Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the new permitted development rights to help kick-start construction and speed-up development as part of the response to the coronavirus pandemic. 

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the new permitted development rights (PD).  The Government has recently announced a number of new permitted development rights to help kink-start construction and speed-up development, as part of the response to the coronavirus pandemic. This report explored the possible implications of these new rights and whether the Council should create Article 4 Directions to remove them.

Additionally new legislation has been published which will dramatically change the well-established use class system in England.  These new provisions have come into force on 1 September 2020.  The new Class E use class for commercial, business and service uses has been introduced, which subsumes A1 shops, A2 financial and professional services, A3 restaurants and cafes, B1 business/offices and some D1 (clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries and day centres) and D2 (gyms, indoor recreations not involving motorised vehicles or firearm) uses.  

The report noted that the PD rights do not apply to listed buildings, scheduled monuments and land within their curtilages, conservations areas and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and certain other areas.  Additionally buildings which were not used for an eligible use or for a Class C3 residential use on 5 March 2018 and buildings constructed before 1 July 1948 or after 5 March 2018.

Members were advised that the planning system allows the Council to prepare an Article 4 Direction where it considers that permitted development rights would be prejudicial to the proper planning of an area and constitute a threat to the amenities of that area.  This means that property owners once again have to submit a full planning application. Directions can either be created proactively where the Council believes that the rights will harm the area or reactively where the Council has evidence that the rights have harmed the area.  

The Secretary of State has the power to veto Article 4 Directions prior to their confirmation. Members noted that an Article 4 Direction is unable to be administered to the Use Class E as they are now all within the same use class rather than it being a permitted development right.

The following points were raised and discussed:

·         A question was raised in respect of obtaining a list of where flats/blocks of apartments are located that may be extended upwards under the new permitted development rights?  Unfortunately this information was not available at the meeting.  Some concern was expressed in terms of future standards of these extensions.

·         Class ZA – loss of S106 money.  This would have an impact on the Borough. We may see restrictions causing issues for developers and this may result in cases whereby they may just submit a planning application on what they would like to see, also what the residents may want and negotiations will be held with Planning Officers.

·         The issue of extending houses upwards to provide additional room(s) will probably be contentious, as character of buildings change and residents will not be able to voice their opinion.

·         Consideration was given to the use of vacant buildings within the Welwyn Garden City town centre; would it be possible to agree what percentage of the buildings can be used for certain businesses/residential?  Unfortunately, this would not be possible under the new PD, as it would now be overruled by the new class use.  The loss of retail was considered, as empty shops could be converted to cafes/restaurants.

·         Investors are likely to extend student accommodation upwards for a better yield on rental.  Reference was made to properties in Hatfield, whereby a developer may put two storeys on a row of terraced houses.  These rooms could have inadequate access and poor fire provision which may lead to issues of poor fire escapes. Also an impact the adequacy of natural light in all habitable rooms of each new dwelling. Ventilation to extensions may pose other issues. Members were of the opinion that it would be safer to have an Article 4 Direction to avoid the issue raised above.

·         Noted that Secretary of State has the final say on Article 4 Directions.  If the Council wished to remove some rights it would have to consider writing new PD rights for certain areas and also justify reasons making the changes. A blanket ban for the Borough may not be feasible, whereas pockets around the Borough which may be under threat such as the houses highlighted around the Hertfordshire University could be considered.

·         The impact of additional two storeys on houses within the Garden City could destroy the historical ambience of the Garden City.

·         It was noted that any Directions would need to be subject to public consultation and a wait of one year to allow compensation claims to fall away.

·         It was suggested that if two storey houses were extended by additional two storeys, it would mean that the houses would be doubled and this would have an adverse effect on amenities within the Borough – e.g. schools, transport and highways.

After careful consideration it was agreed that a paper be brought back to the Panel for consideration of removal of certain PDRs, taking into account the planning issues and what is known so far in terms of PDRs within Hertfordshire and recommend a way forward.

RESOLVED:

(Unanimously)

That Head of Planning to produce a document showing where Article 4 Directions could be introduced against permitted development rights; for consideration by the Panel at a future meeting.