Seven-person HMO at 10 Norman Road, Southsea

What was proposed

The application sought to change a lawful four-person HMO into a seven-bedroom, seven-person HMO with internal remodelling, extensions and cycle storage.

“The Applicant has sought planning permission for the change of use of the dwelling from the current lawful use of as an HMO, which was last occupied by up to four individuals living together, to allow up to 7 individuals to live together as an HMO. The proposed…”

“The Applicant has stated that extensions achieved under Permitted Development (rear dormer, rear extension and two rooflights) would be constructed in order to facilitate the change of use. The property would be extensively re-modelled internally.”

Officer report

Earlier use of the property

There was no planning history, but evidence showed the property had been used lawfully as a four-person HMO and was vacant during refurbishment.

“The property does not benefit from a lawful development certificate or planning application for the previous change of use from C3 to C4. Additionally, it is noted that it is not current on the Council's HMO database as an HMO. This matter has been extensively reviewed as part of this application, and evidence has been provided by the Agent in order to establish the use of the property as an HMO.”

“It is therefore considered on the balance of probability that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the use of the property as a lawful HMO. Reviewing the evidence, it is considered that the property was last used as 4-bedroom/4-person HMO and is now vacant and undergoing refurbishment works as set out in the submitted plans.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional permission, considering the change material but acceptable under relevant policies and the national planning framework.

“Having assessed the likely significant difference in the nature and implications of the change in occupation it is considered that the change in use is material and requires planning permission.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Private Sector Housing said the HMO would require licensing, while Highways found no unacceptable highway or safety impact and requested cycle storage.

“Private Sector Housing: would require to be licenced under Part 2, Housing Act 2004. Comments regarding HMO licenses held by the property are summarised in Para. 4.2.”

“Highways: Norman Road is a residential road with bus stops and local amenities in proximity along Lawrence Road and Albert Road. The proposed application seeks to convert an existing residential HMO unit to a 7-bedroom Sui Generis residential unit. It is considered that size of development would not lead to a material impact to the function of the highway or result in any unacceptable safety impact.”

Officer report

What people objected to

Twenty-six objections cited HMO concentration, overcrowding, noise, parking, waste, accommodation standards, fire safety, neighbour impacts and local service pressures.

“Number of HMOs in the road • Overcrowding and over development • Undue strain on local services and infrastructure, including sewage, drainage, waste management and Doctors/Dentists • 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 • Concerns over the layout and standard of accommodation being provided • Loss of a family…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke in favour, while Councillor Horton spoke against the application and did not participate as a committee member.

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application because it considered the proposal overdeveloped, harmful to occupants and the area, substandard, and contrary to emerging policies.

“RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons - the proposal would constitute over-development with a detrimental effect on both occupants and the area; the bedrooms are the minimum space standard; facilities are substandard in that there is no toilet on the first floor and the shower room on the first floor is below the recommended space standards; bedroom 1 does not have adequate liveable space and would not provide a good standard of accommodation; it…”

Minutes