Over-intensive use of the property • Cumulative impact – could lead to further HMOs • A restrictive covenant on the property could prevent the use…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident objected over parking and a covenant, while the local ward member objected over traffic, congestion, noise and refuse.

Committee discussion

The committee was reminded that covenants were not material planning considerations and considered the officer report, presentation and public speakers’ addresses.

“In response to points raised by the speakers regarding covenants, the Senior Planning Solicitor reminded the Committee that covenants were not a material consideration as part of the planning process.”

“In reaching its decision, the Committee considered the Case Officer’s report and presentation, and the addresses of the public speakers.”

Minutes

The vote

Members voted nine in favour, none against and one abstention on a motion to approve the application with a four-person occupancy condition.

“It was proposed by Councillor Jonathan Harris and seconded by Councillor Adrian Little that application 2026/2208/FULL be approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, subject to the addition of a condition to restrict the maximum occupancy of the property as a House in Multiple Occupation to four persons.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee delegated authority to grant permission, subject to the four-person occupancy condition and the report’s remaining conditions.

“(1) That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director – Planning and Development to grant permission to application 2026/2208/FULL subject to:”

“The remaining conditions set out in the Case Officer’s report (and any amendments to those conditions as deemed necessary).”

Minutes