Protests over more student homes close to Chester University

Dec 8 2008 by David Norbury, Chester Chronicle

OBJECTIONS have been raised to the prospect of more student accommodation close to Chester University.

The application was made at 27 Bouverie Street by Mr D Bibby-Cheshire.

Mr Bibby-Cheshire told planning officers he was seeking approval to convert the roof space of the terrace property, which is already a house in multiple occupation (HMO) for students, to create two bedrooms and a shower room with a dormer at the rear.

The dwelling accommodates five residents, which will rise to eight, according to a report.

It is located in the dense and well established residential area where there is a high proportion of student homes.

A previous similar application with a dormer at the front was refused in April this year.

Plum Terrace neighbours S and C A Owens object and say: “With so many properties in this area becoming multi occupancy and having larger extensions added in recent months we feel it has become over populated.”

They add: “As there are many vacancies in the properties around this area, why is there a need for more rooms?

“It already feels as if we are living on a campus.”

They fear the application will add to problems related to the large amount of rubbish in the locality which they believe presents a threat to public health and safety.

They have also raised concerns about parking and say the dormer window will cause unacceptable loss of privacy.

Secretary of the Canal Basin Community Forum Avril Coady has told the city council there is an “oversubscription” of multi occupancy housing in the canal basin and Garden Lane area.

“The entire area is suffering in several ways,” she claims.

This includes “ever present overparking” due mainly to HMOs and to a lesser extent commuters and noise, litter and low-level antisocial behaviour for nine months of the year “with some streets taking on the air of a ghost town during holiday periods leaving people feeling vulnerable with no permanent neighbours”.

The forum argues that Garden Lane has deteriorated from a busy shopping centre to be, for the most part, fast food shops, off licences and expensive convenience food stores.

The city council says the property has been operating as an HMO since at least 1998.

Although Mr Bibby-Cheshire has not demonstrated a need for the accommodation, they do not feel an additional three students will cause any significant harm to the wider area.

The house can accommodate seven bedrooms and the necessary shared facilities without appearing overcramped.

City planners accept the absence of dormers in the area is part of the distinctive character of the locality but point out the previous application included a dormer at the front.

This has been removed and replaced with roof lights which are considered to be acceptable.

They do not believe the rear dormer will appear out of keeping and say it will not allow for views into any adjacent windows.

Mr Bibby-Cheshire has created two off road parking spaces at 71 Bouverie Street which planning officers feel is acceptable.

They recommended the application should be approved.

College ward City Cllr David Mead (Lib Dem), who called in the application to the city's planning board, said he had a number of concerns and insisted: “The need for more student accommodation has not been demonstrated.

“To Let signs seem to me to indicate there is a saturation of such properties in the area.”

He argued the council should work with university to investigate potential sites where the university itself could build accommodation but added: “I do not think the need for extra accommodation will increase.”

The application, he suggested is “a step in the wrong direction”.

He described the additional parking at the rear of 71 Bouverie Street as “not realistic” as it would be some distance away.

Cllr Mead believes it is tempting for occupiers not to leave their cars a long way from where they were living.

Pressure on parking in the area is already “intense”, according to Cllr Mead.

He feels the rear dormer will still be an out of keeping feature.

Cllr Gwyn Cooper (Lab, City & St Anne's) said her main concern was how the work would be carried out and where the lorries would park.

“You cannot find a place to park in Bouverie Street.

“How will the applicant get the materials to the house to carry out the alterations,” she asked.

College ward city councillor Sandra Rudd, Labour's planning spokesman, referred to the “proliferation of HMOs in the ward” and believed the application would be an intensification of use.

She added, however: “Until we have a change in our policies it is going to be very difficult to refuse.”

Newton Brook Cllr Terri Gray (Con) argued the application should be refused as Mr Bibby-Cheshire had not demonstrated a need for the accommodation and there would be overlooking and parking problems.

Planning board chairman Cllr Andrew Storrar (Con, Saughall) said, however: “There are concerns but this is within policy.”

Development control manager Fiona Edwards pointed out the plans were identical to the previous application which had been refused on highway grounds alone and those had been dealt with.

Referring to the possibility of an appeal, Mr Paul Parry for the County Engineer said: “I do not feel we would have a strong case.”

He said any obstruction in Bouverie Street could be dealt with by the police who had the power to enforce parking restrictions.

“It is very difficult for builders to operate some distance from the property,” suggested Cllr Cooper.

The board agreed on a 9-4 vote that the application should be approved.