South Shields HMO plan in South Eldon Street refused

South Tyneside Council’s Planning Committee, at a meeting this week, voted unanimously to refuse an application for 410-412 South Eldon Street in the town’s Simonside and Rekendyke ward.

Plans from applicant Maytree Property Group were seeking permission for the change of use of a “C3 dwelling to a six-person HMO.”

Proposals for the four-bedroom property included six en-suite bedrooms, a communal kitchen / dining room and a cycle store in a rear yard.

The application falls against a backdrop of South Tyneside Council’s recent decision last year (2025) to launch an “immediate” borough-wide Article 4 Direction removing permitted development rights for small HMOs, meaning that planning permission is now needed for all HMOs across the borough.

The planning application from developers for 410-412 South Eldon Street noted work had started on the property in late-November, 2025, but that the “work or change of use has not been completed.”

A planning statement submitted with the HMO application noted “all bedrooms will be provided with an en-suite, ensuring a high standard of privacy and amenity for occupants” and that the internal layout “provides an appropriate standard of accommodation, exceeding the minimum space and daylight requirements”.

The planning statement added the site is “sustainably located” near public transport links and would “make an efficient use of [an] existing residential property, providing additional, high-quality accommodation that supports local housing needs without adversely impacting the character of the area or the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.”

During a council consultation exercise on the plan there were 17 representations in objection raising a range of concerns, including parking pressures, the “overconcentration” of HMOs in the area, impacts on community cohesion, noise and disturbance, antisocial behaviour, the plans setting a “precedent” for future HMO development in the street and more.

Councillor Kenneth Wood, Simonside and Rekendyke ward member, also objected to the development raising concerns about the number of existing HMOs in the area, the lack of off-street parking, impacts on emergency access, noise and antisocial behaviour, and asked for the Planning Committee to determine the application.

Council documents also confirmed there were two petitions objecting to the HMO plan with a combined total of 71 signatures.

The plans were formally presented for decision at a meeting of the decision-making panel on March 9, 2026, at South Shields Town Hall.

Council planning officers, in a report published ahead of the meeting, had recommended the plans for approval.

Council planners said the “greatest weight in deciding this application needs to be given to the NPPF [national planning policy framework] as opposed to local planning policy, given that the application includes housing development and the council’s housing land supply/delivery deficiencies”.

It was noted that the proposal would “provide social and economic gains by contributing to reducing the current shortfall in terms of housing supply” and that “no significant harm or adverse impacts have been identified in respect of visual and residential amenity, biodiversity, highway safety, or in respect of crime/antisocial behaviour/fear of crime and flood risk/drainage.”

During discussion of the planning application, concerns were raised by several members of the Planning Committee.

Councillor Lynne Proudlock said that “as a councillor for this ward, I genuinely believe that a well-run, well-managed HMO has a place in today’s society with the severe lack of affordable housing for people to rent”.

However, the councillor raised concerns about the lack of an on-site manager and existing parking pressures in the area, given the close proximity of a council Housing Plus scheme and associated activity around visitors and carers.

Cllr Proudlock added the HMO application should be refused on the “lack of availability of parking and also an overprovision of HMOs in the area leading to an imbalance in the community.”

Councillor Shirley Ford also raised concerns about the “cumulative impact” of HMOs in the area, parking issues “near a busy junction which regularly floods at the top of it” and impacts on the neighbours of the Housing Plus scheme.

Council planners said that there was no objection from the council’s highways department on parking and highway safety grounds.

In response to a question from councillor Paul Brenen on wider flooding and drainage issues in the area, council planners said because of the “scale and the nature of this [HMO] proposal”, the local flood authority were not consulted.

After being put to the vote, councillors agreed to refuse the HMO plans and cited several refusal reasons.

The proposal to refuse the HMO plan, from Cllr Proudlock, was made on the grounds of parking and highway safety, residential amenity impacts and the “overprovision of HMOs in the area.”

The applicant has the right to challenge the council’s refusal decision by lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State.

For more information on the plan, or to track its progress, visit South Tyneside Council’s planning portal website and search reference: 250776