Planning matters blog

GPDO – Light Industrial to Residential – Class PA

Owain Nedin 29 Sept 2017

Sunday 1^st October 2017, after 18 months, the world of permitted development rights waits no more: the temporary permitted development right for change of use from light industrial to residential becomes a reality.

From Sunday, and for the next three years, changing the use of a light industrial building (or part of a building so used) that is use class B1(c)[1], to residential, use class C3, benefits from a new permitted development right, subject to a prior approval process and various limitations and conditions, of course. Or more specifically:

Class PA – premises in light industrial use to dwellinghouses

Development consisting of a change of use of a building and any land within its curtilage from a use falling within Class B1(c) (light industrial) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order to a use falling within Class C3 (dwellinghouses) of that Schedule.

Here are the exemptions and limitations:

The building must have been used solely for light industrial on 19^th March 2014 (or when last in use if not in use on or since that date),
The prior approval date[2] must be before 1^st October 2020;
The gross floorspace of the existing building cannot exceed 500 sq.m;
If occupied under an agricultural tenancy, express consent of both tenant and landlord is required,
No development can begin within one year of terminating an agricultural tenancy if it was terminated for the purpose of changing the use by virtue of Class PA (unless both the tenant and landlord have agreed in writing that the site is no longer required for agricultural purposes),
The site cannot be or form part of a site of special scientific interest; safety hazard zone or a military storage area,
The building cannot be listed, or be within the curtilage of a listed building; and
The site must not be or contain a scheduled monument.

As for the application for a determination as to whether prior approval is required, the developer must submit (amongst other things) a statement proving the building was solely in light industrial (B1(c)) use on 19^th March 2014 (or when last in use if not in use on that date, and not in use since) – i.e. the lawful use of the building is solely B1(c), and this was the case on 19^th March 2014. The developer must also state the net increase in the number of dwellinghouses proposed.

And the local planning authority must consider whether its prior approval is required with regard to:

Transport and highways impact on the development
Contamination risks
Flood risks; and
Whether the change of use of the building to residential would have an adverse impact on the sustainability of the provision of industrial and/or storage or distribution services in that area - if the building (or part of a building, if only part is being converted) considered by the LPA as important for provision of those services.

Development under class PA, if permitted, is subject to the condition that it be completed within a period of three years starting with the date of prior approval.

Details of Class PA are in the April 2016 amendment to the GPDO[3]

The Reaction

Are we excited/worried about the changes…? Well, in respect of the latter, LB Southwark clearly are - on Thursday 28^th September 2017, they announced consultation on an immediate Article 4 direction[4] removing Class PA permitted development rights in specified locations (Local and Strategic Preferred Industrial Locations and existing and emerging site allocations for comprehensive mixed use development).

An immediate Article 4 Direction would open the Council up to potential claims for compensation under the terms of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and the Town and Country Planning (Compensation) (England) Regulations 2015 (as amended). Not a decision taken lightly, I suspect.

Others have already used Article 4 Directions, albeit a little while earlier, including LB Hounslow – where an Article 4 Direction comes into force in January 2018, and LB Islington, where it’s already in force, to name but a few.

But are these councils right to be cautious, are we about to see a glut of changes of use removing light industrial space from our towns and cities?

In my view, probably not. The combination of finding a building that is under 500sqm, that can be proved to be, or to have been solely in B1(c) use and that would not be deemed to impact on the sustainability of the provision of surrounding industrial and storage uses may be tough. Particularly as the term ‘sustainability’ is not defined in the GPDO and is subject to interpretation (i.e. a matter of fact and degree that the decision-maker can decide).

So I don’t imagine an office to residential-style (Class O) style rush. But I suspect a few will test the water early on, perhaps on a par with the right for change of use from retail to residential (Class M). Assuming the Government captures the statistics as they do with other permitted development rights, we’ll find out in the next few quarterly releases how popular it has been.

