15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 7 September 2022 by Jonathan Edwards BSc(Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 15 September 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/P0119/W/22/3297910 15 Braemar Crescent, Filton BS7 0TD • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Padbury (Kasa Real Estate Ltd) against the decision of South Gloucestershire Council. • The application Ref P21/07154/F, dated 5 November 2021, was refused by notice dated 22 February 2022. • The development proposed is change of use from residential dwelling (C3) to an eight- bedroom large house in multiple occupation (Sui Generis) for up to eight people including erection of side/rear extension and loft conversion/dormer, vehicle parking, bin storage and cycle parking. Decision 1.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for change of use from residential dwelling (C3) to an eight-bedroom large house in multiple occupation (Sui Generis) for up to eight people including erection of side/rear extension and loft conversion/dormer, vehicle parking, bin storage and cycle parking at 15 Braemar Crescent, Filton BS7 0TD in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P21/07154/F, dated 5 November 2021, subject to the following conditions:- 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: drawings numbered 103, 201, 202, 301, 304, 305, 401, 404, 501, 505, 603 and 604. 3) The house of multiple occupation use hereby permitted shall not commence until electric vehicle charging points rated at 7kw/32amp per parking space have been provided for the 4 parking spaces shown on the approved plans. Details of the design and location of the proposed charging points to be provided shall be first submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once provided, the charging points shall be retained for use thereafter.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Application for costs 2. An application for costs has been made by Mr Padbury (Kasa Real Estate Ltd) against South Gloucestershire Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Application for costs 2. An application for costs has been made by Mr Padbury (Kasa Real Estate Ltd) against South Gloucestershire Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/P0119/W/22/3297910 Preliminary Matters 3. The description of development in the header and decision above is taken from the application form. A slightly different description is included on the appeal form and the Council’s decision notice. However, this includes superfluous information regarding the planning history for the appeal property. Therefore, I have used the original description. 4. The proposed development includes physical operations to the appeal property including extensions and the erection of a dormer. On my visit I saw that enlargement works have taken place to the roof. However, it was unclear whether these works are in accordance with the details as shown on the appeal plans. As such, my assessment is made on the basis that the appeal development has not yet commenced. Main Issue 5. The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to its effect on community balance and housing mix. Reasons 6. Policy PSP39 of the South Gloucestershire Local Plan, Policies, Sites and Places Plan 2017 (the LP) relates to the sub-division of existing residential buildings and houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision It is generally supportive of such development and uses provided they do not harm the character of the area. 7. The submissions also refer to the Council’s Houses in Multiple Occupation Supplementary Planning Document 2021 (the SPD). The SPD highlights the importance of mixed communities in all localities and recognises that the sub-division of properties to form HMOs can make a valuable contribution for smaller households. However, it is acknowledged that HMOs can have harmful impacts where overly concentrated in an area. 8. Under the SPD’s Additional Explanatory Guidance 2 (AEG2), advice is provided on when an unacceptable concentration of HMOs will occur. Such circumstances include (i) when an additional HMO is proposed in a locality where known HMOs already represent more than 10% of households; or (ii) where a proposal would result in more than 20% of households being HMOs within 100 metres of the site. The paragraphs following AEG2 define a locality as the Census Output Area and state that the AEG2 assessment should be based on licensed HMO data and permissions for large HMOs. Therefore, it is clear that small or unlicensed HMOs are not counted when assessing a proposal against AEG2. 9.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision The minutes of the Council’s Development Management Committee meeting on 3 February 2022 include a statement that in this part of Filton, 11.2% of households are HMOs. However, it is unclear whether “this part of Filton” refers to the locality or Census Output Area in which the appeal site lies. Also, it is uncertain whether the stated 11.2% relates solely to licensed or large HMOs or indeed how this figure has established. Without such clarification, the statement fails to convincingly demonstrate a conflict with the SPD. 10. Instead, the Principal Planning Officer’s comments as recorded in the minutes are more persuasive. These refer specifically to only 1.3% of households in the locality as being licensed HMOs and only 1 other HMO within the 100 metre https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/P0119/W/22/3297910 radius of the site. As such, the more convincing evidence suggests the proposal would not conflict with the SPD’s AEG2. 