To consider motions received in accordance with Meeting Procedure Rule 17 as follows:-
Motion 1
To be proposed by Cllr Jim Hakewill and seconded by Cllr Sarah Tubbs:-
‘This Council directs the Portfolio Holder for Rural Communities & Localism, Cllr David Howes, to carry out whatever steps are necessary to have the “Funding Bid for the proposed development of a traveller’s stopping site”, proposed to be located at Rothwell Green Space, north of Junction 3 of the A14 and south of Harrington Road, Rothwell, withdrawn immediately.
Further, that all feedback and background work on this proposal be retained, fed into the Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocations Policy and be considered during the proposed policy development.’
Motion 2
To be proposed by Cllr John McGhee and seconded by Cllr Zoe McGhee:-
‘This motion is asking members to consider changing when planning permission is required for small houses in multiple occupation (HMO).
As it currently stands, people can apply to change the use of a property to a small house in multiple occupation (with between three and six occupiers) under permitted development rights, while larger HMOs have to go through the full planning process.
By removing the permitted development rights, any applications for a HMO, of any size, would be governed by the same rules.
Under article 4 of the National Planning Policy Framework councils are able to increase the requirements for applications for planning permission to HMOs, this has to be based on robust evidence and apply to small areas only so. We recognise that there’s still a lot of work to do on this, but we are positive that by working together, we can improve the way HMOs are governed.
And as part of this motion we are asking officers to look into strengthening licensing requirements for the operation of HMOs, so they can be better monitored, and landlords held responsible for any negative impact on communities.
We ask the council to report back at the next full council with a plan on how to achieve this aim.’
Minutes:
The Chair informed Council that two motions had been received. These were detailed on the agenda paper.
Motion 1 - Traveller’s Stopping Site
“This Council directs the Portfolio Holder for Rural Communities & Localism, Cllr David Howes, to carry out whatever steps are necessary to have the “Funding Bid for the proposed development of a traveller’s stopping site,” proposed to be located at Rothwell Green Space, north of Junction 3 of the A14 and south of Harrington Road, Rothwell, withdrawn immediately.
Further, that all feedback and background work on this proposal be retained, fed into the Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocations Policy and be considered during the proposed policy development.”
Councillor Jim Hakewill MOVED the motion. Councillor Martin Griffiths SECONDED the motion. Councillor Hakewill expressed concern that the proposed course of action was not viable and did not meet the needs of local residents or travellers. Councillor Hakewill felt that there had been insufficient consultation. Councillor Griffiths felt that local resident’s views were not being fully considered and that the Council should consider delaying any decision.
Councillor Howes stressed that this was not a rushed proposal by the Council. The bid for Government funding had been fully costed and thought through. Councillor Howes stressed that the Government were seeking detailed proposals and would not consider substandard bids.
A recorded vote was requested.
Those voting FOR the motion: -
Councillors Addison, Anslow, Armour, Lyn Buckingham, Griffiths, Hakewill, Keane, McEwan, J McGhee, Z McGhee.
Those voting AGAINST the motion: -
Councillors Binley, Bone, D Brackenbury, W Brackenbury, S Brown, Bunday, Carter, Currall, Dearing, Ekins, Hallam, Harrington, H Harrison, Howell, Howes, Irwin, Jackson, B Jenney, Lawal, G Lawman, L Lawman, Marks, Maxwell, A Mercer, G Mercer, Pentland, Powell, Roberts, Rowley, Shacklock, Smithers, Smith-Haynes, Tebbutt, Tye, Ward, Waters, Watt, Weatherill, Wilkes.
Those who ABSTAINED: -
Councillor Henson.
The motion fell.
Guillotine Motion
It was MOVED by Councillor Jon Ekins and SECONDED by Councillor Helen Harrison, that the guillotine be extended until 5:30 pm. Full Council agreed this.
(Councillor D Howes and Councillor D Weatherill left the meeting at this point having earlier declared a personal interest).
Motion 2 - Houses in Multiple Occupation
“This motion is asking members to consider changing when planning permission is required for small houses in multiple occupation (HMO).
As it currently stands, people can apply to change the use of a property to a small house in multiple occupation (with between three and six occupiers) under permitted development rights, while larger HMOs have to go through the full planning process.
By removing the permitted development rights, any applications for a HMO, of any size, would be governed by the same rules.
Under article 4 of the National Planning Policy Framework councils are able to increase the requirements for applications for planning permission to HMOs, this has to be based on robust evidence and apply to small areas only so. We recognise that there’s still a lot of work to do on this, but we are positive that by working together, we can improve the way HMOs are governed.
And as part of this motion, we are asking officers to look into strengthening licensing requirements for the operation of HMOs, so they can be better monitored, and landlords held responsible for any negative impact on communities.
We ask the council to report back at the next full council with a plan on how to achieve this aim.”
Councillor John McGhee MOVED the motion. Councillor Zoe McGhee SECONDED the motion. Councillor John McGhee felt that there was a need to address the proliferation of HMOs, particularly when there were often a significant number in certain localities.
Councillor John McGhee gave examples in Corby where there were a number in a fairly small area, however this applied to other localities in North Northamptonshire. Councillor John McGhee felt that there was a need for the Council to make greater use of the planning and licensing provisions at its disposal, to ensure the concerns raised by local residents were addressed and associated problems mitigated.
Councillor David Brackenbury welcomed the motion, whilst recognising that HMOs were an important part in meeting local housing demand. Councillor Brackenbury recognised there was a need for the Council to review its approach to HMOs and as a consequence was suggesting amended text to the motion.
Councillor David Brackenbury MOVED an amendment to the substantive motion; Councillor Matt Binley SECONDED the amendment. The amendment read, replace all with: -
“NNC recognise the density of HMOs in certain areas in the Council area and wish to work with Officers and stakeholders to ensure the highest standards of licencing and governance of dwellings in this category. We wish to work in partnership with landlords, tenants, the Council and other stakeholders to utilise the whole suite of regulation and planning requirements, which could include Article 4 regulation in some circumstances, to ensure strong governance of HMOs for the benefit of all those living in such dwellings. The Council also recognises that HMOs play an important part in the housing mix and are a vital resource for many people.
We ask the council to report back at the next full council with a plan on how to achieve this aim.”
Both the mover and seconder of the original motion accepted the amendment. The amendment was approved by Council and became the substantive motion.
RESOLVED that: -
(i) The motion (as amended) be approved.