Shared house let to less well-off tenants approved on appeal

A shared house in Bevendean which the council said should be returned to family use can continue to be let out to less well-off tenants after being approved on appeal.

Landlady Belinda Coote says she rents rooms in 40 Heath Hill Avenue at a reasonable rent to people who cannot afford Brighton’s high rents.

She began letting it out in 2015 and was subsequently told planning permission was necessary – and her application for it to be used as a house of multiple occupation (HMO) was then refused.

But a planning inspector allowed her appeal after hearing the number of HMOs surrounding it was exactly 10% – the threshold over which new HMO applications in restricted areas of Brighton are refused – rather than above it.

In her appeal, Ms Coote explained she bought the bungalow with a small inheritance to let it out to those who could not afford high rents.

She said: “I was also determined to provide a home rather than just take money off tenants, and I have spent the rent renovating the house and paying off the mortgage.

“This is very distressing to me as I like to do things legally, properly and ethically.

“I am also one of the few property owners that rents to tenants on benefits, vulnerable tenants and tenants with dogs.”

One of the tenants living at the house wrote to support Ms Coote’s appeal, describing the house as a “dream come true”.

They said: “Our landlady has been extremely kind and accommodating to allow my flatmates to move in with two dogs, and also myself not having a UK guarantor.

“Not only that, she has allowed my other flatmate to stay here even though he is on benefits.”

Planning inspector Martin Andrews granted permission, as long as the house is used for four residents.

He said: “The policy clearly states that applications of the type refused, in this case, will not be permitted where more than ten per cent of the dwellings within a radius of 50 metres of the application site are already in HMO use.

“This does not apply to the appeal application because on the basis of the council’s own analysis there are currently two HMOs which amount to ten per cent of the total dwellings.

“Accordingly, the appeal scheme is not in an area where the 10 per cent threshold has already been crossed, this being the part of the policy which would preclude any further permissions.”

Mr Andrews also dismissed claims the accommodation was not up to standard.

In her appeal, Ms Coote said despite making legal inquiries when she bought the property in 2015, she was advised no licence was necessary.

She was later informed planning permission was required, which is a separate regime to HMO licensing

Planning officers refused permission to convert the house into a “small house in multiple occupation” due to a policy restricting the density of shared houses in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean ward.

They argued granting permission would mean more than ten per cent of homes within a 50-metre radius of 40 Heath Hill Avenue would be HMOs, which went against policy CP21.

The council’s statement said: “The LPA (local planning authority) has through the officer report set out why the council considers that the development fails to comply with policy CP21 which aims to support a mixed and balanced community, and the increased intensity of HMOs in the area would result in unacceptable level of harm to local amenity.

“The current layout would also provide a poor standard of accommodation for current and future occupiers of the HMO and therefore does not meet the requirements of emerging policy DM20 of City Plan Part two.”

Moulsecoomb and Bevendean ward councillor Daniel Yates opposed the application because of the broader impact on the community from another HMO.

A new policy is expected to come into force in October when the council votes on City Plan part two, limiting HMO numbers to 20 per cent in a wider neighbourhood used in the census known as a contiguous output area.