Of course, if you do have a building you think may qualify for this permitted development right, and are interested in finding out more about how you may go about the prior approval process , please don’t hesitate to contact Lichfields.

Download Lichfields Use Class Order

@OwainNedin

Owain.nedin@lichfields.uk

[1] Use Class B1(c): use for any industrial process, being a use which can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit

[2] “prior approval date” is defined in Paragraph X of Part 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) and means the date on which— (a) prior approval is given; or (b) a determination that such approval is not required is given or the period for giving such a determination (in this case 56 days) has expired without the applicant being notified whether prior approval is required, given or refused.

[3] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/332/made.

[4] http://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy-and-transport-policy/article-4-directions?chapter=6&utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term

Image credit: Arcaid Images / Alamy Stock Photo

Paint the town incredible

Grant Swan 26 Sept 2017

Last weekend I attended talks given by a variety of designers speaking at the London Design Festival. These graphic designers and artists all had something in common: their work being used by the public – whether that was as immersive public art, murals, way finding, or branding a pop-up embassy.

One of the speakers, Camille Walala, had livened up Exchange Square, Broadgate with her use of strong colour, bold shapes and an inflatable castle (why not?).

Camille hoped that ‘Villa Walala’ would “introduce a sense of the unexpected” into what is usually a corporate environment filled with “suits” and surrounded by tall offices and backing off Liverpool Street station. She also said, "I think that, to turn a corner into Broadgate, and find a huge, bouncy, pink and patterned house will be hugely entertaining.”[1]

Much of Camille’s work involves her Memphis Group-inspired bright shapes and colours, overlaid onto building facades and her designs always evoke a sense of fun and playfulness. Visitors to her current exhibition at the Now Gallery (inspired by hall of mirrors amusements) have said that it gave them the experience of being a child again. It’s had a very positive response, proven by the need to now ticket the exhibition since it has continued to grow hour-long queues.

Another talk I went to was by Michael Beirut from Pentagram, who worked on the branding of Hillary Clinton's election campaign. Another of his many projects I'll mention involved working on the environmental graphics for over 60 libraries in public schools across New York City. Because the book shelves had to be only so high for the children, they were offered a lot of wall space to play with. Murals were painted onto the library walls - a different artist for every library - and each reflected their school's own character and community. The murals have therefore given the pupils and librarians a better sense of belonging and ownership.

Colour can be a huge part of a place’s identity. If you look at the beautiful pastel-coloured houses of Cornwall, the colourful coastal homes of Cinque Terre, Stockholm’s bright old town of Gamla Stan, the royal blue Jardin Majorelle of Marrakech or the detailed facades of houses on Haight Street, San Francisco – all of these make up a big part of their city or region’s identity and are a draw for tourists too. Studies show that colour can affect our mood and influence our decision making in all environments [2], as written about in The Architecture of Happiness, so why wouldn’t we want to make our streets more colourful and vibrant?

To name a few colourful projects Lichfields has worked on, The Old Vinyl Factory has the Converse Wall of Clash mural on the Powerhouse which brings the disused building to life and there is also a wrap around Cabinet Building of Beatles mania. Part of The Deptford Project, The Rogers Stirk Harbour eight storey residential building located alongside the listed carriage ramp features brightly coloured privacy screens and overlooks a public market area.

Within London, here are a few colourful places I like:

Could our happiness be improved with more colourful buildings or public art in our neighbourhoods? With the help of the Government and local authorities working closely with artists and designers to represent local communities, I believe we would feel the difference.

Sadiq Khan has pledged to support 25 community-led projects through his Crowdfund London initiative, investing more than £400,000. These include light installations in Southall, and conversion of a disused rail line into a public park and green link. He says that, “our shared mission is to empower as many people as possible to shape their city. We believe that if we can achieve that, people will feel a stronger sense of local belonging, and that the places we create together will better serve the needs and aspirations of Londoners.”[3] Also coming soon, will be some public art to coincide with Battersea Power Station’s redevelopment. Jude Kelly (artistic director of the Southbank Centre and arts adviser for Battersea Power Station) wants a 3km “arts corridor” along the river featuring new artworks[4].

