Application Number: 10/00433/FUL CHANGE OF USE FROM A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING TO HOUSE IN MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY WITH 7 LETTABLE ROOMS (RETROSPECTIVE) AT: 5 Rowton Heath, Oakhill, Milton Keynes FOR: Mr Michael Johnson Target: 26th April 2010 Ward: Loughton Park Parish: Shenley Church End Parish Council Report Author/Case Officer: Robbie Caddock Contact Details: 01908 252611 robbie.caddock@milton-keynes.gov.uk Team Leader: Andrew Horner Contact Details: 01908 252609 andrew.horner@milton-keynes.gov.uk 1.0 SUMMARY (A brief explanation of what the application is about, what the main issues are and the officer's Recommendation to the Committee) 1.1 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for a change of use from residential dwelling to a House in Multiple Occupation (HIMO) with 7 lettable rooms. The main considerations are the impact of the development on the locality and any potential impact on neighbouring amenity. The considerations regarding the impact the proposal would have on the character of the area are finely balanced. 1.2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that planning permission be refused for the reason laid out in Section 11 of this report. 2.0 REASON FOR REPORTING APPLICATION TO COMMITTEE (Most planning applications are dealt with by the Chief Planning Officer under powers delegated by the Development Control Committee) 2.1 Milton Keynes Council has seen a large increase in the number of applications submitted for a change of use from residential dwelling to HiMO. As a result of this and in view of the controversy they sometimes create within their localities amongst both neighbours and Parish Councils it is considered appropriate to send most HIMO applications to Development Control Committee for consideration to ensure consistency in decision making. 3.0 INTRODUCTION (A brief description of the site and its surroundings) 3.1 The application site is a three storey, double fronted, link detached property which faces onto a triangular green surrounded on all three sides by a total of (97)
23 properties. There is a rear garden at the bottom of which is a double garage accessed via a shared side access. 3.2 The nearest shops are located at the local centre at Grange Farm being 1km from the site and the district centre of Westcroft is 2.3km away. Here there is a large supermarket, a variety of other stores and facilities. The buses that run to Westcroft district centre as well as Milton Keynes central rail station and Milton Keynes main shopping centre operate every 20 minutes Monday to Saturday and every half hour on a Sunday. 4.0 RELEVANT POLICIES (The most important policy considerations relating to this application) 4.1 The most important factor that the Committee must consider is the relevant planning policies including the Council's own planning policies, particularly the policies in the Adopted Local Plan, other local policy documents such as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) as well Government policy documents such as Planning Policy Statements (PPS) or Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) and Circulars. Planning legislation requires that all planning decisions should be in line with the relevant policies. 4.2 The Milton Keynes Core Strategy is a key document in the emerging Local Development Framework which will eventually replace the some of the existing saved policies of the Milton Keynes Local Plan. On 12th January 2010 the Core Strategy was approved by Full Council for consultation under a Local Development Scheme. Now that the Core Strategy is adopted by the Council for consultation under a Local Development Scheme it becomes an emerging policy that needs to be taken into account in development control decision making. It will not supersede the Saved Policies from Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011 until it is formally adopted after the Council has considered the Inspector s Report following an Examination in Public (EIP) the date for which is yet to be confirmed. 4.3 Local Policy The most relevant 'saved' policies within the adopted Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011 are: H10 - Subdivision of Dwellings and Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs); T3 Pedestrians and Cyclists Supplementary Planning Guidance - Addendum to 'Parking Standards for Milton Keynes' 2005 April 2009. 4.4 National Policy Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS 3) Housing (98)
5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case) 5.1 The parcel of land named Oakhill 6/7 which contains the application site was granted planning permission by the Development Corporation under New Towns legislation ref 7(2).695 in 2003. The development was completed in March 2006. The following two applications were permitted subject to conditions at the Development Control Committee held on the 25 th of February 2010 and are yet to implement their parking schemes: 09/02207/FUL at 6 Langport Crescent 7 bed HiMO (retrospective) 09/02234/FUL at 20 Langport Crescent 7 bed HiMO (retrospective) The three applications below have been refused planning permission. 09/02233/FUL at 12 Langport Crescent -7 bed HiMO (retrospective) - refused 10.03.10 because of overconcentration. 09/02255/FUL at 14 Langport Crescent -7 bed HiMO (retrospective) refused 11.03.10 because of overconcentration and insufficient parking. 10/00362/FUL at 23 Langport Crescent - 7 bed HiMO (retrospective) -refused because of overconcentration and the adverse effect on character resulting from rear garden parking. Decision taken at DC Panel 01.04.10. 