30 student studios at 30 Richmond Road, Wrexham

What was proposed

The application sought to convert former offices into thirty student studio rooms, with window, door and other external works.

“Reference No.: 25/02823/FUL Full Application Proposal: Conversion of former offices to thirty studio rooms for student accommodation with associated external works including window and door alterations/ refurbishments.”

“PROPOSAL: Planning Permission is sought for the conversion of former offices to thirty studio rooms for student accommodation with associated external works including window and door alterations/ refurbishments.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The building is a former commercial property in Ashbrooke Conservation Area, outside the Urban Core and within an HMO Article 4 area.

“The site is located within the sub-area of Sunderland City Centre. The host property is afforded a corner plot adjacent to Mowbray Road and Douro Terrace. The property was originally developed as a pair of semi-detached Victorian villas with designated front gardens and associated grounds and a private access road to the north but is most recent use was that of a commercial use.”

“The site is located within the ward of Hendon. It is within the Ashbrook Conservation Area and within an Article 4 Direction Area for Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMO). The site is within a strategic network route and the smoke control area of City Centre Sunderland.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and deferral

The committee previously deferred the application so the developer could provide more information about student accommodation outside the Urban Core.

“Further to the deferral of the application, the developer has submitted the following; -Report/Statement undertaken by Bradley Hall to provide commentary regarding the viability and deliverability of the proposed redevelopment for student accommodation.”

Officer report

Main planning concerns

The proposal would reuse a vacant building and repair its fabric, but officers raised concerns about policy conflict, community character and possible resident conflict.

“Whilst Sunderland 2020 SHMA Student Need Addendum Report sets out a shortfall in Student Accommodation by 885 units by 2022, CSDP Policy H3 sets out that the development of student accommodation should be located within the Urban Core. The Council need to ensure that student accommodation numbers need to be managed in line with projected student numbers to ensure the city does not end up with an oversupply of accommodation, which cannot be easily converted to other uses.”

“Given the potential for significant number of strangers living together within the building, it is very likely that such a facility will increase the incidents of inter resident conflict as such, there will be an increase in police demand from the address. Such incidences will have a negative and detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area, which would be contrary to CSDP policy BH1.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Four representations objected and two supported the proposal; consultees raised concerns about accommodation standards but gave no objection after further information or subject to conditions.

“No lift for access to kitchen on second floor. Consultation response 27.01.2026 No objection - following the submission of further information. Northumbria Police still hold concerns that the development is likely to increase demand on services. Council’s Planning Policy team - The proposal relates to student accommodation outside of the Urban Core. The proposal will need to comprehensively demonstrate the need for the proposal as required in CSDP Policy H3.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

The agent and the applicant spoke in support, citing student demand, the building’s condition, financial viability and the proposed accommodation’s management.

The committee vote

The committee voted to refuse planning permission for the reason set out in the officer recommendation.

“There being no questions or comments from Members, the Chairperson put the recommendation to the Committee and it was:-”

“RESOLVED that Members REFUSE planning permission for the draft reason set out within the report…”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was refused because the site was outside the Urban Core and the required evidence about suitable sites and additional need was absent.

“Finally, the LPA recognise that compliance with the duties in this section may involve treating some persons more favourably than others; but that is not to be taken as permitting conduct that would otherwise be prohibited by or under this Act. RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE planning permission for the draft reason set out below: Reason: 1 The proposed development is located outside of the Urban Core.”

Officer report