11. On my visit, I saw the appeal property lies in a typical residential street where the dwellings are predominantly 2 storey high semi-detached houses. Some properties have been enlarged and front gardens hard-surfaced to provide parking. However, I saw no obvious signs of any properties being used as a HMO. Even if I am incorrect and nearby properties are used for such a purpose, there is no evidence to show how these impact negatively on the qualities of the area. Consequently, I see no reason why the proposed HMO would cause detriment to local character, particularly as the property would remain in residential use. 12. Moreover, the Council do not contest the appellant’s claim that expressed planning permission is not required to change the use of the property to a small HMO. Also, the appellant has provided evidence that the property now has a licence to be used as a 5 person HMO. If this appeal was to be dismissed, there is a realistic prospect that this change of use would occur and the appeal property would not be used as a single person household.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Compared to the fallback position, the appeal proposal would make no meaningful difference to the balance of the local community or housing mix in the area. 13. Extensions the same as those proposed have already been granted planning permission. As such, there is a strong fallback position in respect of these elements of the development. In any event, the proposed extensions and alterations would be in keeping with the property and would be similar in style to existing additions to nearby houses. The removal of the front wall and provision of hardstanding parking to replace a front garden would be an obvious change in the appearance of the site. However, other properties on Braemar Crescent have roadside parking areas and so this element of the scheme would be in keeping with the street scene. 14. For the above reasons, I conclude the development would not harm the character and appearance of the area, particularly in terms of housing mix and community balance. In these regards, it would accord with LP policy PSP39. Other Matters 15. A number of other concerns have been raised by interested parties.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision The Council’s submissions advise that the provision of 4 parking spaces would meet the required parking standards for the proposed development. I note the site is close to shops and other facilities as well as bus stops that would provide public transport links to the wider area. As such, it is likely that future residents would not be reliant on private car travel or vehicular ownership to gain access to services. The Braemar Crescent carriageway is narrow but is of sufficient width in many parts to allow roadside parking. In light of these factors, I am satisfied that any increase in roadside parking as a result of the development would not prejudice highway safety or lead to unacceptable obstruction to traffic. 16. It is likely that the proposal would increase the level of residential occupation of the appeal property. However, it does not follow that this would lead to unacceptable noise and disturbance. Also, as a residential use, there is no sound reason to find the HMO would lead to anti-social behaviour. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/P0119/W/22/3297910 17. The extensions and alterations include new windows but these are the same as those already permitted. As such there would be no additional overlooking or overshadowing of neighbouring properties compared to the fallback position. 18. I note the concerns over the impact of the HMO on the health of occupiers of the attached neighbouring house and I am sympathetic to such concerns. However, it is unjustified to assume that the proposed residential use would cause harm to the living conditions of the occupants of adjoining properties, simply because it would be a HMO. Even if there are other HMOs near to the site, the evidence before me fails to show how the proposal would cause or add to any unacceptable cumulative detriment to residential amenity. 19. There is no information to show the development would put an unacceptable strain on local services or the sewerage system. The development would have no significant impact on wildlife. As there is no justification to refuse permission on any of the above grounds, these factors fail to affect my overall conclusion. Conditions 20. The Council has provided a list of suggested conditions.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Appeal Decision I have considered these against the tests for conditions as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. Where appropriate I have amended the wording for reasons of precision. 21. For clarity, I have included a condition that requires the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Also, in the interests of highway safety, I have imposed a condition that requires parking and electric vehicle charging points to be provided. However, I am unconvinced that a condition that removes permitted development rights is required to ensure a satisfactory appearance, particularly as the property already benefits from such rights. Therefore, this condition has not been imposed. Conclusion 22. The proposal would be acceptable in terms of the main issue and so it would accord with the development plan when read as a whole. Therefore, I conclude the appeal should be allowed.

15 Braemar Crescent, Filton, BRISTOL, BS7 0TD — South Gloucestershire Council — Jonathan Edwards INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4