A REFUSAL by planners to allow a York property to be converted into a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) has been hailed as a landmark decision, with implications across the city.

A City of York Council planning sub-committee unanimously rejected an application for an HMO in a residential property in Pinewood Hill, Badger Hill, under powers granted through an 'Article 4' direction which controls the growth of HMOs such as student lets.

The Badger Hill Residents Community Group said the decision went against a planning officer’s recommendation to approve conversion on the basis that the street density was under 10 per and the area density was also under 20 per.

The officer argued that this was sufficient grounds under Article 4 to approve the application.

But the group said Cllrs Mark Warters and Neil Barnes argued in support of residents' arguments that if conversion were approved, the 10 per cent street threshold would be breached, reaching 13.6 per cent.

"This case clarifies the point that the thresholds need to be maintained after conversion," said group chairman Harry Telfer.

"Being below 10 per cent before applications is a necessary but not sufficient condition to approve HMO conversions."

He said the committee also took other factors into consideration, including a loss of amenity, the disproportionate impact a HMO would have in a small cul-de-sac and the fact that seven HMOs in adjacent streets already bordered properties on Pinewood Hill, which was a high concentration in a small area.

He said: "“Councillors on the planning committee unanimously made a landmark decision by setting the HMO limit firmly at a 10 per cent street level in order to maintain community balance.

"HMO planning applications which would cause this level to be exceeded should not be approved in future.”

A council spokeswoman said that the authority's supplementary planning document on HMOs was a material consideration when making planning decisions and in refusing this application, the sub-committee had interpreted the policy differently to the planning officer.

"We will be looking at the wording of the policy to ensure a consistent approach is taken to the interpretation of the threshold levels," she added.