London Design Festival is on annually with events, talks and exhibitions across the city.

Footnotes:

[1] http://www.londondesignfestival.com/node/7116 [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dylan-kendall/how-to-be-happy_b_650578.html [3] https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/sadiq-khan-invests-over-400k-in-local-projects[4] http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/home-garden/interiors/design-news/the-worst-and-best-public-art-springing-up-near-new-homes-from-mayfair-to-battersea-a112586.html#gallery

Carepacity – making the case for care homes, and retirement and sheltered housing for the older population

Jennifer Heron 18 Sept 2017

I recently presented at Lichfields' Newcastle Breakfast Seminar on the topic of elderly care accommodation. Or, as I have seen termed elsewhere, accommodation for those in their “extended middle age!”.

The older population, elderly people, those in their extended middle age, however termed, is growing. Indeed, the number of people aged 65 or over in England is projected to increase more than any other age cohort in future years.

Figure 1: Population projections by age cohort, England (2014=100)

Source: ONS, Lichfields analysis

As previously reported by Lichfields, this projection has wide-ranging implications as the country’s demographic profile is the foundation on which public finances are determined and major policy decisions are made. Another of the key implications of the population profile changing so markedly is that housing needs will change too.

In the same way that national policy is clear that local planning authorities (LPAs) must meet the housing needs of their local area, both for market and affordable housing (NPPF para 47), national policy is also clear that LPAs must meet the housing needs of different population groups, including older people (NPPF para 159). However, whilst the focus has been on building more houses in general (and rightly so), interventions have largely been concentrated on those at the start of their “housing career” (such as Starter Homes, First Time Buyer ISAs and so on). Significantly less focus has been placed on those in the later stages of their so-called “housing career”.

This is evident from the Housing White Paper [1] which, in seeking to “fix our broken housing market” sets out some key targets, including:

225,000+ new homes to be provided per year (pg 9)
200,000 people brought into home ownership (para 4.21)
225,000 affordable homes to be built (para 4.26).

Yet there is no such target for meeting the needs of the older population. Rather, the Housing White Paper simply defers the issue, setting out the following:

Offering older people a better choice of accommodation can help them to live independently for longer and help reduce costs to the social care and health systems. […] To ensure that there is more consistent delivery of accessible housing, the Government is introducing a new statutory duty through the Neighbourhood Planning Bill on the Secretary of State to produce guidance for local planning authorities on how their local development documents should meet the housing needs of older and disabled people.

Para 4.42.

Whilst not tackling the issue head on, what the Housing White Paper does is reiterate the thrust of the NPPF - now in its fifth year – i.e. that LPAs are expected to have clear policies for addressing the housing needs and requirements of different groups, including older people. That said, some clear recognition of the severity of the current situation and an emphasis on the urgency required in introducing measures to start to address it would have been welcome.

This begs the question: do LPAs currently have clear policies for addressing the housing needs and requirements of older people? And in short, the answer is no.

Lichfields has analysed the 99 post-NPPF adopted Local Plans identified in its Planned and Deliver Of these:

29 do not have a generic elderly persons’ accommodation policy;
88 do not have a specific requirement for elderly accommodation; and
94 do not make specific allocations.

It’s a ticking time bomb.

As an industry, in both public and private sectors, we need to ensure that we understand, through robust evidence, what the housing need is for the growing ageing population. Alongside this, we need to understand what supply is currently available. Only then can we formulate clear strategies on how the residual need could be met.

To help evidence the need and in order to understand the opportunities to deliver housing for the ageing population, Lichfields has produced its Carepacity Toolkit.

