A motion put to Ashford Borough Council on 15 October 2026 called for an Article 4 Direction covering all parts of the borough not already subject to one, which would require planning permission for conversions of homes into houses in multiple occupation for up to six people.

Ashford Borough Council considered a motion on 15 October 2026 that would extend planning controls over houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) across the borough, amid concerns about the growth in licensed HMOs and associated waste management problems.

What the motion proposed

The motion, proposed by Cllr Johnny Shilton, called on the council to make an immediately effective Article 4 Direction in all parts of the borough where no such direction already exists. The direction would remove permitted development rights under the General Permitted Development Order that currently allow a property to be converted to an HMO of up to six persons without requiring a full planning application.

The motion noted that there are currently 189 licensed HMOs in Ashford, with 40 of those in Victoria ward alone, and stated that there are believed to be many more unregulated properties. It also cited concerns about waste management, saying that management companies for HMOs have been reluctant to correctly segregate waste into recyclable, food and residual categories, resulting in an accumulation of waste and litter.

Existing Article 4 areas

Ashford Borough Council already has Article 4 Directions in place for the majority of Beaver ward, Aylesford and East Stour ward, and Bybrook ward, as well as some smaller areas. The motion sought to extend equivalent controls to the remainder of the borough.

The motion argued that, now that local members can no longer automatically call in planning applications, Article 4 Directions provide democratic accountability by bringing HMO applications before the Planning Committee. It stated that many applications would pass through unamended, but that the process would allow members to apply appropriate conditions following consultation with residents. The motion said this was not considered to add an unnecessary burden to officers.

Ashford Town Council motion also considered

A separate motion, proposed by Cllr Peter Feacey, called on the council to pause all implementation work relating to the establishment of an Ashford Town Council. The motion argued that the original Community Governance Review and its associated public consultation were conducted on the premise that Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) was proceeding and that Ashford Borough Council would be abolished in favour of a new unitary authority. Since the Government has paused LGR, the motion said this represented a material change in circumstances.

The motion also raised concerns about the potential for an additional precept on residents at a time of cost-of-living pressures, and noted that residents had raised questions about the validity of the original consultation, whether the council’s earlier decision remained sound, and whether continuing implementation work could expose the authority to legal challenge.

The motion asked the Selection and Constitutional Review Committee to reassess the validity of the Community Governance Review decision in light of changed circumstances, consider whether further public consultation is required, and report back to Full Council with findings and recommendations before any further action is taken.

The council had not published the minutes of the meeting at the time of writing, so the committee’s decision is not yet on the public record.

Sources

Top image: illustrative, computer-generated. Illustrative AI-generated image. This is not a photograph of any real street or property in Ashford.