Eight-person HMO at 66 Wadham Road, Portsmouth

What was proposed

The application sought to change a dwelling into an eight-bedroom, eight-person house in multiple occupation, with a bike store and bin area.

“The proposal is for the change of use of the property from a dwellinghouse (Class C3) to an 8 Bedroom - 8 Person House in Multiple Occupation (Sui Generis).”

“A bike store is proposed in the rear garden, and an area for waste recycling/disposal bins is shown on the property forecourt. The property is terraced and does not benefit from side or rear access to the back garden.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a terraced property in an area of similar two-storey homes, near shops, services, leisure facilities and public transport.

“The application site is a terraced property on the north side of Wadham Road. The area is characterised by similar terraced properties of two storey height.”

“The site is approximately 250m from London Road South Local Centre, where there are a range of shops, leisure, employment and services, and local buses. The Mountbatten Centre with associated leisure facilities is approximately 400m to the north. Hilsea Station is approximately a 30 minute walk from the site.”

Officer report

Objections received

All 39 representations opposed the scheme, raising concerns about noise, crime, parking, infrastructure, community impacts, density, room sizes and overdevelopment.

“Increase in noise and disturbance; • Increase in crime and anti-social behaviour; • Lack of car parking provision leading to an increase in traffic and exacerbation of existing on-street parking problems; • Undue strain on local services and infrastructure, including sewage, drainage, waste management and Doctors/Dentists • Concerns about impact on community • Density of HMOs within the city and local area…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from an opposing speaker, the agent, and a councillor speaking on behalf of another opposing councillor.

What members debated

Members discussed the HMO threshold, parking, bin storage, fear of crime, protected characteristics and whether the HMO count required further investigation.

“The legal officer advised members that under the public sector equality duty they had to have due regard under the legislation to advance equality of opportunity with people who share and people who do not share relevant protected characteristics. One of those characteristics was disability in relation to the lady who made the representation.”

“Officers advised Members', if they were considering refusal, to concentrate on the issues raised in terms of the protected characteristics and the potential fear of crime but cautioned that the fear of crime had not been upheld by the inspector in a recent appeal, however, they may consider this application has reasons that were sufficiently different but they would still need to be supported and substantiated.”

Minutes

The committee decision

The committee refused permission against the officer recommendation, citing effects on neighbouring protected characteristics, parking and missing environmental mitigation.

“DECISION RESOLVED to refuse the grant of planning permission contrary to officer's recommendation for the following reasons:”

“Additional density of occupation adversely affecting the protected characteristics of neighbouring properties, leading to potential impacts to their living conditions.”

Minutes