A Bath councillor who spoke out against another proposed house in multiple occupation (HMO) in her ward failed in her bid to get the application decided by the planning committee.
The proposal for 11 Hazel Grove was submitted to Bath & North East Somerset Council by 18-25 Properties.
Councillor Jess David (Moorlands, Liberal Democrat) objected to the plans to change the three-bed mid-terraced house to a five-bed HMO.
Her reasons were the loss of family housing and increased pressure on the area in relation to parking, with the potential for five adult residents to bring five more vehicles, causing further congestion.
She said: “From my observations in the ward, HMO properties bring with them additional vehicles compared to unconverted dwellings. This has an unfair impact on other residents and people using the surrounding streets.”
Councillor David also voiced concern about the loss of another house suitable for families to rent or buy to a HMO rental property.
“There is a growing number of HMO properties around the Poplar Close and the Moorlands estate – although only the larger sized properties are viewable on the HMO register. I believe the comments received from residents reflect these concerns.”
She asked for the plans to be decided by the planning committee, but the request was declined by both the chair and vice-chair, who said it should remain delegated to planning officers.
In approving the plans, the officers said the proposed HMO is policy compliant.
They said evidence indicates there would not typically be a significant increase in car parking as a result of a HMO.
The property in Hazel Grove was said to be in a sustainable location, with good access to public transport links. The plans also show provision for bicycle storage.
The report said the change of use of the property would result in a 5.3% concentration of HMO properties within a 100-metre radius, below the 10% threshold, so there would not be an unacceptable loss of housing in terms of mix, size and type.
They also said the change of use would not ‘sandwich’ a house between two HMOs, so would not cause significant harm to neighbours.
