D. Student Accommodation & Houses in Multiple Occupation

Students want to live with other students-what evidence is there to support this proposal

A.C.Lloyd (Asset Management) Ltd wish to object to the wording in relation to student accommodation and HMOs at Policy PO6.

In particular, the current wording suggests that new student accommodation/HMOs will be required to meet locational criteria to ensure they are not located in areas which already have a high concentration of such accommodation. It is our contention, however, that in order to accord with advice within NPPF, locational criteria should be based principally on sustainable development criteria such as access to services and facilities and public transport links to the university.

I agree that developments for uni student accommodation and HMOs need to be addressed in conjunction but strongly feel a policy needs to be urgently introduced ahead of the Local Plan as the current Article 4 directions offer no real control or limitation of these developments and are not ensuring balanced accommodation. In certain parts of South Leamington there is already a proliferation of student/HMO properties meaning other types of tenure, in particular family homes and first time buyer properties, are being displaced by bedsits. This has created predominantly transient populations and real problems re. noise, rubbish and parking.

The local plan says:
"New student accommodation/ HMOs will be required to meet locational criteria to ensure they are not located in areas which already have a high concentration of such accommodation"

I am in strong support of this new policy as it is very much required in areas of south town Leamington.
The problems of unbalanced communities in this area (economic imbalance, loss of amenity e.g. harm to existing residents from noise, rubbish, parking issues etc.) have been well documented.
However I note that there appear to be no details on the "locational criteria" requirements.

My view is that for the goal of maintaining or achieving a balanced and sustainable community, then the locational criteria should focus on the concentration of HMO & student *residents* (rather than the properties) on a street or neighbourhood, since it is the transient residents that are behind the issues, and because the concentration of residents is much usually higher in an HMO or student accommodation than in an owner-occupier household.

Also the policy should encompass a three-fold strategy, including the below as complementary policies:

1) Areas of Restraint
An area within the authority is designated, and within that area, restraints are imposed on certain forms of development e.g. both purpose-built accommodation and student houses. An example is Leeds CC's policy H15 "Area of Housing Mix" - see subnote 2 on the last page of http://www.leeds.gov.uk/docs/pln%2078%20dwelling%20houses%20and%20houses%20in%20multiple%20occupation.pdf .

2) The Threshold Approach
Development proposals for HMOs & student housing should be considered individually, and permitted only if such developments are below a set percentage of properties in a neighbourhood.

3) Purpose-Built Development
Areas within the authority are designated for the development of purpose-built accommodation for students.

All of these policies are necessary, none on its own is sufficient. Areas of Restraint address concentrations themselves. The Threshold Approach tackles developing concentrations. Purpose-built Development is designed to deflate their causes.

Whilst I support the Local Plan, I would like to object to the timing for this particular category. There is a current issue due to the proliferation and high level of student/HMOs properties in the South Leamington area. Current Article 4 directions are not sufficiently controlling such developments. A spread & balance of accommodation is not being ensured and family homes and first time buyer properties, are being displaced by bedsits. This has already created a abnormally transient population with the associated & very real problems re. parking, noise and rubbish.

We feel that a balance is required in Russell Terrace (and immediate surrounding areas) as to the residential aspect of the area. Families and family homes are becoming fewer whilst HIMO's seem to be increasing, and more worryingly, applications for them also. With the new, extensive student accommodation structure, near to completion on Old Warwick Road, the need for still more HIMO's on our residential streets seems incomprehensible. Mr & Mrs Ziyat

I strongly object to any more HIMOs being accepted by the Planning Department.
We are at saturation level now with a couple of streets, at least, having mainly student houses with the odd resident amongst them. This is unacceptable and I understand that Warwick District Council have recognised this via the "Article 4 Direction" - with a view to getting a Policy implemented as soon as possible. I believe that this can be achieved and that WDC Planning Committee will act upon this in the light of all the objections from residents of South Leamington which is becoming increasingly like a student campus. It is the developers and the lack of regulation previously that I take issue with. The demographic balance is already skewed towards a young transient population in parts with families sporadically placed. The impact is huge i.e. noise, rubbish, no community spirit, no parking. I thought Old Town was on the agenda to be regenerated. I have to conclude by saying that I have nothing against students - it is the exploitation of the area by developers who do not live anywhere near to these HIMOs and, some of whom, do not care about the upkeep and the impact on the people who do live here.

I would like to add my name to the residents who are opposing the increasing number of HIMO's in the area, and specifically the proposed development of AC Lloyd. I am lucky in that my experience of students at my end of this road has been trouble-free & I like a mixed-age & changing community, but I realise that others I know have a disturbed time (at least a couple of them are planning to move away) & the HIMO density DOES appear to be becoming rather extreme! Time to draw a line,I suggest.

The New Local Plan should address two issues that are often closely related: [1] developments for university student bed-sit accommodation and [2] developments/conversions for High Intensity Multiple Occupation. Proliferation of such developments within single neighbourhoods threatens the balance of good community because it tends to create a demographic imbalance in which young adults predominate over other age-categories. It also creates an imbalance of tenure because conversion of houses and flats to bed-sits displaces other kinds of tenure and especially family homes. Over-development for student bed in the South of Leamington Spa is leading to an erosion of established community. Some local streets are increasingly marked by the absence of families and children. Established residents find themselves isolated members of a relatively transient population of young adults with whom it is very difficult to establish effective neighbourly relations over matters such as noise, rubbish, car parking, key-holding for alarms, parcel deliveries or incorrectly delivered mail. This pattern, which is already well established in some other British towns needs to be controlled with planning measures that will restrain the further growth of student HMOs in South Leamingt

consultation with the universites would reveal increased buil of student accomadation on campus thus reducing demands within the towns

PO6- D. I am objecting to ACLloyd's proposal to build a large new block of student accomodation on the site of their previous office. The New Local Plan needs to address two closely related issues -(1) developments for university student bed- sit accomodation + (2)developments/conversions for High Intensity Multiple Occupation. Unchecked growth of such developments within single neighbourhoods, eg Brunswick Ward in this case, threatens the balance of a good community because it tends to create a demographic imbalance in which young adults predominate over other age categories. Also it creates an imbalance of tenure because conversion of houses + falts to bed-sits displaces other knidsw of tenure + especially family homes. Over-development for students bed-sits in South Leaminghton area is leading to an erosion of an established community. Some local streets are increasingly marked by the absence of families and children. Established residents find themselves isolated members of a relatively transient population of young adults with whom it is very difficult to establish effective community relations over matters such as noise, rubbish, parking, key-holding for alarms, parcel deliveries or incorrectly delivered mail. This pattern, which is already well established in some other British towns needs to be controlled with planning measures that will restrain the further growth of students HMOs in South Leamington.

Only Part D of PO6 is not fully supported by the Leamington Society:

A. The Leamington Society fully supports the principle of mixed housing and varied types but the means chosen in PO10 will not achieve this:
Garden suburbs prescribes row upon row of uniform suburban plots and is too homogenous. Only a small proportion of the population wants to grow their own food and cultivate a big garden. Many have neither the time, energy nor inclination for this and would be happy with communal parks and gardens and playing fields, which have scale and variety and someone else does the maintenance.
To meet varied need, a wider and more imaginative mix of terraced houses, flats and maisonettes around courtyards, with off-road parking facilities for cars and bicycles and rubbish bins, would take up less land and be more appropriate.
We consider it very important to avoid high concentrations of student accommodation and HMOs to maintain a balanced community. We recommend the introduction of maximum percentages of such properties or populations within specified areas. The number of houses in multiple occupancy, whether by students or others, has reached extremely high levels in much of south of the River Leam in Leamington (often referred to as Old Town). WDC has mapped the density of registered HMOs; see Item 6 and Appendices at
https://estates3.warwickdc.gov.uk/cmis/Meetingdates/tabid/73/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/410/Meeting/225/Committee/29/Default.aspx

This high density places an enormous strain on-street parking space. Therefore the new local plan needs to
* control both the density of HMOs
* require reasonable levels of off-street car-parking in all new HMOs
* ensure these requirements apply to HMOs, student accommodation and student hostels irrespective of their designation.
The Council should decide whether some areas of Leamington have already reached saturation point, and look at how well located student hostels could help manage the problem of over concentration.

MY CONCERN IS THE INFLUX OF STUDENTS IN SOUTH TOWN.MORE AND MORE LANDLORD ARE APPLYING FOR PLANNING PERMISSION TO BUILD/AND USE FOR STUDENTS.

WARWICK NEW ROAD 225
NEW STREET 10
CHAPEL STREET? 72
TOTAL: 307
I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH STUDENTS IN SOUTH TOWN PLEASE GIVE US A BREAK
WHY CAN'T YOU BUILD STUDENTS ACCOMMODATION NORTH OF LEAMINGTON NEAR TO THE UNIVERCITY.
I DO NOT MIND THE STUDENTS BEING HERE BUT I DO OBJECT TO THE RUBISH THEY LEAVE BEHIND THAT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR.SOMETHING REALY NEEDS TO BE DONE TO STOP THIS HAPPENING.

IAM AFRAID THERE WILL SOON BE MORE STUDENTS IN SOUTH TOWN THAN RESIDANCE AND THAT IS NOT THE WAY IT SHOULD BE.

See attachment

2:2 - Why is the environment not listed as a key priority: without it, all manner of planning applications can be granted which are anti-environmental

Is leisure included in "Health and Wellbeing". If so, this should be made clear.

2:5 - As there is no way the economy can be predicted, there should be a commitment to responding to new opportunities and needs which arise

Can the areas mentioned as requiring regeneration be identified?

I am concerned about the second bullet point under Emphasis on infrastructure, as most areas of the countryside and of importance for wildlife need only a very light touch, if a touch at all. There should be a clear distinction between the approach to parks and managed open spaces, and to wilder areas (e.g. Welch's Meadow would be ruined by heavy handed management).

3:7 - there are elements referred to in this draft plan which need to be prioritised and policy made before March/April 2012; in particular a policy on the concentration of HMOs.

4:6 - the protection afforded to conservation areas should be strengthened, particularly as these cover apparently only 4% of the district

4:8, point 2 - It should be noted that one major contributory factor to the current lack of affordable properties relates to HMOs. The house next door to mine is an example of this. It was owned by an elderly lady who went into residential care. There was a large amount of interest in the property from people who wanted it as a family home, indeed so much interest that it was decided on sealed bids. Because the property needed some updating, and I met several potential purchasers who wanted to restore it to its former self, the highest bidder was, almost inevitably, a landlord who could easily find the finance and would easily recoup the investment by turning it into an HMO. I have seen this repeated time and again in my area of south Leamington where the gains from HMOs has pushed up prices beyond affordable for an individual or family: indeed a local couple I know has not been able to find an affordable small period house and, despite wanting to stay in Leamington, is having to move to Cheltenham to find such a property. In addition to the price problem, most often the conversion to HMO is the cheapest possible and degrades the period property.

4:10.2 - It is right to accommodate university students, but not at the expense of other "settled" residents. South Leamington is at a tipping point where the area could be completely dominated by students The advantages of a large student population tend to benefit the few - landlords and places selling cheap food and drink, whilst the cost and disadvantages are picked up by Council tax payers and local neighbours. It also means that businesses not directed at students tend to stay away. One south town resident recently pointed out that because Leamington is only a student dormitory town rather than a university town, we have generally ended up with all of the problems of a large student population and none of the advantages of the university culture which takes place on campus. I can see no reason why special consideration should be afforded to the University of Warwick in providing accommodation for its students.

4:11 - I agree with all these points, particularly endorsing numbers 7, 9 and 10. It is particularly important in any development not to let the developer be the tail which wags the dog, as the developer will inevitably want to take the easiest and cheapest route in contradiction to the area's best interests.

5-7 - Level of growth:
As forecasting population growth is a very inexact science, the Council should constantly monitor what is actually happening. If the expected population growth is not materialising, planned development should be scaled back accordingly. It makes sense therefore to insist on development of the brownfield sites before eating into Green Belt.

P04:D - Loss of green space should also be taken into account when assessing development of garden land. This space may not be directly accessible to the general public, but if it contributes to the overall feeling of green space which is enjoyed by the general public (e.g. with trees that can be seen from neighbouring streets), it is very important that it is maintained. It is also important for biodiversity and the environment, as gardens are now understood to be extremely important habitats for wildlife.

P06.D - It is most important to identify the locational criteria and to carry out a thorough survey of all HMOs and their residents, not just those which have previously had to get Council approval.

7.59 - We need this policy now!

P08 - We also need a firm policy now regarding the protection of existing employment buildings from change of use, as in my area I can think of several schemes either applyng for or already granted planning permission to change from commercial to residential use. The Plan already points out that f the area population is going to increase, then employment will need to increase as well and it is short-sighted to be allowing commercial property to disappear.

8:21 - Does the projection of additional job requirement take into account that the growth in the older population will automatically mean the release of the jobs these people were doing?

9: Retailing

It is a mistake to be led by the retail "experts" who push for constant retail development schemes in order to compete with neighbouring towns. There is a fine balance between having enough "High Street names" to serve shoppers and having so many that Leamington becomes indistinguishable from any other shopping centre - in which case, why would any non-residents want to come here? The success of the last major retail development - which seems dubious to me - (Parade to Regent Street) should be assessed before rushing into another similar development. Outside shoppers will travel to a shopping centre to find something different and it is this difference which needs to be identified and promoted. These major developments also seem to push up rents for retailers.

13: Inclusive, Safe and Healthy Communities

Developments should not be permitted which will downgrade and produce associated problems to an area, e.g. SEVs.

14: Transport

I suggest WDC promote a car sharing scheme.

P014: How can you plan a retail development in Chandos Street whilst aiming to maintain sufficient parking in town centres. Chandos Street is a much more popular car park than the multi-storeys.

15: Green Infrastructure

A relevant issue is that Network Rail is destroying, and has been for a long time, the natural environment and wildlife habitat along railway lines by felling all the trees and killing undergrowth every year with weed killer.

15:14 - Yes to urban tree planting; concern about messing with the River Leam borders unless already in a well-used managed area.

P017 - I agree with the continued support for the development of a cultural quarter

I believe that existing visitor accommodation should be protected from change of use.

18: Flooding

Planning permission should be sought by someone wanting to pave/concrete over a front garden, as I believe this trend has contributed to flooding problems.

Summary of major concerns

* Restrictions needed on HMOs
* Light-handed touch needed on non-parkland open spaces and riverside
* More creative study of retail demands and opportunities needed
* Although the Plan does seem to recognise this, the expansion of the district must avoid segregating areas into a single use, e.g. residential, employment, etc. Areas are much more interesting and attractive if they include a mix of residential, employment, cultural/leisure, etc. properties.

Attached

The Town Council of Royal Leamington Spa broadly welcomes the Plan, and below gives a more detailed response on particular items of the Plan. We expect to incorporate our vision for Leamington Spa into a Plan for the Town in due course.

Delivering Growth (PO1 & PO3)

We welcome the broad location of growth. We agree that an annual average increase of 600 new homes for the next 20 years is a reasonable and fair target. Many of the Wards in the Town are already densely populated, and we note that the Plan anticipates some growth in these areas.

Affordable housing (PO5)

We approve the requirement that 40% of new homes on developments of 10 or more dwellings, and 5 or more dwellings in the rural areas, should be affordable housing.

Mixed communities (PO6)

We approve the option for a mix of housing, and note that strategic sites will include Extra Care Housing. We believe in a balanced and mixed population and welcome families and single people in all our Wards.

Whilst the Town Council is proud of the diverse population in Leamington, we would request the District Council introduce a policy to restrict the number and density of Student Houses and Houses in Multiple Occupation to ensure that they do not adversely impact on the character of neighbourhoods to the detriment of family households. The Town Council requests close involvement in the input into the policy on mixed communities.

We would also welcome developments that demonstrate a more imaginative provision for students, that are not simply converting existing family housing.

Economy (PO8)

We welcome the proposals to ensure a wide range of employment. We particularly support the regeneration and enhancement of existing employment areas.

The Town Council believes that the Local Plan needs to encourage the continuing growth of the already successful Computer Games industry and the further development of Silicon Spa as the primary UK centre of excellence for the industry. The Local Plan also needs to support further growth in the innovative automotive industry much of which is based in the District or on the edge of the District as this is likely to provide future employment in the Leamington and Warwick conurbation.

Retailing and Town Centres (PO9)

We welcome the support for Town Centre retailing and a Town Centre first message. We believe that the `Town' includes the whole town, and that developments should be considered in the area south of Regent Street, in the Parade and in Old Town.
The Town Council believes that we should promote and support Fair Trade initiatives.

We are committed to strategies that promote the town for retail provision, leisure, entertainment and eating establishments. We can promote our parks and green spaces as important attributes of the Town Centre.

However, we see that `shopping' also includes local shops. The Town Council would prefer there to be a policy on where supermarkets should be located, and that local communities should be consulted about any new proposals for supermarket development.

Historic Environment (PO11)

We welcome the intention to protect the historic environment. We see that this includes the historic areas of the Old Town, and would be pleased to work with the District Council in listing the historic assets, and reviewing the Conservation Area. We are pleased to note the District Council's encouragement of regeneration of appropriate sites within the historic environment. We strongly affirm that the historical integrity of the area is threatened by sex entertainment establishments and oppose any such establishment, which we see as an inappropriate development.
The Town Council supports the Blue Plaque scheme, and the Guild of Guides Walks.

Climate Change (PO12)

As a Transition Town, the Town Council welcomes the intention to include a policy on climate change.

Transport (PO14)

We support the option to minimise the need to travel, and to promote sustainable forms of transport. In addition to the proposals in the Plan, we believe that a higher priority should be given to cycle provision, and to ensuring that all new developments encourage ease of access by bicycles between areas of the District. This includes cycle lanes and provision to park cycles.

Residents should also be encouraged to travel by bus for work and leisure with the encouragement of more quality bus routes into and across Leamington.

Encourage the co-ordination of different forms of transport to encourage more residents to travel by foot, bus, train and bicycle.

Green Infrastructure (PO15)

We welcome the intention to protect and enhance the assets as identified in the Plan. We are pleased to see the introduction of "Green Wedges" as an alternative to areas of restraint.
We would also be in favour of consideration of a policy that considers garden preservation. We support greener neighbourhoods through our tree planting scheme, and through our support of Allotment Societies.

Culture and Tourism (PO17)

We support the intention to develop this appropriately and would welcome opportunities to share ideas on promoting the cultural facilities of Leamington. We believe there is scope for improving the visual impact for visitors to Leamington who arrive by rail or canal.

We are proud of the assets of the Town and are committed to maintaining them as welcoming and friendly venues for residents and visitors.


ADDITION

Evening Economy

The Town Council is concerned that the District Council's Policy on the Evening Economy has not yet been completed and so is not available for consultation. The evening economy is important to Leamington, but unless it is carefully considered it can produce public dangers, so it is important to the Town that there is a well-considered policy in place that takes account of the needs of residents, visitors, the businesses and public safety.

I am encouraged by your preferred option 6(d), to provide student housing in "suitable locations - and not in areas" where student accommodation is already exceeding private homes in the vicinity. But I trust that you will be consulting with local residents before detailing such locations in your final plan.

I live in Leamington Spa, which is the preferred student location according to one housing officer at Warwick University, who said she would love to get more students into Coventry. I therefore believe that this aspect, regarding student preference, should be addressed before our new Local Plan is finalised; in order that Coventry can be seen to get its fair share of benefits from the student economy group.

After all, Coventry did gift the green belt land upon which Warwick University now stands (see current Local Plan 10.16). It also has as many nightclubs as Leamington currently boasts (even though Leamington has less than half the population of Coventry). Hence it would seem prudent to investigate the reasons why students reportedly prefer Leamington and, where possible, implement measures to redress this apparent imbalance and reduce the burden on our local towns.

In addition, I think it is important to note that it has always been the custom to locate Halls of Residence on campus, not in towns. Further, that student houses have traditionally been old stock (with bathrooms so cold the toothpaste freezes!), not new builds. As this is all part of the student experience - and character building.

However, the growing trend, in Leamington in particular, is to move away from these traditions and to allow developers to erect purpose-built hostel blocks in quasi 'halls of residence' style, with minute rooms - thus encouraging students to go out most evenings rather than settle down to their studies.

Further, in my opinion our towns have absolutely no responsibility to provide 'halls of residence' in any form. Warwick University has committed itself to an expansion plan and, as such, has made itself responsible for providing halls of residence on campus. I note, in 10.18 of our 1996-2011 Local Plan, that 43 hectares of green belt land has already been identified for such use, and so I fail to see why further demands need to be made upon our towns. We are not Oxford.

Moreover, I am aware that it is beneficial to our towns to attract students so that local enterprise can benefit from student spending power. I am also aware that many students choose to remain in their university towns, and thereby contribute to the regeneration of such towns. But, there is little evidence of that many graduates remaining in Leamington and so it is only the business sector that benefits from their presence - while local residents suffer from a social imbalance caused by such a large and 'non-contributory' transient populous that has no interest in the local community.

Another problem, particularly in Leamington, seems to result from a conflict between the student demand for old stock houses (HMOs) and the demand of house buyers (permanent residents of the town) for the restoration and maintenance of old houses that fall within conservation areas, such as those in Leamington Old Town - where the number of student houses has already started to overtake privately owned and rented homes. This has resulted in an imbalance within local communities that needs both immediate attention, and, future protection.

It is therefore essential, in my opinion, that WDC ensure our local plan includes clearly defined parameters within which further provision of student housing be accepted; not simply state, 'in suitable areas - and not in areas which already have large amounts of such accommodation", (per the Preferred Options Summary). The volume of students demanding housing in Leamington is now a serious threat to the livelihood of the town and, as such, should be given due consideration and prominence.

If Leamington remains the preferred location for students attending Warwick University, and if the demand for student housing increases because of a known expansion plan, then I firmly believe the time has come for our council to take positive steps to prevent Leamington from becoming nothing more than a money-earning shopping plaza, engulfed in a quasi student campus, with no hope of future regeneration.

Introduction
We have had the benefit of seeing a draft of a similar submission which is being made
to you by the National Landlord's Association (NLA) and we endorse what they say.
As we support their submission we do not intend to repeat the matters which they
have put to you. Our comments are confined, by and large, to certain specific issues
which we believe the Council need to consider before taking this proposed policy any
further. As indicated in the heading this response relates only to Policy P06 : Mixed
Communities and wide choice of housing.

Lack of justification
It is important that this proposed policy is considered in the light of the National
Planning Policy Framework ("the Framework"). Not only must the Framework be
considered but also the outcome of two public examinations on similar policies put
forward by both Portsmouth City Council and Manchester City Council.
As is clear from paragraph 50 of the Framework the underlying planning purpose
underpinning any such policy restricting HMOs is about "mixed communities", i.e.
mixture in the tenure, type and range of properties. It is not about balanced
communities i.e. people who live in them. Only affordable housing can be based on
the concept of a balanced community.
As provided for in the Framework the needs and demands of all sections of the
community must be met and catered for through planning policies i8ncluding young
people such as young sharers Following the introduction of the new Class C4 and
Use Classes Order, it is also clear that such a policy cannot just be about students.
Shared accommodation and bedsit accommodation are primarily residential
accommodation for mainly young people but also across all sections of the
population. Occupants include not just students but also young professionals,
working people, benefit customers and so on. The proposed planning policy is
intended to inhibit the provision of shared accommodation for students particularly in
those areas where students want to live, but it has much wider ramifications.
Restrictive planning policies can be justified in certain circumstances but only by the
impact of concentrations of HMOs so long as there is resulting adverse impact on
residential amenities such as anti social behaviour, litter, lack of internal repairs, car
parking problems and loss oflocal amenities (such as schools and shops). As the
NLA rightly point out no such evidence has been produced in this instance of any
residential disamenity. Importantly, it is the concentrations of HMOs and resulting
adverse impacts on residential amenity which is the justification; not concentrations in
themselves. Your planning policy is, however, purely aimed at restricting such
concentrations for their own sake. If you pause for a moment you need to think that if
we were dealing purely with an area of owner/occupation then there would be no wish
for interference. In this instance, however, it is about young people and a different
approach is therefore being pursued, which is not permissible.
If there are adverse impacts due to concentrations then dominance of concentrations
of HMOs as a tenure may be contrary to Framework policie~ for mixed developments
thus providing justification potentially for planning policies to intervene. What this
can then do is justify a wider distribution of HMOs in different areas because the
need/demand for such accommodation can still be met. It is important to stress,
however, that it must be founded on evidence. No consideration is given to alternative
areas where the demand is to be met and no doubt the residents of those areas would
then raise concerns if HMOs were to start appearing in their neighbourhoods.
Any such policy must be justified by and underpinned by a credible objective
evidence base. You need to demonstrate the evidence that there is residential
disamenity. As already pointed out there is no such evidence.
When it comes to formulating policy there must be clear evidence to justifY the nature
of the restriction and the areas to which it is applied. The Planning Inspector in
Manchester indicated that there is a need for flexibility for different percentages and
different areas. There must also be a proper assessment of the effectiveness of the
applicable percentage limits to assess their effectiveness so as to promote social
harmony.
Importantly, there must be a proper assessment of need/demand such as a strategic
housing market assessment which provides detailed evidence or a similar study of this
nature.

Locational policy
In the justification of the policy it is indicated that the plan will need to include a
locational policy to determine planning applications for shared houses as well as other
types of HMOs. The plan itself contains, at the moment, no preferred option for ay
such plan so it is very difficult to make comments upon it. Also it is not clear whether
you are able to deal with this by a local plan document or through a Supplemental
Planning Document. We consider that a matter of this kind which is of such
importance should be dealt with via the development plan document route which
would enable it to be subject to proper independent examination.
Conclusion
It is very difficult to comment at this stage on the proposed policy because of the lack
of detail. Nevertheless, we have very serious concerns about what is proposed and
would urge the Council, as local planning authority, to think again. Clearly, the
Council has to have proper credible evidence to justify its intended course of action.
There is also a misconception on your part around what is intended in the light of
national planning policies as set out in the Framework.

See Attachments

National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
National Landlords Association:
Response to Warwick District Council's Local Plan Consultation
June 2012
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
Introduction
1. The National Landlords Association (NLA) exists to protect and promote the interests of private residential landlords.
2. With more than 20,000 individual landlords from around the United Kingdom and over 120 Local Authority Associates, we provide a comprehensive range of benefits and services to our members and strive to raise standards in the private-rented sector.
3. The NLA seeks a fair legislative and regulatory environment for the private-rented sector while aiming to ensure that landlords are aware of their statutory rights and responsibilities.
General Comments
4. The National Landlords Association (NLA) would like to thank Warwick District Council for including us in your consultation on your New Local Plan. This statement will only make comments on the provisions relating to "Policy PO6: Mixed Communities and Wide Choice of Housing" and the Direction made by under Article 4 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995.
5. An Article 4 Direction is undoubtedly a powerful tool for local authorities when used appropriately. However, it is a planning instrument rather than a tool to be applied liberally to combat societal problems. We are very concerned the "Council does not consider that there are any other options for planning for mixed communities and ensuring a wide range of housing to meet needs1" as we are unconvinced Warwick District Council has explored all of the appropriate avenues or provided sufficient justification that this Direction is suitable to meet the Council's objectives.
Background
6. The trends in future UK housing demographics and in the future growth of Higher Education, along with the current lack of available housing finance and supply of affordable housing, point to a greater need for shared housing in the UK.
7. The flexibility and affordability that HMOs and shared housing provide are critical for many who either cannot afford or do not want the liabilities involved in owning their own home. The Government-commissioned review of the private rented sector published in 2008 identified a clear growth in the number of young professionals renting instead of turning to home ownership. 20 to 29 year olds now account for 79% of all tenants2. While accurate statistics do not exist in this area, it is likely that the majority of this is shared housing.
1 New Local Plan, Preferred Options, May 2012, Paragraph 7.60, p.31
2 Julie Rugg and David Rhodes (2008), "The Private Rented Sector: Its contribution and potential", p.16.
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
8. In addition to young professionals, migrants and students make up an important part of the shared housing market across England in general and Warwick in particular. For obvious economic reasons and for flexibility, shared housing is an important source of housing for these groups. However, demand is not static. Recent research suggests that emigration out of the UK by economic migrants is increasing3 and current projections for student numbers point to the majority of future student growth over the next couple of decades being amongst post-graduates and part-time undergraduates4.
9. The overwhelming characteristic between these groups is that they are necessarily transient. These households are not intended to 'grow roots' or stay in the same home for a generation. HMOs and shared housing are popular amongst these socio-economic groups precisely because they provide a fluid housing option.
Policy Reasoning
10. It states at paragraph 5.44 of the Warwick District Council Strategic Housing Market Assessment that the main reason for creating this Article 4 Direction is that "when concentrated, [HMOs] may lead to particular problems such as short term tenancies, impact of lifestyle, less pride in the area, stress on parking, rubbish, increased crime and increased pressure on public services5". Like any other tenancy, rights and responsibilities lie both on the landlord and on the tenant. As with any other household, those in shared housing are required to behave in a socially acceptable way. Where reality does not match up to these expectations, both the landlord and the local authority have powers that can be used to tackle unacceptable behaviour.
11. Where a particular issue related to shared housing concentration has been identified, local authorities and enforcement agencies have extensive existing statutory powers to deal with such issues. The NLA argues that such powers should be explored and exhausted before an Article 4 Direction is implemented.
12. These powers require local residents to identify particular cases of unacceptable behaviour so that they can be dealt with. Landlords can neither continually monitor the behaviour of their tenants, nor do anything that may constitute harassment.
13. Frequently local residents develop the false impression that it is the house itself rather than the household that cause problems. They build up a 'general feeling' based on the observation of generally unrelated phenomena about particular localities. This is particularly prevalent in areas of dense shared housing, without looking to see whether particular problems have been dealt with.
3 Finch et al, 'Shall We Stay or Shall We Go? Re-migration trends among Britain's immigrants', IPPR, 2009
4 'The future size and shape of the higher education sector in the UK: demographic projections', Universities UK research
5 Paragraph 5.44, p.76; Available at: http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/784BFACF-C6A2-4562-94E9-F84C9219BDF8/0/WarwickSHMAReportFinal.pdf
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
14. This aggregation of issues, particularly grievances and 'general feelings' about a community can quickly make residents feel that a 'tipping point' has been reached. This problem is compounded where residents are not made aware of any specific action taken by a landlord or local authority against a particular household and so are ignorant of any work being undertaken to tackle issues important to them.
15. Where local authorities have come together with other community stakeholders, including local landlords, to tackle particular problems or issues, then there have been successes6. However these initiatives do require active engagement by local authorities and only solve the problems associated with negative perception if their outcomes are publicised.
Justification
16. It is the NLA's contention that the establishment of a small HMO (a change of use from Use Class C3: Dwelling House to Use Class C4: HMO) does not represent a substantial change of use in terms of the burden imposed on local infrastructure. The usage of local services is unlikely to be greatly different for a property shared by three unrelated renters than a family with teenage dependents, or made up of multiple generations. This position is supported by the recent Lancashire Planning Appeal Reference: 100-067-072 which stated:
"The continued use of an end of terrace house in Lancashire as a house in multiple occupation was allowed, an inspector reasoning that noise should be little different from that made by a typical family. The next-door neighbours referred to disturbance from televisions, people moving around the property and doors slamming, claiming that it extended well into the evening on occasion. However, the inspector reasoned that in properties in family use many bedrooms occupied by children, and particularly teenagers, contained televisions and audio equipment. Thus, whilst tenants might be inconsiderate on occasion, the same could be said of any type of occupier. Moreover, she found no evidence to support the generalised assertion that occupiers of an HMO were intrinsically more disposed to coming and going in the late evening or early morning hours than occupiers of other property types. She acknowledged that some tenants could work on a shift basis or during night time hours but given the limited number of occupants she did not consider that the comings and goings would be materially different from that associated with a typical household"7.
17. It is of great concern to the NLA that there does appear to be any documentary evidence provided by Warwick District Council of the impact or problems associated with HMOs to support the Article 4 Direction. We therefore do not believe there has been sufficient evidence advanced in justification
6 ECOTECH (2008), "Evidence Gathering - Houses in Multiple Occupation and possible planning responses", CLG. Although the Government's ECOTECH research focuses on student and migrant sections of the population, it does identify a number of effective local level initiatives which show stakeholders coming together.
7 Planning Appeal Decision Ref: 100-067-072, A Roland (Inspector), 2010 http://www.compasssearch.co.uk/compass/faces/casebook2.jsp
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
for the policy. This lack of evidence is also reflected in the relevant sections of either the New Local Plan8 or the Strategic Housing Market Assessment9.
18. The NLA is therefore forced to conclude that it and other interested stakeholders are unable to provide informed comment or constructive feedback on the reasoning for the scheme; as no reasons appear to have been advanced by the District Council to support their plan of action.
Housing Benefit / Local Housing Allowance (LHA) Tenants
19. 2010's Comprehensive Spending Review changed the shared room rate age threshold for Local Housing Allowance from 25 to 35, meaning that single benefit recipients under this age have only been able to access shared housing since 1 January 2012. The Government have estimated that 88,000 extra rooms in HMOs are required and the Strategic Housing Market Assessment suggests this will directly affect 130 households in Warwick10.
20. The New Local Plan mentions on several of occasions the desire to create mixed communities. This Article 4 Direction will have the opposite effect. It is specifically aimed at reducing the future availability of good quality private accommodation in shared housing. It will, therefore, have a detrimental effect on the ability of vulnerable and low-income households to locate suitable shared accommodation; potentially increasing homelessness applications to the Council.
21. Further, as landlords choose to take students over those on benefits (for understandable business reasons), it will push single LHA tenants out of much of Leamington and create two communities; those who can afford to live in Leamington and the rest who cannot.
Students
22. Warwick University has 23,420 students11, many of whom live in the Warwick District Council area and seek accommodation through the private rented sector. The university does not have enough accommodation to house all of their undergraduates, let along their postgraduates. Therefore, the provision of privately rented properties being available for students is essential.
23. The new planning policy is specifically designed to act as a barrier to the provision of good quality shared accommodation for the students in the preferred areas. This will have three effects. Firstly, it will reduce the volume of available property for this important local demographic; potentially pushing students towards those criminal landlords who pay little regard to regulation and will be prepared to exploit a vulnerable market associated with the university. Secondly, it will increase rent