20 Langport (permitted) and 23 Langport (refused) are the two closest properties to the application site. 10/00583/FUL at 3 Rowton Heath 6 bed HiMO (retrospective) received 1 st of March 2010 and is still to be determined. 6.0 APPLICATION AS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED (Details of the proposal as originally submitted) 6.1 The application seeks retrospective consent to use the property as a House in Multiple Occupation with 7 lettable rooms. The proposed accommodation comprises a hallway, kitchen, bathroom, utility room and two bedrooms on the ground floor, two bedrooms (one with en-suite), a living room and a bathroom on the first floor and three bedrooms (one with en-suite) and a communal bathroom on the second floor. At the time of the submission of the application five of the rooms were occupied by single adults 6.2 The application proposes 5 on-plot parking spaces. Two are existing, sited in front of the existing double garage. Three additional spaces are proposed, two in the rear garden and one in the front garden. Bin storage is indicated as being provided in an area in the rear garden, clothes drying facilities are indicated as being provided by use of a clothes line in the rear garden and (99)
cycles storage is indicated as being in the double garage. 7.0 AMENDMENTS (Any changes that have been made to the application since it was originally submitted) 7.1 None 8.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS (Who has been consulted on the application and the responses received) 8.1 Highways Development Control The applicant has submitted a parking layout showing 5 car parking spaces which meets the Council s parking for HiMO properties in zone B. I do however have some concerns over the layout but this can be overcome with some relatively minor changes to the layout. 8.2 Space numbered 5 on the plan cannot be contained completely on plot because there is a strip of highway with a depth of 1m which reduces the parking area of the plot down to approximately 4.5m. The alternative solution to this is to change the orientation of the parking space and using the existing access for turning. 8.3 Spaces numbered 3 and 4 would be acceptable if either they were pushed slightly further into the plot or the dimensions widened to 3m each (or a combination of the two). This is to allow adequate reversing distance in order to turn. We would normally expect a 6m reverse distance in order to make turns but by widening the spaces this can usually overcome this issue. 8.4 As the changes to the parking layout would be relatively minor I am happy for the layout to be agreed by condition. 8.5 Private Sector Housing The property was inspected on the 9 th of March 2010 at which time there were 6 bedrooms of which 5 were occupied by single tenants. This property should be licensed but no licence application has been received. A letter requesting an application was sent on the 15 th of March 2010. A schedule of works to be completed was also sent on the 17 th of March 2010. 8.6 Chief Environmental Health Officer The Environmental Health Division has no record of any complaints concerning this property. The premise is a semi-detached property, comprising of communal facilities and seven bedrooms over three floors. I would therefore recommend that the recently agreed noise condition be applied to any permission to protect the amenity of the occupants and the adjoining property. (100)
8.7 Shenley Church End Parish Council Object to the above application on the following grounds: Car parking spaces 3 & 4 would require a turning and reversing manoeuvre which looks awkward The proposed parking spaces in the front and rear garden would be visually prominent and would appear as an incongruous feature in the street scene. The increased parking and traffic movements would cause undue disturbance and noise. Fire Service reports show that there are access problems in Oakhill due to parked vehicles. Due to the number of rooms being let and corresponding extra car parking and movement, internal and external noise levels will exceed those expected from a building of this type. Contrary to guidance in BS 8233, there is not compatibility between rooms in separate occupation by stacking of like uses, ie proposed bedroom 6 is below the first floor living room. There is already an over-proliferation of HIMOs in Oakhill, exceeding the original design code, which adversely affects the character of the surrounding area, leads to a loss of family homes and a loss of community cohesion as a result of the transient nature of the occupants. 8.8 Local Residents The occupiers of the following properties were notified of the application: 1 16, Rowton Heath. 22 38 (Evens), 25 & 27, Langport Crescent. The current occupiers of the HIMO. Further, a site notice was erected on the 09.03.10 which expired 30.0310. 6 letters have been received from neighbours objecting to the proposal on the following grounds: 1) The proposed front parking space will be unsightly. 2) Additional risk of flooding in rear garden. 3) Extra traffic causes congestion at key junctions. 4) Retrospective permission should not be granted. 5) Parking is already a serious problem with cars regularly parked on soft landscaping and up on kerbs. 6) No space for visitors. 7) There are already too many other HiMOs in an area close to two schools intended for families with children. 8) Emergency vehicles have difficulty getting through. 9) HiMO occupants have a don t care attitude and are noiser. 10) There are no pavements in this area which means children are at risk from the increased level of traffic. (101)
9.0 CONSIDERATIONS (The analysis of the issues which are critical, material, considerations and/or of greatest concern to objectors for the Committee to weigh up before making a decision) 9.1 Policy H10 contains 4 specific criteria which if satisfied allow for planning permission to be granted. These criteria are addressed in detail in the following paragraphs. 9.2 Effective measures are proposed to minimise the effects of noise and disturbance. Noise can be divided into two categories. Internal noise such as banging of doors and noise from televisions or external noise usually associated with parties or antisocial behaviour. 9.3 An increase in internal noise can result from the use of a property as a HiMO. In general there are likely to be more occupants in a HiMO than a single dwelling, self-closing devices fitted to doors result in increased impact noises, the independent living of HiMO tenants means they are likely spend more time in their rooms with a likely increase in noise levels and there is also a likely increase in the number of journeys up and down stairs to use the kitchen, bathroom and to enter and exit the property. 9.4 Noise generated internally within a HiMO, can be transmitted through party walls to adjoining neighbours. This property is partially attached to no. 7 Rowton Heath. 9.5 Because of the element of independent living within a HiMO, Environmental Health have expressed concerns about the well being of the occupants in terms of the ability of their bedroom walls, ceiling and floor to insulate against the noise from the other occupants. To deal with this a condition, which requires a minimum standard of internal noise insulation to the bedrooms, has been agreed with Environmental Health. It is recommended that this condition be imposed in planning permission is recommended to be granted. 9.6 With regard to external noise, Environmental Health records show that no complaints have been received about the property and only one letter makes a general reference about HiMOs being noisier than a normal household. It should be noted that the antisocial behaviour of previous or current tenants can not be addressed through planning legislation. Planning permission relates to the property/land and not the occupants. Noise problems resulting from the behaviour of the occupiers can effectively be dealt with by landlord Management controls under Housing legislation, or individual action under nuisance provisions. 9.7 It is considered that subject to an appropriate condition regarding internal noise insulation, the application is in accordance with this section of the policy. 9.8 Off street parking and manoeuvring space is provided to meet the Council's standards or, if on-street parking is necessary, it would not (102)
result in unacceptable congestion in the surrounding area. The main objection from all the neighbours is in relation to the parking problems in the area: with comments made regarding too many cars on narrow roads, inappropriate parking on pavements, kerbs and landscaped areas. 9.9 The area has been visited the area on numerous occasions, over several months, in connection with this and other planning applications in the area. The parking situation in the area generally is a particular concern. Cars and vans have been seen parked on corners, half up on pavements, as well as on the green itself. 9.10 Some neighbours expressed concerns about the layout and size of the three proposed spaces. The Highway Engineer also noted some minor changes that are required to the parking layout to make the spaces acceptable, but subject to a condition relating to this, has no objections to the proposal. The parking situation in the immediate area will clearly be eased through the introduction of the extra three on-plot parking spaces which are proposed but not yet provided. 9.11 The covering of a large part of the rear garden with impermeable surfaces could cause additional surface water run off however it is considered that if necessary that the new car parking spaces be constructed through the use of porous materials. 9.12 As the parking scheme with amendments is acceptable to the highways department and thus, in simple numerical terms, meets the council s own adopted parking standards policy, the application accords with this section of the policy. Outstanding issues however exist with regard to other parts of Policy H10 as noted within Sections 9.14-9.21. 9.13 Adequate outdoor space is available for bin storage and a drying area. Although much of the rear garden is to be taken up with parking approximately 25sqm will remain as garden area. Policy H10, in clarification of sub paragraph (iii), indicates that a minimum space of 15 square metres is required. The application proposes the provision of a clothes line in the rear garden which is considered to be acceptable. The application indicates rubbish to be stored in the rear garden with no further details supplied. Should the application be permitted it is recommended that the bin storage be dealt with by condition no.5 as detailed in section 11 below. 9.14 The proposal would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area or lead to an unacceptable concentration of flats or houses in multiple occupation within the area. Central Government advice in PPS1 and PPS 3 states that development plans should promote developments that create socially inclusive communities, including suitable mixes of housing. One of the key (103)
