Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the change of use and alterations of former public house to form house in multiple occupation (Sui Generis)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the change of use and alterations of a former public house to form a house in multiple occupation (sui generis) at The Omnibus, Throstle Road North, Middleton, Leeds, LS10 4AD.

Members attended the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion on the application.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The site was currently vacant and unused.

·  The car parking area was not included as part of this application.

·  The only exterior changes would be 2 windows and closure of a doorway.

·  The proposals were for 9 bedsits within the building, communal areas, 9 car parking spaces and amenity space to the front and rear.

·  A previous application for 15 units had been refused.

·  The bedsits would be marketed for working professionals.

·  Internal layouts were shown.

·  Objections to the application had been received from Ward Members and local residents.  These included traffic concerns and the intensity of use.

·  It was felt that parking, level of amenity and impact on the highway were all acceptable.

·  The application was recommended for approval subject to the conditions outlined in the report.  The condition relating to time limits was to be amended to 3 years and an additional condition regarding details of access was to be included.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  The room sizes would be between 19 and 25 metres which met space standards.

·  There were no concerns regarding access or additional highways concerns with regard to the location of the bus shelter.

·  There were no proposals for landscaping or boundary treatments.

·  Concern was expressed regarding the size of the bedsits and communal areas.

·  Concern regarding the lack of consultation.  It was reported that the application had been advertised in accordance with regulations and neighbouring properties had been informed.

·  Concern that the site had not been fully accessible during the site visit.

·  In response to concerns regarding potential use of the property and tenants, particularly in regards to the proximity of a primary school, it was reported that planning permission for any change of use would be required should it be used for purposes such as a bail hostel for example.

·  Concern that it would not attract working professionals as it was not a city centre location.  Reference was made to a similar conversion in Hunslet that had shown a demand for this kind of accommodation.

·  There was a broad feeling from Members that there were aspects of the application that still needed to be addressed.  It was suggested that the application be deferred to these matters.

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred to give further consideration to the following:

·  How the application would meet the needs of local people.

·  Further information regarding boundary treatments and landscaping

·  Nature of the occupants – further information on how the properties would be marketed.

·  Further site visit to look at the interior and exterior of the building.

·  More details on the management of the land.

·  More detail in respect of traffic and parking.