- Decision
- allowed, 22 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: E Worley
- Authority
- Portsmouth (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6004676
- Application reference
- 25/00705/FUL
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Change of use of part ground floor (Class E) and upper floor flat to a 9-bed sui generis HMO, with mansard roof and single-storey rear extension; front Class E unit retained
- Site context
- inside settlement
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- No Framework version cited
- Determinative policies
- s38(6)
- Development plan policies
- Portsmouth Plan 2012 PCS13, PCS17, PCS18, PCS23, HMO SPD 2019, Parking Standards SPD 2014
- Main issues
- local centre; living conditions; parking; character; habitats sites
Summary
A 9-bed HMO with a mansard roof above a retained shop unit in the Havant Road local centre, Portsmouth. Allowed. The local-centre role was kept, the council's noise and parking concerns were unevidenced (there was no kerbside survey), the mansard suited the varied roofscape, and Solent SPA mitigation had been paid. The whole decision is plan-led and the letter never cites the Framework.
What made the difference
The council produced no evidence on disturbance, parking stress or the viability of the smaller commercial unit. The inspector also departed from a recent refusal at No. 246 in the same parade (appeal 6001588), finding that the retained frontage unit kept the local centre working (DL ¶8).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCS18 (Portsmouth Plan) | accord | front Class E unit retained so local-centre role supported; no evidence smaller unit unlettable; differs from inspector on 246 Havant Road (appeal 6001588) (DL 6-9) | |
| PCS23 (Portsmouth Plan) | accord | no material noise/disturbance increase over family occupation of flat; mansard acceptable in eclectic roofscape; 2-space parking shortfall not shown to cause parking stress without a kerbside survey (DL 10-25) | |
| N6 | neutral | Solent SPA recreation and nutrient contributions paid via s111 undertaking; AA passed (DL 26-30); code mapped by harvester |
Key facts
- HMO concentration within 50m remains below 10% SPD threshold; no sandwiching (DL 31-32)
- No kerbside parking survey by the council (DL 23)
- Letter never refers to the National Planning Policy Framework
- Costs application made; separate decision
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.