Pontefract HMO plan refused after hundreds of objections
Plans to convert former legal offices in Pontefract into a 23-bed house in multiple occupancy were refused following hundreds of objections.
The application refers to Newgate House, on Newgate, just outside of the town centre.
It is described as a vacant, neoclassical, two-storey detached building, which was built around 1930 as a labour exchange and most recently used as offices for a legal firm.
A heritage statement provided on behalf of the applicant said: “We submit that there is a general shortage of accomodation in the area.
"We respectfully submit that our proposal will have no impact on the conservation area and will only benefit the local community.
"We note that since its recent loss of occupier’s incidences of attempted break-ins and congregated local youths in the rear car park have occurred.
“The occupation of the building will obviously improve the locality and help preserve the structure.”
Wakefield Council received a total of 413 objections to the application.
One said: “There is likely to be an increase in the number of cars if 23 new occupants are living there.
"There is little parking space by Newgate house. In addition the area can already be very congested, particularly at school opening and closing times at St Joseph's School. This would exacerbate the situation.”
Another said: “There will also be a fear of crime – we already suffer car damage and theft in the area on a regular basis so much so people have taken to leaving their cars unlocked to avoid having to claim for the damage – and many residents are elderly or single women who would be very vulnerable and fear for their safety.
"Also the parents of the primary school children will be fearful for the safety of their children.”
Four comments in support of the application were sent to the council.
One said: “I believe this would open opportunities for young people/couples to have their own affordable living space, saving green belt from being disturbed and. saving 23 flats being built.”
A case officer report concluded: “Whilst the principle of development is considered acceptable, for the reasons outlined above the development is considered to be harmful to the amenity of existing and future occupiers and would result in harm to highway safety, contrary to policies.”