Agenda item

Creation of 9 bedroom House of Multiple Occupancy (Sui Generis) in lieu of permission 1/0144/2025/FUL. Ground floor and basement retained in part as commercial use.

 18 South Street, Torrington, Devon

The following Councillors attended the virtual site visit:

Councillors: Lock, Leather, Hames, O’Rourke, Pennington, and Smith.

A recording of the virtual site visit was sent to Councillors Bushby, Kenneally, and Harding.

Application No.1/0557/2025/FUL - Creation of 9 bedroom House of Multiple Occupancy (Sui Generis) in lieu of permission 1/0144/2025/FUL. Ground floor and basement retained in part as commercial use, 18 South Street, Torrington, Devon.

Interests – Councillor Smith, a member of Torrington Town Council Planning Committee.

Recommendation - Grant

The Planning Officer presented the report and informed the Committee of the main planning considerations.

With the increase from 6 to 9 bedrooms, Members asked about potential HMO occupancy. The Planning Officer advised that the exact number is unknown, but the rooms meet size standards and a maximum occupancy can be set by condition.

Members raised concerns about accessibility, particularly relating to the ground floor bathroom and access route through the alleyway.

Although Members understood that fire regulations fall outside planning considerations, they noted that this remained a concern.

Members raised concerns about waste and recycling capacity for the expected number of occupants. The Planning Officer advised that Torridge District Council’s Waste and Recycling team had no further comments following the submission of the waste-storage drawings, and noted that a condition could require a detailed waste and recycling plan. The Planning Manager added that the issue could also be addressed through the HMO licence.

Councillor Hames noted that the issues raised are covered by HMO licensing regulations and do not provide planning grounds for refusal, but he acknowledges Member’s concerns about accessibility and waste management.

Councillor Bushby asked whether the HMO is intended for specific groups, such as local residents or single people. The Planning Officer confirmed there is no indication that it is aimed at vulnerable individuals. The Planning Manager added that anti-social behaviour would be managed by the operator, and the application does not require consideration of specific occupants. She also noted that the Housing Delivery Lead has identified a housing need.

The Chair proposed approval of the application, with an added condition limiting occupancy to 9 and requiring a pre-commencement waste management plan. Councillor Hames seconded the proposal.

Councillor Leather stated that he had spoken with the Waste and Recycling Manager, who expressed concerns particularly about collection arrangements. Councillor Leather expressed his worries that the volume of waste would clutter the alleyway and create amenity issues for neighbouring properties. He also felt that increasing the number of bedrooms was not sensible, raised concerns about fire safety, and noted that the property would be inaccessible for disabled people.

Councillor Kenneally referred to Policy DM04, noting that it requires design and development to include measures to prevent crime and anti-social behaviour, as he felt it supported Members’ concerns. The Planning Manager clarified that where such issues depend on management arrangements rather than physical design, they fall outside planning considerations.

Members asked about the strength of a management plan and whether it would be approved by the Chair and Vice-Chair. Officers said they could draft a plan which the Chair and Vice-Chair can amend. The Planning Manager added that, while such matters don’t usually return to Committee, they could do so at Members’ discretion, though the separate licensing regime must be considered.

Members sought clarification on enforcement. The Planning Manager explained that enforcement is a different regime, but any issues that arise would be investigated.

It was proposed by the Chair and seconded by Councillor Hames that the application is approved subject to:

-       A limit of 9 occupants.

-       A pre-commencement waste management plan, both inside and out.

-       That rooms are retained for their purpose.

A recorded vote was taken.

(Vote: For – 3, Against – 6, Abstentions – 0)

Resolved –

The motion was lost.

To aid a refusal, Members referred to Policy DM04 (paragraph 13.38) regarding accessibility, Policy DM01 on residential amenity, Policy H3 of the Neighbourhood Plan, and NPPF paragraph 135(f), which relates to creating places that are safe, inclusive, and accessible.

Councillor Leather proposed to refuse the application listing the policies above. This was seconded by Councillor Kenneally.

A recorded vote was taken.

(Vote: For – 6, Against – 3, Abstentions – 0)

Resolved –

That the application is refused.

Martyn Evans addressed the Committee as a member of the public in support of the application.