Carepacity can assist in the planning process by:

objectively assessing the need for housing for older people and finding potential development sites;
understanding existing supply;
assessing the potential of development sites;
supporting the planning case by quantifying the range of benefits arising from the development of housing to meet the needs of the ageing population; and
enabling delivery through an understanding of the planning and financial implications of different typologies of elderly care provision, as summarised below.

Figure 2: Typologies of accommodation

Source: Lichfields analysis

To discuss Carepacity further, please get in touch: nye@lichfields.uk

[1] Department for Communities and Local Government - Fixing our broken housing market (February 2017)

The new London Plan: policy preview

Jennie Baker 13 Sept 2017

This has been quite a busy summer for London Mayor Sadiq Khan; while many of us were (rightly) enjoying some time off work, the Greater London Authority and the Mayor released a plethora of documents which will play important roles in shaping London’s future. Furthermore, these publications provide a very clear policy preview of the new London Plan due to be published in November.

In the last few months, the Mayor has published (in draft) his statutory Transport (TS), Health Inequality (HIS), Environment (ES), and Housing Strategies (HS) [1]. He’s also issued the final version of his Affordable Housing and Viability Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) [2], his vision for a night-time economy [3], and a tourism vision for London (through London & Partners) [4]. The Mayor has also announced investment and funding allocations to increase the delivery of affordable housing in the capital [5], as well as releasing the preliminary draft charging schedule for the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy to fund Crossrail 2 (the so-called ‘MCIL2’) [6]. Finally, he released commissioned reports on the impact of overseas buyers on London’s housing market [7], London’s industrial land demand [8], and an office policy review [9].

For those with a little experience and knowledge of London planning matters, this deluge of material comes as no surprise, as the most important strategic document for the city’s development, the new London Plan, is set for publication in draft by the end of the year. As speculation on its content grows, it is possible to preview the draft document’s policies, as many references are made to them, and heavy hints have been spread across all of this summer’s publications.

New Plan, brand new proposals

The Mayor has provided us with some very clear insights on brand new policy that he is considering incorporating in the draft London Plan.

First, the Mayor aims to embed his ‘new approach to securing affordable homes through the planning system within the draft London Plan’ (Policy 4.2A HS), meaning that the 2017 Affordable Housing and Viability SPG’s 35% threshold approach will become development plan policy and, therefore, have strengthened status (see Lichfields blog for details). Other parts of the SPG will also be incorporated in the new draft London Plan, including:

London Living Rent (‘the Mayor’s draft London Plan will support councils, housing associations, and other developers in the delivery of homes let permanently at London Living Rent levels’ – Para 4.23 HS; see Lichfields insight for details); and
support for Build to Rent (‘to encourage the development of the sector, the Mayor will embed the BtR pathway approach in his draft London Plan’ – Para 3.75 HS)

Second, the Mayor is also minded to ‘give a clear presumption in favour of appropriate residential development on small sites, including specific borough level targets for this type of development’ (Para 3.21 HS); as part of this, the Mayor will include details referring to ‘working with councils to promote the use of Permission in Principle on small sites’ (Para 3.83 HS). This is an interesting policy proposition, and it could potentially lead to an increased contribution to housing delivery from smaller developers and housebuilders. However, the potential for implementation success lies also with the London Boroughs, as all of the stakeholders need to be convinced that Permission in Principle actually does offer effective advantages when compared to other existing planning routes, particularly outline permission (see Lichfields blog for details on Permission in Principle).

The draft Environment Strategy also offers some interesting previews of the content of the new London Plan, including the intention to introduce ‘the Agent of Change principle […] through the new London Plan and puts the noise mitigation requirement onto the person or business responsible for making the change rather than penalising existing businesses’ (Policy 9.2.2a – box 35 ES). Other planning-related proposals will be considered for inclusion in the new Plan, such as ‘a requirement to consider the overall suitability of a site (and its design layout) for the proposed end use in terms of exposure to pollution’ (Proposal 4.1.1c ES).

