Appeal 6003350

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Change of use from dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to a flexible use permission as a HMO (Use Class C4) and a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/02066/FPA, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions in the attached schedule. (1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with [name]: 1478-02 site location plan, drawing no 1478-01 existing floor plans and elevations,1478-04 [name] floor plans and elevations, existing and proposed site plans 1478-05. (2) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. (3) The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling. (4) Prior to the commencement of the development a detailed method statement including foundation details of the extension in accordance with [name] 4.2 – Building near trees shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (5) Prior to the occupation of the use hereby permitted, the sound proofing detailed on plan reference [name] 1478-04 [name] shall be fully implemented before the extension is bought into use retained and maintained as such. (6) No later than the 29 April 2036 confirmation of the use of the property shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The use at that time shall become its lawful use. (7) The number of occupants in residence within the dwelling shall not exceed four people at any one time. (8) For the purposes of occupation by students, the development hereby permitted shall be operated strictly in accordance with the measures detailed in the Student Management Plan for the duration of the property operating as a Use Class C4, House in [name]. (9) The bin storage and cycle storage provision shown on Drg no. 1478-05 received 28 July 2025 shall be installed and available for use prior to the first occupation of the C4 use hereby approved and shall be retained in perpetuity thereafter. (10) No external construction works, works of demolition, deliveries, external running of plant and equipment shall take place other than between the hours of 0730 to 1800 on Monday to Friday and 0730 to 1400 on Saturday. No internal works audible outside the site boundary shall take place on the site other than between the hours of 0730 to 1800 on Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1700 on Saturday. No construction works or works of demolition whatsoever, including deliveries, external running of plant and equipment, internal works whether audible or not outside the site boundary, shall take place on Sundays, Public or [name].

As the permitted development rights have been removed from the local area, there is no opportunity to change the use from a C3 use class to C4 use class without the requirement for the appellant to apply for planning permission. The Council do not object to the principle of a more flexible use class as the dwelling would support both a C3 use and a C4 use given the appellant has an interest in the student accommodation market. There would be an expectation that the dwelling would become occupied by up to four unrelated persons.

The planning application was refused solely on the grounds of the impact on highway and pedestrian safety.

The main issue of the proposal is the effect on parking and highway safety.

The dwelling is located within the [site address] which appears as a planned and purpose-built modern housing estate. It has three bedrooms at first floor and would be extended at ground floor level to provide a living space and a bedroom occupying a ground floor room. The Council’s Parking and [name], 2023, (SPD) requires three-bedroom dwellings to accommodate two off-street parking spaces. Parking is currently absorbed on-street as there is no opportunity for the dwelling to accommodate in-curtilage parking due to the constraints of the site.

In accordance with the SPD, a four-bedroom dwelling would generate demand for additional parking in the region of three parking spaces. The addition of one more bedroom could inevitably increase parking demand within the local area.

At the time of my visit, I could see that the roads of the estate are narrow, there is some off-street parking, and some indiscriminate parking was occurring on the built-out parts of the footway. There is some limited evidence provided by the Council’s planning officer with this appeal to demonstrate inconsiderate parking arises. However, in general I am not of the view that there was parking stress occurring or it would lead to displaced parking that would result in parking stress elsewhere.

The Council sought no parking surveys and there is no evidence of highway or pedestrian safety incidents, and their [name] raises no objections to the proposal. I also note a lack of strenuous objections from local residents to the proposal.

I am aware that the Council can apply measures to enforce against indiscriminate parking. In any case, the site is located close to local amenities and access to the city centre and employment providers and more public transport options. This lessens the reliance on the private car for future occupants.

Furthermore, there is nothing before me to indicate that refuse provision cannot be acceptably accommodated on site that would lead to an adverse impact on the local road network.

Without compelling evidence presented to me, there is nothing before me to indicate that the proposal would be unacceptable, even though it is not fully compliant with the SPD. Therefore, its effect on highway and pedestrian safety or impact on residential amenity would not be so severe as to warrant the proposal unacceptable in planning terms.

To conclude on this main issue, the proposal would not lead to an unacceptable effect on highway or pedestrian safety and would not conflict with County Durham Plan Policies 16, 21, 29 and 31 which together, and amongst other things, seeks to safeguard highway and pedestrian safety as well as the same objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework.

I am aware that there are objections raised to the principle of this flexible use class. The Council have a specific Local Plan Policy 16 that seeks to create mixed and balanced sustainable communities. Therefore, the numbers of student accommodations in the city need to be carefully managed. This policy is broad although aims to benchmark the number of student housing by testing the location of student-exempt council tax HMO’s (Class M) within 100m of the proposed site, whether or not implemented and unimplemented HMO’s within a 100m of the application site are Class N exempt is above 10% and the location of HMO’s in combination with other student-built accommodation.

The evidence before me submitted by the Council does not lead me to conclude that the proposal would fail to create a sustainable, balanced and mixed community in the city.

I have considered the conditions suggested by the Council with reference to the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance. In addition to the standard time limit, a condition listing the plans is necessary in the interest of certainty. In order that a satisfactory appearance and form of development is achieved, a condition requiring the materials match the existing house is also necessary. Soundproofing of the extension, building near trees, the number of occupants and final use of the site after ten years are also necessary to make the development acceptable. Other standard conditions have been amended for consistency with the Framework and the PPG.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.