Councillors have granted planning permission to a property company to turn a family home into a shared house for up to six people.
Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee voted unanimously to allow WSE Property Services Ltd to convert 47 Eastbrook Road, Portslade, into a small house in multiple occupation (HMO).
Committee members were told that “limited weight” had been given to supporting comments because the company, owned by John Wright, 49, and Holly Wright, 49, had offered a reward for positive comments.
There were 43 objections to the planning application on the grounds of overdevelopment, the loss of a family home and potential parking problems.
Resident Robert Selvey spoke on behalf of his neighbours and said that the plans would change the character of the street. They also had concerns about the effect on parking because the street was not in a controlled parking zone.
Mr Selvey said: “Approval of this property as an HMO will mean a loss of one of the more affordable family homes in Brighton and Hove.
“The average house price in Hove last year was £560,000, which is out of reach for most occupants in the city.
“In contrast, this home was purchased for £260,000 by the developer – less than half the Hove average and far closer to affordability for people in the city.”
Mr Wright told councillors that when he bought the property, it was in “very poor condition” with extensive damage to the superstructure.
He spent £220,000 on the rebuild and conversion into a five-bedroom property for young professionals.
Mr Wright said: “I honestly believe this would have been a project too far for a family home.
“It would not have been viable for the building to be converted into a family home as the cost to complete would be more than what the house would be worth at the end of the project.
“Our company’s motto (or) ethos is to provide housing that we would want our children to live in. We strive with every development to up our game and go one step further in better design and product.”
Labour councillor Tobias Sheard spoke about the high cost of housing in Brighton and Hove as a young professional living in a shared house.
Councillor Sheard said: “In reality, a lot of people in HMOs are young people because housing is so expensive.
“The average price of a family home is £540,000. This house was picked up for £243,000 and was deemed affordable. That’s six-and-a-half times the average wage of the country.
What a good article – which highlights many issues we face in the local housing market – and we might say that property market is messed up, or in meltdown. There are ruder words.
In this case a rundown property in Portslade was bought for £260,000 and the developer has allegedly spent £220,000 on it, bringing the outlay to £480,000. You look at the picture shown, and ask: ‘Would I now spend half a million to buy this refurbished terraced property?’
The answer is, only as an investment or rental.
The restored property is now a 5 bed house and that allows up to 6 sharing adults to live here. With 5 people paying £800 per month that would be a monthly rental of £4K – or £48K per year for the landlord. There are costs of course, and the council rules mean a licence fee.
This news article pin-points how a young family would struggle to get the same place – either to rent, or indeed as a first buy, with a mortgage. (And if you COULD afford that high mortgage, then you’d probably buy elsewhere, to get more for your money, or a posher address. )
I’m a great fan of house shares, having lived in one myself, but in the modern age, with rents now so high, the house sharers are usually slaves to work, just to pay their bills. Party noise is not the problem, and nor is parking, because most tenants can’t afford cars.
The worst effect of this overcrowding is that people leave when they can’t pay the bills, and then there’s a trail of debt collection. There’s an also a high turnover of tenants, with each change meaning more stuff left behind, and more stuff dumped.
And when the house share works, there’s little disposable income amongst sharers that goes to local pubs or other leisure businesses. This is why all pubs and cafes and restaurants are so dead midweek now.
So we talk about shared houses taking away properties from local-born people, or from young families in the area, but really the overall consequences of shared rental now go way beyond that – and the effects on the local economy are catastrophic, especially for the longer term. Many renters have zero ‘disposable income’.
The government policy about housing remains the same as for the last decade, namely that building more houses or flats will increase supply, and excess properties will supposedly bring the average home price down. The reality is that all property developed now is only for high income people, and all the shared-ownership schemes, with their excessive maintenance charge scams, have simply tied young professionals into even deeper debt. Those on more modest incomes don’t even get a look in.
This is a time bomb for dissatisfaction and anger.
Thank you for one of the more thoughtful posts on this issue. Which, in previous articles on similar applications, usually turn into rants about students.
This does show that there is a market for housing like this for young, single professionals needing somewhere to live.
I believe most HMOs operate on a utilities inclusive basis as at the end of the day it’s easier for the landlord to manage (as well as the utility companies too of course). And the landlord of course has to account for any void periods as well as the costs of finding and vetting new tenants.
The abuse of the system, ie paying people to support the application, should have automatically disqualified the proposal and resulted in sanctions.