Consultation: Houses in multiple occupation and possible planning responses - POS Response

Extract:

The Society considers existing planning controls to be inadequate and overdue for renewal. The option of no change (Option 1) is therefore not supported.

Option 2 would seem to be a neat and sensible change, creating a planning definition of an HMO and requiring planning permission for all material changes of use. The Society's concern, however, relates to how the HMO threshold is to be defined; the definition needs to encompass HMO uses likely to cause harm, but not unnecessarily regulate innocuous, small scale residential uses currently regarded as legitimate C3 dwellinghouses.

Option 3 effectively offers a deferred means of planning control. The Society considers Option 3 to be less than satisfactory.

To read the full response click here

To read the Joint LACORS/LGA/POS/CIH response click here

Note: for the purposes of clarity if the reader perceives any conflict between the separate POS response and the planning comment contained in the combined response then the separate response should be taken as the definitive Society viewpoint.