Six-person HMO at 28 Grove Lane, Ipswich

The site and changes

The detached two-storey house faces Grove Lane, has a rear garden fronting Kings Avenue, and revised plans replaced four parking spaces with one maintenance space and cycle storage.

“The proposed site sits within the Article 4 Direction area removing permitted development right change of use from single dwellinghouse (use class C3) to small HMO (use class C4). The premises comprises a two-storey detached dwelling facing Grove Lane, with rear garden fronting Kings Avenue, directly opposite Alexandra Park. The ‘existing plans’ show the premises to be a 4-bed dwellinghouse. 2.4.”

Officer report

Residents’ objections

Six objections raised concerns about HMO concentration, parking, refuse, loss of family housing, the street scene and residential character.

“Psarianos, 2 Oxford Road (received 10.05.25) Summary of objections: -HMO Overconcentration -Loss of family oriented character area -Incongruous to the character of the area. -HMOs not needed, more decent housing is. -Errant parking outside of residential permit parking controlled hours (i.e. post-6pm) leading to highway network capacity and safety issues (e.g. emergency vehicle access).”

“-Overdemand for parking permits, leading to overcrowded bays and residents being unable to own cars due to the parking issues. -Unsightly parking arrangement -Inadequate parking provision for 6 bed HMO -Risks of refuse bins being left on the pavement, and increased number of bins required. -Loss of attractive rear garden at detriment of street scene. -Over-concentration of HMOs in the area, including unlicensed HMOs on Kings Avenue.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The owner spoke in support, highlighting professional management, policy compliance, car-free living, transport links and the proposed living standards.

What councillors debated

Councillors questioned the two smaller bedrooms, one-kitchen layout, HMO concentration, parking eligibility, accessibility and enforcement of management standards.

“The Planning Officer confirmed that HMO occupants would not be eligible under the Council’s parking policy. The property was located within a residents’ parking zone that operated from 8am to 6pm; however, it was recognised that there could be a risk of increased on street parking demand outside of the restricted hours.”

“The Development Management Team Leader confirmed that the application had to be assessed against the room standards for HMOs and not the national described space standards that applied to houses and flats; both of the smaller rooms exceeded the 6.15 square metres minimum requirement and therefore were compliant with Policy DM20 (a).”

Minutes

The final decision

Planning permission was refused because the additional HMO would contribute to cumulative over-concentration and harm existing residents’ social cohesion and amenity.

“Policy DM20(d) (Houses in Multiple Occupation) of the Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review (March 2022) states that proposals for the development of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO), including through the change of use of existing non- residential buildings, will be supported where they would not adversely impact on the amenity of the local area through the over-concentration of HMOs, or cumulatively adding to an…”

“Consequently, the addition of No.28 Grove Lane as a further HMO in this area results in an unacceptable impact upon the social cohesion and amenity of existing residents by virtue of a risk of more than 2 HMOs across the multiple combinations of runs of 20 on one side of the road in which the premises sits, contrary to the specific test of policy DM20(d) & DM20(iii).”

Minutes