characteristics of a mixed community is a variety of housing, particularly in terms of tenure, price and a mix of different households such as families with children, single person households and older people. 9.15 There are currently two permitted HiMOs in Oakhill (as shown in the plan below) at 6 and 20 Langport Crescent. In this instance the character of the area can be impacted in two ways. Firstly the impact from the use as a HiMO itself and secondly the impact as a result of the provision of the car parking in the garden areas and the loss of an existing boundary treatment. 9.16 As the first application to come forward within this street it is very difficult to establish that the principle of a HIMO in itself would have sufficient impact on its own to adversely affect the character of the area. 9.17 Neighbour letters mostly raise parking issues as their main concern with only a few letters mentioning issues relating to character. There have not been any complaints relating to loud music or antisocial behaviour made to the Environmental Health Department. 9.18 Neighbour letters raise concerns regarding the character of the street scene with regard to the provision of the single parking space on the front garden. Whilst this point is accepted, it should be noted that the application site is one of only a few properties in the area to have rear parking and many others have their parking provision either to the side or front of their property. There are also many vehicles that are parked on the highway itself. It is therefore not felt that one additional car within the street scene would be a sufficiently adverse affect, to refuse the application. 9.19 In a previous similar application at 23 Langport it was considered that an unacceptable change in the character of the area would occur if the rear garden (which was clearly visible from the street) was replaced with car parking. 9.20 In the current case, the application property is not located in such a prominent location, set at the end of a small private access serving two properties. The impact to the streetscene is therefore reduced; however the issue with regard to neighbouring amenity and loss of garden land to car parking remains. It is noted that there are currently a significant number of habitable rooms with an outlook to the rear garden that would be significantly reduced in size as a result of the new parking spaces, and would in turn lead to the loss of an important and established boundary treatment in respect of continuity of street frontage and loss of enclosure of space eroding the existing clear definition of public and private areas and its replacement with an open and exposed car parking area, drying area and bin store which in turn would have an adverse change in the character of the surrounding area, contrary to 'saved' policies H10 (iv), D1 (iii) and D2A (ii) of the adopted Local Plan. 9.21 Cycle parking should be provided that is conveniently sited, secure and sufficient to meet the Council s parking standards, together with showers and changing facilities. (104)
9.22 Transport Policy T3 (v) relates to the provision of cycle storage for new development and it is considered to be relevant to applications for the sub division of dwellings. This policy acknowledges the importance of sustainable transport which minimise the impact on the environment in terms of pollution, congestion and the need for infrastructure. 9.23 The district centre of Westcroft is situated 2.3Km away which is a reasonable cycling distance and Oakhill is connected to the Redway network giving access to a wide range of recreational cycle routes. It is therefore considered reasonable to require the provision of secure cycle storage to encourage the use of the cycle by HMO occupants. 9.24 The application indicates that the garage is available for use by the occupants. Should the application be permitted it is recommended that this be appropriately conditioned. 10.0 CONCLUSION (The officer advice to the Development Control Committee on the appropriate decision, based on the policies of the Development Plan, taking into account the issues detailed in the report) 10.1 The application as submitted, by virtue of the loss of the existing garden area and boundary treatment to parking is considered to result in a change to the street scene through the loss of a continuous street frontage. The proposal is not therefore considered to comply with 'saved' policies H10 (iv), D1 (iii) and D2A (ii) of the adopted Local Plan. 11.0 REASON (The reasons that officers recommend that the application should be refused. The reasons must be ones that the Council can demonstrate with evidence, should the applicant appeal against the refusal.) 11.1 The proposed Change of Use and the resultant provision of two extra car parking spaces within the garden area is considered to result in a significantly compromised outlook from a series of habitable windows from No's. 3 and 5 Rowton Heath by way of the loss of almost fifty percent of garden space to car parking. This would in turn lead to the loss of an important and established boundary treatment in respect of continuity of street frontage and loss of enclosure of space eroding the existing clear definition of public and private areas and its replacement with an open and exposed car parking area, drying area and bin store which in turn would have an adverse change in the character of the surrounding area, contrary to 'saved' policies H10 (iv), D1 (iii) and D2A (ii) of the adopted Local Plan. (105)
(106)
(107)
(108)
(109)