Decision details

Housing in Multiple Occupation and Flats Supplementary Planning Document

Find out more about this issue

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: Yes

Is subject to call in?: Yes

Purpose:

To note the findings of the public consultation on the HMOs and Flats SPD and to formally approve the HMOs and Flats SPD for adoption for use by Development Management for making planning decisions.

Decisions:

Further to Minute No. 123 of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 6 February 2013, the Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Built Environment on the results of the recent consultation on the draft supplementary planning document for housing in multiple occupation and flats.

The Cabinet also considered an addendum note produced by the Director of Built Environment on a revised recommendation made by the Planning Committee and a copy of the presentation given by Amanda Brown, (Planning Consultant) to the Planning Committee on 6 February 2013.

The Chair sought assurances that adequate consultation had been undertaken on the draft supplementary planning document and the Director of Built Environment indicated that a 12 week consultation period had been held; officers had considered and replied to the seven responses submitted and met the Private Landlords Forum to discuss the issues set out in the document.

This was a Key Decision and was included in the Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

Decision Made:

The supplementary planning document be approved subject to the insertion of the following text before table 3 in the document, to provide clarity on where the size standards in the table apply:

“These minimum standards will apply to all self-contained flats whether the development is part of a HMO (Use Classes C4 or Sui Generis HMO) or part of a scheme consisting entirely of self-contained flats (Use Class C3)”.

Reasons for Decision:

To adopt the supplementary planning document for decision making for Planning applications and enforcement purposes.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

None.

Report author: David Robinson

Publication date: 20/02/2013

Date of decision: 14/02/2013

Decided at meeting: 14/02/2013 - Cabinet

Effective from: 27/02/2013

This decision has been called in by:

Cllr Peter Papworth who writes I believe the Call-In is justified and necessary, in accordance with Para 40 (b) and (c) of Chapter 6 of the Council's Constitution. My reasons will be contained in a separate e-mail to Steve Pearce. This call-in is supported by Cllrs Dorgan and McIvor."
Sean Anthony Dorgan who writes The reason I am Calling-In this decision is that I believe it contravenes sub-paras (b) and (c) of Para 40 of Chapter 6 of the Council’s Constitution; in other words, that the Cabinet decision is unsound, being based on facts not taken into account, and would lead to very unwise future decisions by the Council. In particular: a. Cabinet was advised that ample consultation had taken place; this is disputed by my constituent, who is the largest provider of HMO’s in Sefton, and who also represents a considerable number of other landlords. He had about 10 minutes in which to read and comment on the SPD. b. The Supplementary Planning Document seeks to impose the same rules on HMO’s as on flats. This seems unwise, as the two regimes are subject to different rules re Building Regulations, Environmental Health, Licensing and Benefits. c. Disabled access to HMO’s is usually impossible, as there are no lifts. d. The conditions about roof-lights and windows in HMO’s are unworkable and wholly unnecessary. e. Whilst noise insulation in a flat is of course desirable, to provide it in an HMO means insulating each room separately, which would be prohibitively costly. f. The document appears to rule out the use of terraces as HMO’s, which seems to limit their development for no good reason. g. The requirement for S.106 funds of over £1,500 per HMO is excessive. Altogether, the SPD appears likely to put the Council at a considerable disadvantage (at precisely the moment when Liverpool is easing its conditions!), by making the development of HMO’s financially unviable, and thus decimating the supply of new affordable housing. My constituent already has a substantial record of successful appeals against Planning decisions, and would far prefer to assist the Council by taking part in genuine consultations before a revised SPD is prepared. "
David McIvor who writes I believe the Call-In by Cllr Papworth which is supported by Cllr Dorgan and myself is justified and necessary, in accordance with Para 40 (b) and (c) of Chapter 6 of the Council's Constitution. The reasons are contained in a separate e-mail to Steve Pearce."

Accompanying Documents: