A bid to turn a large property in Shanklin into a house of multiple occupancy (HMO) has attracted a wave of criticism.
Mr Singh’s planning application for a change of use of 23 Atherley Road encountered resistance from both residents and those further afield during a now-closed council consultation.
The current building is a 2-storey house with 8 bedrooms, 2 kitchens, 2 lounges, 2 ensuites, 3 shower rooms and a bathroom.
If converted, it would have 8 bedrooms plus a communal bathroom, shower room, lounge-kitchen room and 2 residents’ storage areas.
A total of 9 individuals objecting to the plans flagged concerns relating to the prevalence of and need for HMOs in the area, property maintenance, anti-social behaviour and security, effects on the local tourism industry, community and elderly people and the standard of proposed accommodation.
They also raised issues such as family housing needs, impacts on property values and the area’s character, parking availability, road congestion and maintenance, noise pollution, overstretched public services and local infrastructure capacity.
Atherley Road resident Emma Godsell said:
“This application to increase resident numbers in the property without providing any parking facilities will only exacerbate existing problems.
Article continues below this advertisement “I am also concerned that this will provide more transient accommodation in a road already saturated with HMOs, when the area is lacking available properties for families or long-term residents.”
Karen Penn, who lives in Ventnor, said:
“The proposed plans show poor-quality accommodation: multiple small bedrooms, one inadequate shared kitchen, one and a half bathrooms and very limited lounge space attached to the kitchen.”
Council officer Michael Thorne said County Hall’s environmental health service had no objections to the proposal.
A decision is due to be made on the application on 31st March.
Parking is not a problem, there is a car park
behind Mr T’s, just purchase a permit
Lol
Yes, families do need housing, but so do single people, and if Emma thinks any of them have cars she’s deluded. No-one needing a bedsit is affluent enough to drive.
This lot:
‘They also raised issues such as family housing needs, impacts on property values and the area’s character, parking availability, road congestion and maintenance, noise pollution, overstretched public services and local infrastructure capacity.’
Property values- oh diddums, the neighbours with 3-4 bed villas might not make as much disgusting profit they thought they might when high house prices force the young out of the market and they smile smugly?
Parking- two families in that property more likely to have two cars, ditto argument for road congestion.
Noise pollution- Evidence?
Overstretched public services- Two families of 4 each is the same as 8 individuals?
Ditto infrastructure concerns.
If people are going to complain, they really need to think first because knee-jerk nimbyism only highlights their privilege and it’s not a good look.
They will lower the tone of the area though. Yes there is an argument that HMO’s need to exist, but they should be put on Pan Estate or somewhere like that where they will feel more at home.
Lower the tone?? I hope you’re not implying that single people with limited income are somehow inferior to you, or to people occupying property in Atherley Road? That they should all be herded into a ghetto as punishment maybe for being single and poor? That they should know their place, that it doesn’t include proximity to the socially superior? Why, that’s exactly the attitude people had before the slum clearances started in the 1930s. And the people in the well off streets wrinkled their noses and squeaked ‘how awful! THOSE types of people will be living amongst US!!’
Perhaps if you’re worried about them ‘feeling more at home’ you could start by checking your privilege and sense of entitlement and making any neighbours welcome.
Are you serious? What a bigot