PLANS to turn a former beauty salon into a house of multiple occupation (HMO) have been refused as this would offer "substandard living conditions" for future occupiers.

St Helens Council refused the proposals for the change of use of Ambiance Tanning Beauty and Hair Salon on Market Street, Earlestown, sent by applicant Paul Soni.

Previous plans for an HMO at the site were submitted last year but later withdrawn.

The new application said the HMO would be created on the ground floor and plans would include some building changes to replace the existing beauty salon.

A heritage statement in the plans said: "Whilst the extent to which the shopfront contributes to character and appearance is considered debatable, given the extent of alteration and development which has already taken place – the proposed development is able to accommodate the retention of the existing shopfront.

"The advice previous provided to the council concludes with the observation that harm would be mitigated by the retention of the shopfront".

However, planning officer Alex Ball said in a report: "The proposal would provide a poor living environment for the occupiers of the HMO due to poor outlook and limited natural light".

READ > Plans for flats in St Helens town centre submitted

It was added: "The change of use to a HMO would deliver an alternative form of housing in a sustainable location, however, the internal layout and quantum of development would be poor quality and would result in an unacceptable living environment for the occupiers which would therefore be contrary to policies LPA02 and LPC01 of the St Helens Local Plan".

Mr Ball said: "Whilst each bedsit would have a window, the living environment would still be poor resulting in limited natural light, outlook, and loss of privacy.

"The applicant states that there are no changes to the front elevation, however, no existing and proposed elevations have been provided.

"Therefore the ground floor bedroom on the front of the building would be served by a front door opening straight into the bedsit and a large shop front display window which could result in a loss of privacy if not adequately screened".

It was noted the proposed development "is acceptable in terms of design and appearance given that the physical alterations to accommodate the change of use would be internal" but permission was refused.

A decision notice stated: "The development would result in a poor form of residential accommodation which would be cramped and overdeveloped, with poor outlook and limited natural light and insufficient privacy for future occupants.

"The proposal would result in substandard living conditions for future occupiers."

It added: "The proposal would prejudice Earlestown town centre.

"Insufficient information has been submitted in relation to the proposed development to able to justify the loss of the commercial unit on the ground floor".