Council planners have blocked proposals to turn an empty building into a house in multiple occupation (HMO) – due to concerns over privacy and parking.

The plans would have seen the two-storey building in Ruxley Road, Bucknall, which has been vacant for seven years, converted into a seven-bedroom HMO.

But planning officers at Stoke-on-Trent City Council have refused the change-of-use application saying that privacy levels would be 'unacceptably low' due to the two ground floor bedrooms being next to the street, and that there be no outdoor amenity space for occupants.

The officers also noted the lack of off-street parking, and said the applicant had failed to demonstrate the scheme would not lead to on-street parking problems in the area.

According to the applicant, the building was previously used for storage and as a walk-in freezer, but has been vacant since 2018.

The application suggests the site is an 'extremely sustainable location' due to the proximity of shops and other services in Werrington Road.

It says that, with careful management, the building could provide 'safe, secure and comfortable accommodation'.

Under the proposals there would be two bedrooms and a shared kitchen/dining room on the ground floor, with five more bedrooms on the first floor. All the bedrooms would have en suite facilities. There would also be a storage area for bins and bikes.

Five residents submitted objections to the plans, raising concerns over issues such as parking, noise and disturbance, and the lack of outdoor space.

The planning officers' report states: "The application site has no off-street parking provision and the application has failed to demonstrate that the proposed use as a house in multiple occupation for a maximum of seven residential occupiers would not result in an increase in on-street parking within the nearby area to the detriment of highway safety.

"The proposed layout fails to demonstrate that the development would provide an acceptable level of amenity for all residential occupiers. Privacy levels for a number of the bedrooms would be unacceptably low due to street proximity whilst the lack of suitable and genuine outside amenity space represents a further substantial weight against the scheme."