An 8-bedroom house in the middle of the seaside town of Shanklin will become a house in multiple occupation (HMO) despite an outcry over the plans.
Mr Singh’s planning application to County Hall for a change of use of 23 Atherley Road in Shanklin has been approved by planners as a ‘positive contribution to meeting local housing needs’.
The 2-storey property currently has 2 kitchens, 2 lounges, 2 en-suites, 3 shower rooms and 1 bathroom.
Submitted plans show the HMO will have 8 bedrooms plus a communal bathroom, shower room, 2 lounge-kitchen areas and 2 residents’ storage spaces.
A total of 9 people objected to Mr Singh’s proposal, raising 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 flagged 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.”
Simon Pusey, of North Road, said:
“This is going to sound NIMBY, however that’s not my intention. Atherley Road is the first experience of Shanklin for many visitors on their way to the beach or accommodation.
“As the road stands as a first impression of our town, it is very poor. Adding more residential space on an already congested and poorly maintained road isn’t going to improve the situation for current residents, the proposed new residents and visitors to Shanklin.”
The council’s report explaining the decision said:
“Given the relatively small-scale of the use proposed, edge-of-centre location, and variety of uses and accommodation locally, it is considered the proposal is unlikely to have any significant impacts on the residential character of the locality.
“All bedrooms would be of a reasonable size and benefit from windows providing sources of daylight and outlook.
“The property also benefits from small front and rear gardens, with the rear garden providing some communal outdoor amenity space.
“There is no evidence that existing HMO uses are harming the area in terms of crime and disorder locally.
“It is considered future occupiers of the HMO would be less likely to own a car…the proposed use would be unlikely to have a severe impact on the highway network.”
Ha!
‘I’m not a nimby, but’….an 8 bedroomed house is an 8 bedroomed house, not matter which way it’s sliced. No residential space has been added.
Cue the pitchfork brigade….
I can guess the places won’t go to islanders or locals it’ll go to overseas workers coming over in droves , no wonder there is a housing shortage.
All those Council taxes, perfect for the
Councils pension pot.
What makes you think the residents of what will amount to a hostel will pay Council Tax, EiE?
As I’ve told you before, our council tax does not directly pay into the LGPS. The council is an employer. Both it and the employee pay contributions which attract tax relief, that is, money made from the investment, which is generally how all pension schemes work.
There’s a surprise, good old Mr Singh caring for the local community and the lack of housing for local residents, all along being supported by the local joke of a council. No doubt will be filled with ethnics from anywhere but the Island & guess what, nowhere near where Mr Singh or any of the councillors that voted it through live. You low life should be ashamed of yourself!! IOW Council, carry on destroying the islands culture & tourism industry, what is left of it.
Are you that much of a curtain twitcher you’d need to know the ethnicity of who lives next door in case it destroyed your ‘culture’? Rather suggests you don’t actually have any. Here’s some stats for your blinkered little head to absorb:
From the last census, just 1.2% of people living here identify as ‘ethnic’ of the over 8% born elsewhere than England. That means the other 6.8% are Irish, Scottish and Welsh. Also with different cultures.
Of the 92% English, MOST of them were not born here on the island either.
Live births on the island are roughly just 1500 a year, matched by roughly the same number of deaths. Our total population increase in the 10 years between the last two censuses has risen by just 2200, and increase of 1.6% and significantly less than the rest of the country which has a n increase of 7.5%.
In that same time period, the number of older persons rose by 4,600, which the younger generations fell by 5,100.
What this suggests is that the ‘tourism industry’ of which you are so fond consists of the elderly who then go home, pack their cases and move here. If a Mr Singh and his family move here, at least you can be sure it will contain working tax payers to help prop up the local economy and people to spend in the community. I’d pity them having to live next door to YOU though.
Just a point or two about your slightly patronising and dismissive comment about the elderly packing their cases and moving here, Sunshine. Do elderly newcomers not pay Council tax, VAT and other forms of purchase tax? Do they not employ local tradespeople and home visitors like cleaners,, hairdressers and pedicurists etc? And shall we compare the costs and problems caused by anti-social and criminal behaviour by young and old? Finally, what would be your reaction had anyone made the packing their cases reference about any ethnic group? Hmmm.
Those who are still living in their homes, yes. Those in care homes, no. But they themselves are not tradespeople, cleaners, hairdressers etc…they are what’s called economically inactive and their clocks are ticking. The point I was making was to someone insinuating that those ‘others’ who do come here to work should be discouraged; couple that with a falling birthrate and little chance of housing for the young in general (this scheme gives 8 people somewhere to live, unlikely to be pensioners) who will be the tradespeople for the pensioners, and who will help care for them in care homes in the future? OR be available to prop up a tourism sector?
I’m not attacking the elderly, I’m one myself, and an overner. I’m asking people though to stop being protectionist as THEY get older and realise that everyone needs somewhere to live, no matter who they are, and we all need each other’s skills to exist. It’s not rocket science.
Shanklin has a new crack house then, well done council, what a bunch of idiots. Get rid of Jordan an Co.
Considering they’ll all be private rented, I’d doubt crack-heads could afford them, or be able to prove employment to get a lease. They usually inhabit derelict properties.