Six-person HMO conversion at 151 Bedford Road, Bootle

What was proposed

The application sought to convert a dwelling into a six-person HMO, with rooflights, a rear door alteration, refuse storage and cycle storage.

“Date of MeeƟng: 12 th November 2025 Subject: DC/2025/01012 151 Bedford Road, Bootle L20 2DR”

“Proposal: Change of use from a dwellinghouse (C3) to a House in MulƟple OccupaƟon (HMO- C4) (6 units - 6 person), installaƟon of 2no. rooflights to the front and 1no. rooflight to the rear, alteraƟons to the door opening to the rear elevaƟon, with associated refuse and cycle storage…”

Officer report

The site

The site is a vacant two-storey terraced building with converted loft living space, rear garden space, no off-road parking and surrounding terraced homes.

“The site is a rectangular plot, on the northern side of Bedford Road, Bootle. It comprises a two-storey terraced building, with a loft that has been converted into living space. The building has been vacant for over 20 years. There is no off-road vehicular parking. There is private garden space to the rear of the building. The site is surrounded by terraced residential properties.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal met accommodation standards, protected neighbours’ privacy and outlook, and raised no highway safety concerns.

“The bedrooms would offer appropriate accommodation which meets the Council’s standards. Private amenity space would also be retained to the rear of the dwelling. The amenity space to the rear would not meet the Council’s recommended standard, however, this is mitigated by the property’s proximity to South Park. The existing building can accommodate three first floor bedrooms and two second floor bedrooms, which is not dissimilar to the proposed HMO.”

“The proposal would preserve the privacy and outlook of the surrounding residential properties and the development would not raise any highway safety concerns. It would bring a long vacant dwelling into use which would contribute towards the Borough’s housing supply.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The Highways Manager, Environmental Health Manager and Local Planning Manager raised no objections, subject to conditions from highways and environmental health.

“Highways Manager No objection subject to condition to ensure cycle parking…”

“Environmental Health Manager No objection subject to a condition requiring a suitable scheme of sound insulation prior to occupation.”

Officer report

Residents’ objections

Five neighbours objected over community imbalance, living conditions, waste, noise, safety, outdoor space, parking, policy and the need for family homes.

“Impacts on character of area • Overconcentration and community imbalance • HMOs will drive existing residents out • Need for family homes…”

“Living conditions of neighbours and future residents • Waste generation • Noise/disturbance and antisocial behaviours • Safety of children • Proposed roof lights or floodlights could severely disturb the children's sleep pattern • No outside space for residents • Worry over who will move in…”

Officer report

Who spoke

Councillor Robinson represented objectors, and the applicant responded.

Members’ concerns

Members were concerned about limited private outdoor amenity and the lack of good-quality public amenity nearby.

“Arising from the discussion, Members expressed concern regarding the lack of private outdoor amenity and the lack of good quality public amenity in the immediate vicinity of the premises. Members considered that the lack of such amenity was not outweighed by the regeneration benefits of bringing the building back into use.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application because inadequate private and nearby public amenity was not outweighed by bringing the building back into use.

“That the recommendation be not approved and the application be refused for the reason that the development has a lack of private outdoor amenity space and there is a lack of good quality public amenity in the immediate vicinity of the premises which is contrary to Policy HC4 part 2B within the Sefton Local Plan, which is not outweighed by the regeneration benefits of bringing the building back into use.”

Minutes