8 Mixed Communities and Wide Choice of Housing, Policy PO6, Paragraph's 7.53 - 7.60
9 Houses in Multiple Occupation, paragraphs 5.42 - 5.45, ps. 75 - 76; Available at: http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/784BFACF-C6A2-4562-94E9-F84C9219BDF8/0/WarwickSHMAReportFinal.pdf
10 Ibid, paragraph 7.62, p.109
11 http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/about/profile/people
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
levels as supply is constrained; making it difficult for students to locate good quality, affordable private rented accommodation. Thirdly, as supply fails to meet demand, it will force students to look for property in different localities - such as closer to the university campus. This will transplant the supply side problems of low availability elsewhere which will reduce the quantity of shared housing accessible by low income households in those areas.
Businesses and the Local Economy
24. Students wish to live near their friends. If students find it difficult to locate suitable properties, they may move en masse to other areas. Such an eventuality will take significant amounts of money away from the local economy; not merely in terms of rental income but also for local businesses. This policy will therefore have a negative effect on local businesses that cater to the student's needs and desires. If students move away from Leamington and chose to live in Coventry, it is highly likely many local businesses will fail.
House Prices
25. Landlords are willing to pay a premium for suitable properties in desired locations. This policy will make the Article 4 Direction designated area undesirable and landlords will choose other areas to invest in property. The result is the 'landlord premium' will be removed and house prices in the area will fall. We have already seen this happen in areas of the country that have implemented Article 4 Directions and have anecdotal evidence from the North East which suggests house prices can be reduced by as much as £50,000.
First-Time Buyers
26. The Warwick Housing Demand Study states that "with the average [house] price still being around eight times income, the data does suggest that many households are likely to have difficulty in accessing the owner-occupied market12". This will require many people to rent privately whilst saving for deposits on houses and a significant proportion of these households will reside in shared accommodation. When supply of such accommodation is restricted (as is being suggested by this policy) and demand increases, rents rise. When people have to spend more on their rented accommodation, they can save less which in turn increases the length of time they remain in rented accommodation before they can build up a deposit large enough to access the owner-occupied market. Therefore, this Article 4 Direction is likely to make it more difficult for people to become owner-occupiers.
12 Paragraph 6.8, p.81
National Landlords Association, 22 - 26 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TJ
Locational Policy to Determine Planning Applications
27. Paragraph 7.59 states that "[t]he Local plan will, therefore, need to include a locational policy to determine planning applications for shared houses as well as other types of HMOs". It is not clear whether it is being proposed this will be undertaken through a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). Paragraph 6.1 of Planning Policy Statement 12 (PPS 12) states that "SPDs should not be prepared with the aim of avoiding the need for the examination of policy which should be examined13". We believe this policy is too important for the continued development of Warwick's housing mix for it to be introduced by way of a Supplementary Planning Document, as is potentially being proposed here. Whilst SPDs carry less weight and are a 'material consideration' for the purposes of development control, it is extremely difficult for an individual appellant to challenge a high level policy such as this if the details were to be incorporated in an SPD. Without a proposed locational policy, the New Local Plan could not work and therefore, it would be highly inappropriate to implement this policy through an SPD; effectively avoiding the proper independent scrutiny available via the Development Plan Document (DPD) process.
28. Further, we have seen several local authorities who have adopted Article 4 Directions decide that planning permission will be denied when a 'Tipping Point' has been reached (where a community becomes unbalanced if the concentration of HMO exceeds 10% within 100m). This is an assertion by the National HMO Lobby14 and should not be used as the basis for planning policy. Such important decisions must be based on substantive, objective empirical evidence of local problems. As such, we hope that if Warwick District Council does choose to go forward with implementation based on percentages they will undertake a robust evidential analysis and come to conclusions built on local needs rather than merely adopting the National HMO Lobby's 'Tipping Point'.
Conclusion
29. It is the NLA's contention that Warwick District Council has failed in its duty to provide satisfactory justification for its proposed actions.
30. We do not believe Warwick District Council has provided sufficient evidence to create "a particularly strong justification for the withdrawal of permitted development rights" as is required by Department of Communities and Local Government Guidance15 and would suggest the entire Policy PO6 be reviewed and re-drafted with robust evidential justification.
31. As such, at this stage, we would argue this plan cannot be legitimately implemented.
13 Planning Policy Statement 12: Creating strong safe and prosperous communities through Local Spatial Planning, 2008
14 National HMO Lobby, Balanced Communities and Studentification; Problems and Solutions, 2008
15 Department of Communities and Local Government Replacement Appendix D to Department of the Environment Circular 9/95: General Development Consolidation Order (978 0117531024), November 2010

As scanned