Consultation on proposals to require landlords within specified areas of the borough to obtain a licence to rent has opened.
There are 29 specified areas proposed for the borough, including The Ladder and The Gardens. I would recommend looking at the maps in the consultation package. A fair few roads on The Ladder and in The Gardens are not included and some only partially so (for instance the north side of Mattison is in but the south side isn’t). As far as I can gather the proposals are based on the last census (which showed where HMOs were located) and crime statistics.
The consultation is open until March 2018 and there are public drop-ins about the proposals in each of the affected wards.
The Harringay ward map seems rather odd. whilst some Ladder roads are exvluded in their enitirety, the whole of Finsbury Park is included.
It’s based on the census super output areas. I imagine that’s why there are peculiar “holes” in the proposed areas and why the park is included. I suppose the most obvious observation on the proposals is that the gaps in the proposed areas would make implementation and enforcement very difficult
I agree. as far as the Ladder is concerned it would seem more sensible to include all of it or none of it.
In the census the ladder is divided into thirds. The top third and bottom third's population grew by 33% between 2002 and 2011 but the appropriately named middle didn't grow at all. If there's a noisy/problem HMO in the middle then we hear all about it.
As far as I can tell, the map doesn't even include the HMOs on my road! Plus they move around - houses are sold and converted (illegally I presume).
By the way, does anyone know what's happening at no 65 Umfreville? The builders told me 'renovations' but there are walls coming down throughout. Have checked and there's no planning application in.
It was auctioned in October - link to details here.
Key sentence " Offered vacant for repair/improvement with potential for conversion into flats (STPP). "
A same-layout house nearby had an loft conversion added a year or so ago. Given the number of skiploads of plaster and now loft timber already gone, if no. 65 isn't an HMO come the spring I'll be very surprised.
As for planning enforcement, the fact that the link to the Planning Enforcement guidance document on Haringey's planning pages is broken rather sums it up.
That's what they said to me too. They said it was not being sub-divided and was going to be a single house. There is already a room in the loft space. I attended one of the open viewings and took photos if you want to pop round for a nose! There were walls downstairs that anyone would have taken out. The room layout downstairs didn't work at all. And frankly some of the walls were falling down and would have needed to be taken out for that reason.
The gas supply was reworked recently, one meter not multiples -- perhaps not flats then.
But given the auctioned price plus the reworking costs, if it adds up to a profit-making investment as a single house versus an HMO I'd be surprised.
Scaffolding including overall roof covering now up, so a loft extension looks likely. Which, below a certain volume, is 'permitted development'. Only if it becomes an HMO does the owner have to interact with the council, I think.