Special new powers will now allow the city council to rein in the spread of student housing in residential areas.

Laws imposing curbs on the conversion of family homes into Houses of Multiple Occupancy(HMOs) were finally enacted tonight.

So-called Article 4 Directions will leave potential landlords needing planning permission for such conversions.

Canterbury's full council voted the new laws in after an earlier committee had unexpectedly put them on hold earlier this year.

The earlier decision to shelve the plans had been formally challenged by a breakaway group of councillors.

Terry Westgate was among 16 councillors who had made the successful challenge.

He said previously: “Article 4 is important because it allows us to have some control in trying to maintain sustainable communities.

"You need a balance of long-term residents as well as short-term residents in a community. If the balance favours landlord-owned lettings with very few permanent residents you can get problems.

“Student tenants don’t always see the problems being caused in the longer-term to a community.

“Everyone wants to live in a decent area and the longer-term residents have a greater investment in that.”

"There are areas in Canterbury where the number of long-term residents is so small they can no longer function as a balanced community..." - residents' group chairman Richard Norman

Hundreds of city centre properties have been transformed into student digs with developers cashing in on the booming rental market.

Opponents claim an unrestricted market has led to family communities being torn apart and residential quarters such as the Hales Place Estate being turned into “student ghettos”.

Had the city council imposed an Article 4 direction, the authority would have had the discretion to refuse planning permission in areas where HMO density exceeded 10% of overall property stock.

Richard Norman, chairman of the St Michael’s Road Area Resident Association, said in August: “There are areas in Canterbury where the number of long-term residents is so small they can no longer function as a balanced community.

“There should be enough long-term residents to balance out short-term tenants so that together they can look after the community and ensure some continuity.

“The case for Article 4 has been made constantly in the last five years to create balanced communities which are viable.”

Documents lodged with the council reveal that the challengers claimed the policy and resources committee had originally failed properly look at evidence submitted in support of imposing Article 4.

They state the council “failed to consider the implications of not confirming the Article 4
Directive on local communities in the light of evidence
offered in the report and by the officer”.

They also claim that the authority “failed to adequately
consider the strategic importance of a balanced community being an objective of an Article 4 Directive”.