Controversial HMO which could 'jeopardise' North End's community could soon be approved

Applecore PDM Ltd, which manages shared homes across Hampshire, including more than 200 in Portsmouth, submitted its planning application for the Oriel Road scheme in September.

On Monday an appeal was launched against the city council by the firm due to the time it had taken to consider the application which proposes the conversion of the building into a six-bed HMO by building a rear extension.

But the scheme has attracted significant opposition from people living in Oriel Road and the surrounding streets.

A petition signed more than 100 times has been submitted to the council, warning that there is 'a distinct shortage of family homes' in the city and urging permission to be refused when the application is considered by its planning committee on Wednesday.

'The SPD [supplementary planning document] specifically acknowledges this and effectively prohibits any more of our style of houses being converted to flats,' it said.

'Local single occupant needs are already met by existing - nearly 4,000 - HMOs on the register and locally by those in London Road, Gladys Avenue and the extensive ongoing conversion of former retail and commercial properties.

'The community is concerned about the shift in both the placement and scale (overdeveloped, mini, cramped self-catering hotels) of these developments.'

Oriel Road resident Daniel Hussey said there was 'the potential' for it to lead to anti-social behaviour, would strain the sewage system and exacerbate parking difficulties.

'Properties such as these are very much needed for families and are being taken away from the family housing stock,' he said. 'As this is very much a family-orientated road, I feel this is important as the essence of our community is in jeopardy.'

Despite the significant opposition, a report by council planning officers recommends the conversion be approved.

'Having regard to the existing lawful use of the property as a self-contained dwellinghouse, it is considered the use of the property would not have a significantly greater impact on local services than the existing use which could be occupied by a similar number of occupants,' it says.