The house in Chesterton Gardens has held an HMO licence since April 3, 2014, but Worcester City Council has refused an application seeking formal confirmation that its existing use as a five-bedroom HMO is lawful.
The application sought a lawful development certificate, which would have established the property’s planning status as an HMO.
The case attracted an objection from a nearby resident, who raised concerns about parking pressures and road safety.
They argued that use of the property as a five-bedroom HMO was likely to increase the number of vehicles in an area that was not designed to accommodate them.
COUNCIL: Planners decided there wasn’t enough evidence to show the continued use of the property as a HMO (Image: Phil Wilkinson-Jones/LDRS)
Their submission stated: “There is insufficient parking provision for this type of development.
“The property itself only offers a driveway suitable for one vehicle, which is inadequate for a multi-occupancy household.”
The resident said vehicles were already being parked on pavements and in turning areas, causing difficulties for residents and creating potential access problems.
Concerns were also raised about emergency vehicles reaching properties on the road, which is designated for access only.
The resident added: “Increased on-street parking could obstruct access for emergency services, making it extremely difficult for them to reach properties along the street when needed.”
However, council officers refused the application because they found insufficient evidence to prove the property’s use as a lawful HMO under planning legislation.
According to a council report, while the house has been licensed as an HMO since April 2014, tenancy agreements and supporting documents did not demonstrate continuous occupation by three or more unrelated people before a key planning policy came into force or consistently afterwards.
The report said the HMO licence showed the property was intended to operate as shared accommodation but did not by itself prove lawful planning use.
Officers stressed that HMO licensing and planning permission are “separate legislative controls” and that compliance with one does not automatically mean compliance with the other.
As a result, the property remains without formal planning recognition as an HMO despite its long-standing licensing history.
