PLANS for a house in multiple occupation (HMO) for five people in Merthyr Tydfil have been allowed on appeal after previously being refused by the council.
The application for the change of use of a house on Ninth Avenue in Galon Uchaf to a HMO was refused by the council’s planning committee in October but an inspector at Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (Pedw) has overturned that decision at an appeal brought by D2 Propco Limited.
The reasons given by the planning committee were that the development would give rise to an increase in the level of on-street parking and congestion to the detriment of highway safety, and the nature of the residential use would be at odds with the existing housing in the area to the detriment of the character of the area.
In the appeal decision, the inspector said the proposed use would be in keeping with the established residential character of the area.
In terms of incidents at other HMOs, the inspector said there is “no cogent evidence” the proposed use would inherently give rise to anti-social behaviour or detrimentally affect community safety or cohesion.
The inspector said while they accept fears for personal safety and the impact of such fears on people’s mental health and well-being can be material considerations, there is no evidence the proposed use would prevent neighbouring residents from continuing to live in their homes.
The inspector highlighted the highway authority considers the provision of an additional parking space would be an improvement on the overall parking situation and they consider the proposal would be acceptable.
The inspector said as the site is in a sustainable location served by public transport and with a range of facilities within reasonable walking distance, they see no reason to disagree.
Referring to concerns raised by residents around significant parking pressure with a nearby nursery and football pitches attracting a high number of cars to the area at certain times, the inspector said these pressures are temporary and sees no empirical evidence to question the view of the highway authority which doesn’t object.
The inspector said the proposed development would not materially harm highway safety or exacerbate parking pressures or congestion to the extent that would warrant refusal.
In terms of pressure on local services, the inspector said the number of people occupying the property would be similar to a family dwelling so they have seen no evidence local services could not accommodate this use.
The inspector also awarded costs against the council in a separate decision.
They found the council “acted unreasonably” in refusing the application contrary to officer recommendation without reasonable evidenced planning grounds for doing so.
The inspector said this resulted in the applicant incurring costs of pursuing the appeal and the inspector found the full award of costs was fully justified.