Other notable new environmental policies include:

‘all new large-scale developments in London are ‘Air Quality Positive’ and maintain Air Quality Neutral requirements for all other developments’ (Proposal 4.3.3a ES) and
‘fracking is prevented in London’ (Proposal 6.2.2d ES).

On the latter, I am not sure that this is a necessary policy – surely there is no real appetite for shale gas development, given its character and the high cost of land in the capital – but it would be a clear political symbol, if nothing else.

New Plan, slightly amended (but still old) policies

The Mayor has provided additional details on how he will change some of the policies/ requirements/ standards in the current Plan (published in March 2016) [10].

Among these, the Housing Strategy states his intention to ‘fully revise and update the list of London’s Opportunity Areas’ in the new draft London Plan to maximise the number of new homes that largest housing-led regeneration initiatives could deliver’ (Para 3.16). Also in the Housing Strategy is a reference to the inclusion of a specific policy which will clarify that ‘affordable homes demolished as part of estate regeneration projects should be replaced on a like for like basis’ [the same will apply to homes sold under the Right to Buy] and adds, ‘this means that homes for social rent must be replaced with homes at similar levels’ (Policy 4.3D). This represents a subtle but important change when compared to the current London Plan’s reference to estate renewal and the need to provide ‘at least an equivalent floorspace of affordable housing’, when redevelopment of affordable housing is proposed.

Other policy tweaks are to include:

‘more ambitious requirements for sustainable drainage in relation to new development’ (Proposal 8.2.3a ES);
the strengthening of ‘the consideration of the impact of planning on health and health inequalities’ (Objective 3.2 HIS); and
the possible development of ‘new parking standards […] to ensure car-lite development’, with the aim of restricting ‘car parking provision within new development, with those locations more accessible to public transport expected to be car free’ (Proposal 76 and related guiding principles TS).

These expanded requirements, in addition to the new affordable housing contributions (35% threshold) and the revised MCIL2 that the Mayor is currently implementing, will potentially lead to an increased burden overall for developers and housebuilders.

New plan, old policies

The latest version of the current London Plan is a stunningly long, 441-page document. From what we know so far, it is already seeming inevitable that the new London Plan will incorporate many of the proposals and policies already included in the 2016 edition – not surprising, given its strategic nature.

This is the case for many of the ‘new London Plan’ references included in the different draft mayoral strategies; the policies and proposals are not new. For example, although not providing any detail, the Transport Strategy refers to the need for ‘protecting industrial land through the London Plan’ (Proposal 15b). The same draft Strategy also mentions that although the new London Plan is still in preparation, this is likely to show that ‘the city’s growth potential is concentrated in the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), within its town centres and Opportunity Areas; there will also be growth potential from the managed intensification of suburban areas’ (Chapter 5b).

None of the above is at all surprising; the same goes for the reference in the ES to the protection of ‘Green Belt, Metropolitan Open Land and publicly accessible green space’ (Proposal 5.1.1), and the introduction of ‘a zero carbon standard for non-residential buildings in the London Plan from 2019’ (Proposal 6.1.4a), as both of these strategic goals are in the current Plan. In the same way, throughout the Housing Strategy there are references to the ‘Mayor’s housing targets for councils’ (Policy 3.1A), which will be based on a revised Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) – the same process as now.

Probably a bit more surprising, particularly given the many calls for additional flexibility and potentially revision, is the intention to maintain ‘existing space standards’ and to ‘ensure that any further national reviews of standards take into account London’s circumstances’ (HS, Para 5.14).

First comes planning (the strategy), then comes implementation

The above preview is a (not so) brief overview of the policies and proposals the Mayor has decided on, or is considering for inclusion in his new London Plan that will be launched for consultation later this year. The spatial development strategy will be part of the capital’s development plan and set the scene for London’s future development over the next 20-25 years, therefore all of its content needs to be carefully planned and considered throughout.

Quite naturally there are high expectations; many stakeholders wish to see certain policy wording or particular proposal which could boost/ improve their sector. