By Cameron Blackshaw

Controversial plans to transform a vacant family-sized home into a 24-person house of multiple occupation (HMO) have been refused.

Planners thought the scheme would negatively impact neighbours due to the potential for an increase in noise and disturbance from the high-occupancy property.

Plans to convert the large semi-detached house in West Heath Road, Bexley, into a 12-bedroom HMO that could house up to 24 people were submitted to Bexley Council at the end of July.

The planning application received over 100 objections, and those living nearby told the Local Democracy Reporting Service they feared it would become a source of antisocial behaviour and its occupants would be “transient people”.

Some also had concerns about parking and privacy, with Pinewood Road residents believing the proposed outside terrace would provide direct views into the back of their homes.

Bexley Council refused the planning application on Thursday (October 9), citing several reasons, including the number of bins the property would need.

The refusal notice added: “The proposal would require the introduction of significant refuse bins and a cycle store to the front of the site, which would result in visual clutter and erode the residential character of the area, harmful to, and out of character with, the surrounding neighbourhood.”

Planning officers also thought the application lacked an accurate parking stress survey, which meant it could cause “parking stress and unsafe parking” in the surrounding streets.

It was also refused as it was assessed as not fire safe.

To see more planning applications and other public notices for your area, click here.

Since 2018, Bexley Council has had a mandatory HMO licensing scheme that applies to all HMOs occupied by five or more persons in two or more households.

In terms of planning powers, Bexley also has an Article 4 Direction in place, which allows it to remove permitted development rights for smaller HMOs.

Without that, conversions to small HMOs would be possible without the planning committee having a say, though all those with seven or more occupants would have required full planning permission anyway.