Agenda item

Change of Use from C3 to C4.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, a copy of which had been circulated (for copy see file of minutes).  Members noted that the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site. 

The application for change of use from C3 to C4 and was recommended for approval, subject to the conditions set out within the report.

The Principal Planning Officer noted there were no external works or extension proposed.  He explained that within the report Highways had erroneously referred to the property being within a controlled parking zone, however, that was not the case.  However, Highways had noted no objections in respect of the application.  It was noted that Belmont Parish Council had objected to the application, with issues raised including; noise and disturbance; additional coming and going, especially at unsociable hours; crime and the fear of crime; lack of space; and concerns it would lead to other similar conversions.

The Principal Planning Officer noted no objections from internal consultees, including Spatial Policy who noted the percentage of houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), as defined as properties that were Council Tax exempt was currently 3.8 percent, which would increase to 5.1 percent if another development nearby were to go ahead.  The Principal Planning Officer noted objections from Local Members in terms of the increase in student properties and they had asked whether there was a need for such properties, given a number of purpose-built student accommodations (PBSAs) in the area.  He added there had been 12 letters of objection, including those from the Parish Council and Local Members, with the concerns summarised within the report.

The Committee were reminded as regards CDP Policy 16 which stated change of use from C3 to C4 would not be permitted if more than 10 percent of properties within a 100 metre radius were Council Tax exempt.  The Principal Planning Officer reiterated that the current level was 3.8 percent and would be 5.1 percent if the other property referred to had a change of use.  He noted that including that other property, the application would increase the percentage from 5.1 to 8.3 percent, still within the 10 percent threshold of Policy 16.

The Principal Planning Officer reiterated that internal consultees had no objections to the application, and while the objections set out by the Local Members, Parish Council and objection letters had included crime and the fear of crime, without material evidence as regards issues limited weight could be afforded to those issues.  He noted that a condition would require details as regards bin and cycle storage to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, and the provision to be in place prior to property being occupied.  The Principal Planning Officer concluded by noting that the application was felt to be acceptable in respect of CDP Policy 16 and, with Officers noting there would be no impacts in terms of residential amenity or highways safety, the application was recommended for approval, subject to the conditions set out within the report.

The Chair thanked the Principal Planning Officer and asked Parish Councillor Patrick Conway, representing Belmont Parish Council, to speak in relation to the application.

Parish Councillor P Conway noted the Parish Council had received a lot of representations from local residents, principally from those living at Keiper Crescent.  He added a number of phone calls had also been received from the wider area with concerns as regards the development of HMOs in the area.

In reference to the NPPF, Parish Councillor P Conway noted that he did not feel the change of use represented development within a mature, residential area.  He noted Part 5 of the NPPF referred to the sufficient supply of homes, and a change of use would not support that in a residential area that had existed for generations.  He added that there was a need for family homes in the city and therefore the property should remain as a family home, noting that, as a Trustee of a Housing Association, he would not wish to see further erosion of the housing stock.

Parish Councillor P Conway reiterated that there was no need for student houses, with the PBSA within a quarter of a mile of the property having spare capacity.  He noted residents were concerned that competition in respect of student rent levels could lead to properties being maintained to a lower standard.  He added residents were concerned as regards impact upon the estate roads and shared access.

Parish Councillor P Conway noted CDP Policy 16 referred to a 10 percent threshold, and while this was useful in the cases where it was exceeded, in areas where it was not it appeared to be considered a target to reach, adding there were a further four applications for change of use from C3 to C4 in the area.  He appreciated the methodology used by the Council in terms of the 10 percent threshold and Council Tax exempt properties, however, he noted that anecdotally many properties were being used as HMOs, with the Council Tax simply being paid.  He reiterated that residents were concerned that the HMOs would creep to the threshold of 10 percent.

Parish Councillor P Conway noted the Officer’s report and presentation was very fair, however, there was a judgement to be made in terms of HMOs.  He explained the Parish Council believed the 10 percent threshold within a 100 metre radius was a blunt instrument that could in fact be used to justify more HMOs.  He noted that the Parish Council would strongly ask that the Committee refuse the application, noting the application had been before the Local Authority in 2018, only to be withdrawn by the applicant.

The Chair thanked Parish Councillor P Conway and asked the Principal Planning Officer to respond to the points raised.

The Principal Planning Officer noted that a change of use was development as defined by the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.  He added that Policy 16 did refer to the 10 percent threshold in relation to HMOs, however, other policy elements were required to be met in addition.  He reminded Members that Policy 16 had been found to be sound at the Examination in Public of the CDP.

The Chair thanked the Principal Planning Officer and asked the Committee for their comments and questions.

Councillor J Elmer noted that the application hinged upon Policy 16 as set out in the CDP.  He added it had taken 10 years for the Council to reach the point where the CDP was in place and adopted.  He noted that it had been attempted within the earlier CDP proposals and explained that there was huge demand for rented accommodation in Durham, primarily for students.  He reiterated as regards the efforts to get Policy 16 in place, with the arguments made at the Examination in Public as regards a 10 percent threshold.  Councillor J Elmer noted that the Committee had to comply with the policy, adding that if Members abandoned it then developers would see that.  He noted that therefore the line must be defended, and policy should be applied consistently so that where applications did not comply with Policy 16, they could be defended against in future.  He proposed that the Committee accept the Officer’s recommendation and approve the application.  He was seconded by Councillor M Stead.

Upon a vote being taken it was:

RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions set out within the report.