Application Number: 19/P1799      Ward: Dundonald

Officer Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions and S106 Agreement

PAC Resolved that application 19/P1799 is:

Refused, the reasons will be detailed in the minutes

Proposal: Two storey rear extension and change of use to facilitate 15 bedroom, house in multiple occupation (HMO)

The Committee noted the officers report and presentation, and noted that Condition 10 had been amended so that there were now only 11 occupants allowed.

The Committee received verbal representations from two residents, who raised objections including:

·         Bedroom 10, does not have any natural light, neither does the passageways, Staircases, ground floor bathroom

·         The proposal is not policy compliant as it only has 2 kitchens, and these have no cookers and insufficient counters

·         The proposal does not meet the minimum standard for bathrooms

·         The plans submitted are incorrect and misleading

·         In some rooms the ceiling height is less than 1.5 and this reduces the floor area

·         There is an error in the Planning Officers Report – Oakleigh is not an existing HMO

·         62 Local residents have opposed as this will have an unacceptable impact on the area and is a flawed and misleading application that fails to meet Merton Standards

·         Neighbours were not consulted, and the application is of a low standard

·         The area is predominantly family homes

·         The Reduced proposal is still too big

·         The Metropolitan Police are concerned, and there are concerns about safety

The Committee received a verbal representation from the Applicant’s Agent, who made points including:

·         Although this property does not currently have HMO use, it has been used as an HMO for the last 8 years. This application seeks to regulate this usage whilst creating higher quality accommodation.

·         We have worked closely with Planning Officers, who contest that this proposal does meet standards

·         The property already has 11 bedrooms

The Ward Councillor, Anthony Fairclough, addressed the Committee, and made points including:

·         The House is currently used as an HMO by a religious community

·         Standards of accommodation proposed do not meet Merton Policy or minimum space standards

·         Bedrooms do not all have windows

·         Kitchens are not of a suitable size or standard

·         The development will cause the loss of a family home

The Planning Team Leader North replied to points raised by the speakers:

·         The property is still considered to be a C3 Dwelling House

·         To operate as an HMO the Property will need to get an HMO License from the HMO Licensing Team

·         There are conditions to limit the number of bedrooms and number of occupants

·         There are conditions on security measures

·         The roof design and room sizes have been taken into account and all bedrooms meet HMO minimum standards

In reply to Members’ questions The Planning Team Leader made Points including:

·         Confirm that it is not currently a licensed HMO, it has no HMO Licence and is still classed as a C3 Dwelling House. The application includes the change of use

·         Bedroom 9 does have a roof light, so all other bedrooms have natural light  From a planning perspective hallways do not have to have natural light

·         The Guidance says 5 occupant per kitchen, this proposal has 11 occupants with 2 kitchens – Officers consider this acceptable

Members commented that the development appeared to be a massive over intensification of the site

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed to:

1.    REFUSE Planning Permission for the following reasons:

The proposal would result in overdevelopment on a small plot, and is over intensification of the site

2.    DELEGATE to the Director of Environment & Regeneration the authority to make any appropriate amendments in the context of the above to the wording of the grounds of refusal including references to appropriate policies