11-bedroom HMO at 277 - 279 High Street, Smethwick

What was proposed

The application proposed converting residential space into an 11-bedroom HMO, with a loft conversion and first-floor rear and side extension.

“The applicant is proposing a change of use at the ground floor rear and first floor levels from residential to an 11-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), including a loft conversion and a first-floor rear/side extension. The proposed first-floor rear and side extension would measure approximately 14.8 metres in length, with a maximum width of 5.7 metres and an overall height of 7.5 metres (6 metres to the eaves).”

“First Floor • Room 4 – 14.2 m² (with ensuite) • Room 5 – 12.7 m² (with ensuite) • Room 6 – 12.1 m² • Room 7 – 12.4 m² • Room 8 – 12.2 m² (with ensuite) • Room 9 – 14.1 m² • Two shared kitchens (measuring 25.2 m² and 6.8 m²) • One shared bathroom and a separate toilet with basin…”

Officer report

The site

The site was a two-storey commercial property in a local centre and conservation area, with an optician and two existing flats.

“The Application Site 5.1 The application relates to a two-storey commercial premise located on the eastern side of High Street, Smethwick. The property falls within a local centre allocation and within the High Street and Crockett’s Lane Conservation Area. The area to the front is commercial in nature, with residential properties located to the rear on Victoria Avenue.”

Officer report

Earlier proposals

The original scheme was reduced from a 20-bedroom HMO with larger extensions, a raised roof and dormer windows.

“The application has been subject to significant amendments from the originally proposed scheme, which sought the change of use of the ground and first floors, together with the erection of two-storey side and first-floor rear extensions, and the raising of the roof height to create a new second floor with four side dormer windows, to facilitate a 20-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (HMO).”

Officer report

Who spoke

Objectors attended and raised concerns, while the applicant was not present at the meeting.

What members discussed

Members considered waste storage, congestion, parking, tenant amenities and the size of the shared living areas.

“Members were of the view that the provision for waste storage would be inadequate and that the highway was already congested with limited parking. The Committee also felt that there were insufficient amenities for tenants and that the small, shared living areas provided was insufficient. As such, members were not satisfied that the application was suitable and that, given the number of units as proposed in the application, would cause overcrowding at the premises.”

“As such members were minded to refuse planning permission due to overcrowding, inadequate amenities and the inadequate provision for waste disposal.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

Planning permission was refused because the committee considered the proposal overcrowded, with inadequate amenities and waste disposal.

“I) overcrowding; II) inadequate amenities; and III) inadequate provision for waste disposal.”

Minutes