Agenda item - Petitions for Council Debate

Petitions to be debated at Council.  Report of the Monitoring Officer (copies attached).

(a)  Family Homes Not HMOs.  Lead petitioner Mr. W. Gandey.

(b)  Save the Dyke Pub.  Lead petitioner Ms. L. Sigfrid.

(a)          Family Homes Not HMOs

31.1      The Mayor sated that where a petition secured 1,250 or more signatures it could be debated at the council meeting.  He had been made aware of two such petitions and would therefore take each in turn.  He also noted that there was a Notice of Motion listed at Item 39(b) on the agenda which related to HMOs and he was therefore inclined to take it along with the petition in one debate.  In addition there were two amendments to the recommendation contained in the covering report to the petition and an amendment to the notice of motion which would also be included before the matter was opened up for general debate.

31.2      The Mayor then invited Mr. Gandey as the lead petitioner to present the petition calling on the Council to prohibit the issuing of any future HMO certificates in the Bevendean/Moulsecoomb Ward.

31.3      Mr. Gandey thanked the Mayor and stated that the petition had reached 1,285 signatures which demonstrated the strength of feeling in the area and the need for something to be done to support families who felt their communities were being broken up.

31.4      The Mayor thanked Mr. Gandey and called on Councillor Carol Theobald to move the amendment on behalf of the Conservative Group.

31.5      Councillor C. Theobald stated that the matter should be considered by the Economic Development& Culture Committee rather than the Housing & New Homes Committee as it related to planning policy.  She also stated that it was felt that the extension of the area of restriction from 50 metres to 150 metres would be helpful for when future applications to convert homes into HMOs were to be made, and hoped the committee would agree to review the City Plan Part One.

31.6      Councillor Miller formally seconded the amendment and stated that there was a need to do something to address the proliferation of HMOs in certain areas of the city.

31.7      Councillor Meadows moved an amendment on behalf of the Labour & Co-operative Group, calling on the committee to consider extending the current Article 4 Direction area and to better align the planning and licensing functions in relation to HMOs.  She also stated that she wished to amend the wording of the amendment to replace the word ‘rented’ with that of ‘HMO’ in the final line of 2.2.

31.8      Councillor Moonan formally seconded the amendment and stated that it was important to enable planning and licensing functions to work efficiently in relation to their enforcement roles.

31.9      Councillor Hill moved the Notice of Motion on behalf of the Labour & Co-operative Group, concerning HMO landlord licensing and business rates.

31.10Councillor Cattell formally seconded the motion.

31.11Councillor Gibson moved an amendment to the motion on behalf of the Green Group.

31.12Councillor Druitt formally seconded the amendment.

31.13   Councillor Robins responded to the petition and stated that challenges around the availability of family homes in the city was one of the key themes that emerged in consultation on the Housing Strategy along with the wider impact of student housing resulting from the growth of the universities.  He also offered to send Mr. Gandey a full response on the matter and stated that officers would be working with the universities to address ongoing concerns about the number of HMOs and ways to manage existing and future student accommodation.

31.14   The Mayor then opened the matter up for debate and the following Members expressed their views, Councillors Page, Inkpin-Leissner, Wares, Wealls, Marsh, Yates, Hamilton and Druitt.

31.15   In response to the debate Councillor Robins stated that he felt the proposed amendments could be taken forward for consideration at the Economic Development & Culture Committee.

31.16   In response to the debate Councillor Hill stated that she was happy to accept the Green Group’s amendment to the notice of motion and hoped that it would be fully supported.

31.17   The Mayor noted that both amendments to the petition report’s recommendation were supported by Members and therefore put the amended recommendations to the vote which were carried.

31.18   The Mayor noted that the amendment to the notice of motion had been accepted and put the following motion as amended to the vote,

“This Council resolves:

To request that the Chief Executive writes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, the Chair and Vice-Chairs of the Local Government Association and local MPs to request that councils should be given powers to bring landlords of HMOs, party houses and Air BnB properties within the scope of business rates in the same way as for example hotels and guest houses are within the scope of business rates.”

31.19   The Mayor confirmed that the motion which was carried by 31 votes to 19, with 1 abstention as detailed below:

31.20   RESOLVED:

(1)       That the petition be noted and referred to the Economic Development & Culture Committee for consideration at its meeting on 17^th November 2016;

(2)       That the Committee be requested to consider that the City Plan Part One be reviewed to increase the area of restriction from 50 metres to 150 metres where applications for conversion to HMOs will be rejected if more than 5% of current dwellings are already HMOs;

(3)       That the Committee be requested as a priority to consider the extension of the current Article 4 Direction area and options to further extend the licensing of private rented housing; and

(4)       That the Committee consider whether to better align the Planning and Licensing functions in relation to HMOs and learn from other university towns as to more effective management of student HMOs and to request a report on this matter to its next meeting.

(b)          SAVE THE DYKE PUB

31.21   The Mayor sated that where a petition secured 1,250 or more signatures it could be debated at the council meeting, and invited Ms. Sigfrid as the lead petitioner to present the petition calling on the Council to recognise the Dyke pub as an asset of community value.

31.22   Ms. Redfern and Mr. Fardell thanked the Mayor and stated that they would be presenting the petition on behalf of the petitioners and noted that it had reached 1,413 signatures.  Ms. Redfern stated that the local community had submitted an application for the pub to be listed as an asset of community value, in order to give them an opportunity to work with interested parties to have the pub restored to its original use.  As things stood the current owners had simply closed the pub and reopened it as a furniture shop with no consultation or warning.

31.23   The Mayor thanked Ms. Redfern and called on Councillor Cattell to respond to the petition.

31.24     Councillor Cattell stated that the change of use was allowed due to the Government’s change to permitted development rights last year.  She had been advised by officers that the owner of the Dyke Pub followed the correct procedure in carrying out the change of use by writing to the local planning authority, 56 days before, to seek advice as to whether the pub had been nominated as an ACV and as no such nomination was received for the public house before or during the 56 day period, the developer was permitted to change the use of the pub to a shop.

31.25     She noted that the council had since received the community’s nomination of the former pub as an ACV – and the petition in support of reinstatement of the pub would be noted when considering the nomination. In terms of looking forward the council recognised that pubs are often an important asset to local communities and officers were currently looking into the best approach to tackle the unwanted loss of pubs in the future. 

31.26   The Mayor then opened the matter up for debate and the following Members expressed their views, Councillors Morris, Littman and G. Theobald.

31.27   In response to the debate Councillor Cattell stated that she had recently visited another authority to see how they were attempting to address the use of permitted rights so that similar issues could be prevented.

31.28   The Mayor then put the recommendation to refer the petition to the Policy, Resources & Growth Committee to vote which was agreed.

31.29   RESOLVED: That the petition be noted and referred to the Policy, Resources & Growth Committee for consideration at its meeting on 8^th December 2016.