Agenda item

(Copy herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon. It was advised that permission was originally sought to change the use of the property from a single dwellinghouse to a house in multiple occupation for 4 people, however, the plans submitted with the application showed four self-contained units. Revised plans have subsequently been submitted. Self-contained units have been replaced with shared accommodation and the number of bedrooms reduced to 3 only.

There will be one bedroom and shared lounge and kitchen on the ground floor with additional lounge in the basement and shower facility, two bedrooms with en-suite facilities on the first floor with another lounge.

Councillor Lane addressed the Committee as a member of the public and spoke in favour of the application as the developer had a good track record in delivery high quality developments and that the proposal would be well managed. Reference was also made to the need to learn from previous appeal decisions

Councillor Lane left the Committee at 18:43 after he spoke.

Councillor Smith addressed the Committee as the Ward Councillor and spoke against the application as it was considered that there were too many houses in multiple occupation within the vicinity and the impacts on the highway system

Mr James Fitzgerald addressed the Committee and spoke against the application and referred to the number of houses in multiple occupation within Lloyd Road and that residents may not use cycle storage and would prefer to have a car

Mr Daniel Morris addressed the Committee as the Architect and spoke in favour of the application.

The Principal Planning Officer referred to 6.2 of the report which outlines the licensing position. He also stated that there is a condition recommending that no more than 3 people can live at the dwelling and if the Council received a complaint that there are more than 3 residents at any point it would investigate.

In response to questions from the Committee the Principal Planning Officer stated that there is a typographical error in point 6.2 of the report where it should state 3 persons rather than 4 but condition 3 enforces the maximum amount of persons that should be residing at the premises.

He also stated that soundproofing falls out of planning permission.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED

The Committee APPROVED the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report and addendum and for the following reason:

The development would not lead to an unacceptable concentration of HIMOs within the locality that would adversely impact upon the character of the street, nor would the development have significant adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity or parking provision.  The property is of sufficient size to accommodate the level of accommodation as proposed and is in accordance with the requirements of Policies H1, H5, and S10 of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy, Policies E20 and H30 of the Northampton Local Plan, the Houses in Multiple Occupation Interim Planning Policy Statement and the aims and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Councillor Lane rejoined the Committee.