Scheme to create house of multiple occupancy is refused
PUBLISHED: 14:17 24 June 2019 | UPDATED: 14:17 24 June 2019
A bid to turn a home into a house of multiple occupancy (HMO) has been refused by a council.
The change of use application to turn a six-bedroom house in Lowestoft into the HMO property was lodged with Waveney District Council - prior to becoming East Suffolk Council - earlier this year.
But the proposal - submitted by Waldorf Farrow Ltd, on behalf of Mr Patel at Acacia Ltd - to change the residential two storey home off Westwood Avenue in Lowestoft into a house of multiple occupancy was refused last week.
In recommending that the application be refused as the proposal "would not adhere to the aims and requirements" of two policies within the Waveney Local Plan (2019), a case officer report said: "It is proposed that the HMO is to be used in connection with the nearby Dell Care Home.
"Within the submitted design and access statement it is stated that the plan for the HMO is that as residents become more able to live without 24-7 supervision they can move into 103 Westwood Avenue to experience a more independent way of living.
"The property will be monitored by care staff and procedures will be put in place should any of the residents need assistance."
With the site located off Westwood Avenue, and the house "set back from the road and accessed by a private driveway," according to the applicants, the property currently has six bedrooms and these would all have been retained within the proposals.
After the planning and environment committee of Lowestoft Town Council considered the application in March and recommended approval to East Suffolk Council, 13 objections from neighbours opposed to the plans were received.
And with the decision delegated to the Head of Planning and Coastal Management at East Suffolk Council, the case officer report added: "It has been confirmed that five residents would live in the property, with one bedroom left free for a staff member if there was a need for staff to stay overnight.
"In conclusion, whilst it is considered that an exceptional circumstance has been met, it is considered that proposal fails to adhere to the requirements of policies WLP8.4 and WLP8.29, as it fails to meet the size requirement set out within the policy, and insufficient details as provided to ensure that the proposal does not adversely impact on neighbouring residents."
If you value what this story gives you, please consider supporting the Beccles and Bungay Journal. Click the link in the orange box above for details.