PLANS for an HMO in Treherbert have been described as “slum housing” by a local councillor.
The plan for a four-person house in multiple occupation in Bute Street were opposed by Rhondda Cynon Taf (RCT) on Thursday, March 6, against officer recommendations.
The reasons for refusal were parking concerns, the unsustainable location, potential impact on facilities in the area, waste management concerns, the sub-standard accommodation, the size of the rooms, and disruption and noise nuisance.
It’ll come back to a future planning committee for the strengths and weaknesses of making this decision to be considered.
The planning report said that no external changes were proposed and the internal layout would be kept.
Local councillors Scott Emanuel and Will Jones had requested the application be called in for consideration by the planning committee.
One letter was received by the council raising concerns about the potential for anti-social behaviour from future occupants given that such issues have been experienced with nearby flats.
Cllr Emanuel said: “These are our family homes and I object to absent landlords purchasing our family homes to turn them into a vehicle for them to make money, something I object to quite greatly.”
He said the location, in his opinion, is “completely unsustainable”.
Cllr Emanuel said he believed that if it was approved it would lead to more applications of this nature leading to the “overconcentration and overcrowding” of houses in Treherbert which he said would overwhelm already stretched local services.
He said the kitchen is the “bare minimum” of seven square metres and asked how they could say that is acceptable in 2025 for five adults.
He said: “This is slum housing and as this is in my ward I’ll quite happy go on the record and say we will not accept slum housing in Treherbert and I am absolutely dead against this.”
In recommending approval officers said: “The proposed conversion and change of use to a house in multiple occupation would not be considered to have a detrimental impact on the character of the site or highway safety and would not result in an unacceptable intensification of use.
“The property would retain its residential use, in common with the majority of the surrounding development, benefits from being sustainably located and would be acceptable in terms of the amenity of future residents.”
They said it is located within the settlement boundary and the principle of residential development would therefore be acceptable and it would result in the beneficial reuse of a vacant property, provide affordable housing to meet local need and would neither create an unacceptable amenity impact to existing residents or harm highway safety.
