10-bedroom HMO at 74 Week Street, Maidstone

The site and surroundings

The 226-square-metre site lies behind 74 Week Street, with neighbouring commercial and residential buildings and part of the site in a conservation area.

“An open service yard accessed from Union Street is at the eastern end (rear) of 68- 72 Week Street. Pedestrian access to the application site and the existing flats on the upper floors of 74 Week Street is from Union Street. This pedestrian access is between this service yard (with Ragstone boundary wall) and the building at 15 Union Street. The building at 15 Union Street is three storeys high with a clipped hip roof.”

“The building immediately to the front (west) of the application site at 74 Week Street is not in a conservation area but is a non-designated heritage asset. At the eastern end of the site (including the site access from Union Street) an area of 26 square metres is in the Holy Trinity Conservation Area (designated in 1977).”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions covered flats and a 10-bedroom HMO, but neither development had been implemented and both remained extant for stated periods.

“24/503483/FULL Demolition of the existing shed and erection of part 3 (sic), part 4 storey building, comprising a 10-bedroom HMO (Sui Generis), with associated bin and bike storage (part retrospective). (NB: change from flats to an HMO from earlier approval (Approved 13.12.2024) (Extant until 13.12.2027.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the location sustainable, the design and accommodation acceptable, and the heritage and neighbour impacts outweighed by the scheme’s benefits.

“SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: • Provides residential accommodation in a sustainable location where future occupiers do not have to rely on the private car for daily needs. • Scale, height, design and plot coverage in keeping with local character and appearance. • Standard of accommodation and neighbour impact are acceptable. • Proposal acceptable in relation to highway safety, access and parking.”

“No reasons are found that would provide adequate justification for going against these earlier decisions. • The benefits of the scheme outweigh the harm when carrying out a planning balance and available information on the council’s housing land supply position lends further weight to the positive recommendation.”

Officer report

Local objection

One local resident objected because the proposal was considered contrary to new HMO guidelines then under review.

“Local resident 4.01 One representation received objecting to the application as it is contrary to”...the new HMO guidelines presently out for review”.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An agent addressed the committee on behalf of the applicant.

The decision

Permission was granted subject to the report’s conditions, with condition five amended to require the maximum technically possible number of swift bricks.

“That permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report with the amendment of condition 5 (Ecology Enhancement Measures) to require the maximum number of swift bricks technically possible for the development as part of the ecological enhancements.”

“That the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.”

Minutes