Nine-person HMO at 45 Greenbank Road, Darlington

What was proposed

The application sought to change a single dwelling into a nine-person HMO, adding three ground-floor bedrooms without further external alterations.

“In December 2024 a Certificate of Lawfulness (ref no: 24/01010/PLU) was issued for a change of use of the property from a single dwelling (Use Class C3) to a 6 No. person HMO (Use Class C4). The Certificate confirmed that under the provision of Schedule 2, Part 3, Class L of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 the proposed change of use from a dwelling (Class C3) to a six person HMO (Class C4) constituted permitted…”

“The main change to the layout would be the creation of three additional bedrooms on the ground floor. This planning application does not include any external alterations to the property, but it does include bin and cycle storages areas within the rear yard…”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Certificates of lawfulness covered rear and loft works and a six-person HMO, with those works still underway and not completed.

“In October 2024, a Certificate of Lawfulness (ref no 24/00932/PLU) was issued for the partial demolition and conversion of the existing garage to provide a habitable space and covered store area at the rear including the blocking up existing garage door to the rear boundary wall, the conversion of loft into habitable space together with the installation of 2 No. box dormers with rooflights to the rear and two Velux rooflights at the front roof slope.”

Officer report

Officers recommended approval

Officers recommended permission subject to conditions, considering the proposal compliant with relevant policies and supported by its location, storage and nutrient mitigation.

“CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 50. The application site is located within the development limits for the urban area and therefore the proposal can be supported in general planning policy terms subject to compliance with all other appropriate national and local development policies.”

“The development will be nutrient neutral as the applicant will obtain nutrient credits from Natural England to mitigate the impact of the proposal on Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar Site and associated Sites of Special Scientific Interest.”

Officer report

Council and police advice

Environmental health, transport, highways and private-sector housing officers raised no objections, while the police provided general security advice.

“RESULTS OF TECHNICAL CONSULTATION 10. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer, Transport Planning Officer and Highways Engineer have raised no objections to the planning application.”

“The Council’s Private Sector Housing Team have no objections and have advised that the property will be subject to mandatory licensing under the Housing Act 2004”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Objectors raised concerns about parking, noise, antisocial behaviour, litter, property values, fire safety, overcrowding and the loss of family homes.

“The area has deteriorated as half of the family houses have been turned into bedsits, flats and HMOs. • There has been an increase in antisocial behaviour in the local area with race riots, robberies at the Sainsbury stores on Corporation Road and a shop blowing up. • This will lead to an increase in noise pollution. • This will lead to an increase in the number of vehicles. • This will lead to an increase in litter in the area.”

“Thi s document was cl as s ified as : OFFICIAL • Public bins have been removed and large amounts of recycling, due to the existing HMOs, often cause bags to overflow making the area unpleasant to live in. This proposal will make the matter even worse. • Concern that the builders are converting the building before they have permission to do so. • Concern over who the occupants of the premises will be.”

Officer report

Who addressed the committee

The committee heard from the applicant’s agent, one objector and the ward councillor, alongside considering sixteen objection letters and technical advice.

The committee refused permission

The committee refused permission contrary to the recommendation because another nine-person HMO would worsen noise, disturbance and parking conditions for neighbouring properties.

“RESOLVED – That planning permission be refused contrary to recommendation, for the following reason:”

“The application site is located within an area where there is a high concentration of properties in multiple occupation and in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the introduction of a nine person house in multiple occupation in this location will lead to adverse amenity conditions for the occupants of the neighbouring properties in terms of noise, disturbance and lack of parking.”

Minutes