Planning committee members have called for a change to the rules governing houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) amid escalating concern about the impact on some areas of Bath, particularly with uncapped student numbers.
A bedroom at an HMO property | Library image
The Bath Echo regularly reports on controversial HMO applications – in the main in Odd Down, Twerton and Weston.
The issue was discussed in detail at December’s meeting of Bath & North East Somerset Council’s planning committee, when two HMO applications in Odd Down ward came before councillors.
Prior to the meeting, committee chair Councillor Ian Halsall (Liberal Democrat, Oldfield Park) had invited a discussion, saying: “The ward members continually raise objection to the effectiveness of Policy H2 and the criteria set out in the supplementary planning documents on Houses in Multiple Occupation insofar as it affects Odd Down.
“Whilst the officer confirms that the proposal is policy compliant, the committee may wish to discuss this policy and its current ‘one size fits all’ approach, which applies across the whole district, rather than the overall impact such change of uses may have upon specific residential neighbourhoods.”
The first scheme discussed was Gray & Amor Properties Ltd’s application to change the use of 530 Wellsway, a terraced three-bed family home, into a four-bed HMO. The plans also include removing a rear fence to create an off-road parking space, and installing a four-bay cycle rack.
Council records show the conversion will result in five HMOs within a 100-metre radius – a 4.8% concentration. The threshold laid down by the council is 10%.
The second policy test is whether a home would end up being ‘sandwiched’ between two HMOs, which would not be the case.
Addressing the planning committee, the applicant’s agent said the property had been thoroughly refurbished and would be ready to let to four professionals from the new year.
He added: “Taking a slighter wide view of this, I think it is important to note that HMOs do fulfil a vital economic development housing role for the city. They provide accommodation for younger professionals starting out in full-time and fixed-term employment.
“So even though it is acknowledged that some members do have concerns about over-concentration and occupation by students and so forth, I think it would be wrong in this case for those concerns to be mediated through this planning application.
“I think if members do have concern about the effectiveness of the current HMO SPD (supplementary planning document) a more effective way of addressing those concerns would be through the Local Plan policy route that is taking place now, and not through our client’s application.”
Odd Down’s Liberal Democrat councillors Steve Hedges and Joel Hirst have been highlighting concerns about the exponential growth of HMOs in the wider Odd Down area for some time.
Addressing the committee, Councillor Hedges said: “We object in principle to more HMOs being created in Odd Down ward. We feel strongly that the Odd Down ward needs to be protected for housing and family units.”
He said that widening out the 100-metre radius map in this instance by half as much again would include between 15 and 20 more HMOs.
He highlighted the “unsustainable” growth in student numbers: “The city of Bath is constrained because of the World Heritage Status, especially when you see all the land that is being built on specifically for student housing.
“When the student cap was lifted, the council policy was never updated to account for such large influxes of students.”
Regarding the proposed HMO at No. 530, he said Wellsway is a busy trunk road and parking is “really difficult” along that stretch.
Councillor Hedges said: “These are small family homes which we can ill afford to close. The more of these homes that are turned into HMOs the less facility we have for family units.”
Asking the committee to reject the scheme he said there is a bike rack but only one parking space allocated.
“If you get five students in a house at least three of them will have a car so where are the other two cars going to go?”
He acknowledged that he could not comment about the people who would be living in this property but highlighted that with a lot of other HMOs in Odd Down, it is the case that tenants are noisy and untidy.
Councillor Joel Hirst told the committee that the HMO register map view shows a concentration in the south-west corner of the city and a deprivation map on the public health section of the council’s website “almost mirrors exactly” that area.
He said: “The HMO developments have been targeted at the low value housing areas, forcing out key workers and people, and so I think we need to reflect quite deeply about whether the 10% rule could be applied in a slightly more creative way, thinking about zoning some areas where you might want a lower percentage figure to protect lower value housing areas for key workers, and then having a higher value – maybe 12.5%, 15 % – in other parts of the city so you can then share the burden of the HMOs across the city; or whether you reflect on the point that Steve was making about whether the 100-metre radius is actually fit for purpose.”
Councillor Tim Warren (Conservative, Midsomer Norton Redfield) said he had sympathy with the Odd Down councillors but could not see any planning reason to refuse this particular application so moved a motion to permit it.
Councillor Lucy Hodge (Liberal Democrat, Lansdown), who is vice chair of the planning committee, said: “I am happy to second the officers’ recommendation, but I do really share the concerns raised by the ward councillors.
“As a committee, we could perhaps ask or consider that the SPD is revised through the Local Plan policy route and look at the 10% rule and the 100-metre rule, thinking about the loss of affordable accommodation for families in particular areas of Bath. I hope we can review that.”
Committee chair Councillor Halsall said it would require resources to look into that. He said that when the SPD had been introduced, in terms of ward (Oldfield Park) “the horse had already bolted”.
He acknowledged that “perhaps there is a case for applying a different formula” in some wards.
Committee member Councillor Deborah Collins (Liberal Democrat, Widcombe & Lyncombe) said she lives in a ward with a lot of HMOs – “an area that is almost at saturation with the policy”.
She told councillors: “I do think we need to pause and think about this but I think we need to look at this in a very broad perspective. The population within the city of Bath, as Councillor Hedges says, has increased dramatically and a significant proportion of that increase is due to students.
“It would be lovely if those students when they graduate can come and stay and work in our city but it’s really, really hard for young people and it’s really hard for families as well. I think as councillors, as a committee, we need to think about all our residents.
She added: “There is a real pressure on universities to expand. An extra 20,000 or so students – with no requirement to the universities to consider the housing needs of the city into which they are bringing those extra students – is where we are landed by national policy.
“As a council, we can react by trying to re-balance, but actually we have got to build more houses because if we do not provide more, in the private rental accommodation and social rented accommodation for families within the city, as well as young people within the city, we are not going to resolve this. There is always going to be that tension.”
However, she said that the issue could not be solved by the application before them and it should be approved.
Councillor Eleanor Jackson (Labour, Westfield) also called for a review to include HMOs in the Somer Valley, not just Bath.
Councillor Fiona Gourley (Liberal Democrat, Bathavon) highlighted the loss to the city of council tax: “The more HMOs that are permitted, the less the city receives.”
The plans for 530 Wellsway were approved, with seven members in favour and three against.
The second application was to turn 51 Ambleside Road, a 1960s three-bed semi-detached house, into a five-bed HMO.
The applicant told the committee that ideally the accommodation will be let to key workers, such as NHS. There is no parking but there is storage provision for bicycles.
There had been 17 objections, highlighting that there are already six HMOs in this road and others close by. It was also pointed out that the local student population has increased significantly, and their presence disrupts local families. There were also concerns that the HMO will increase on-street parking,
The planning report noted that the density of HMOs in a 100-metre area is 5.9% and there is no ‘sandwiching’ of a property within two HMOs.
The debate about HMOs continued, with Councillor Hirst saying: “Our current policy around HMOs is not fit for purpose. It’s not about de-valuing students.
“Students are enormously important in terms of our wider economy but it’s about having a balance of sustainable communities … we have reached that tipping point where residents kind of feel it’s reached an unacceptable level of the loss of family housing to HMOs.”
He said there were particular challenges around this location, including narrow roads, parking “chaos”, and gradients that are “challenging” for cycling.
Councillor Jackson observed that if the property did not become a HMO it could be turned into an Airbnb, adding: “They are a far greater problem I think for displacing Bath families.”
The plans were approved, again with seven votes in favour and three against.
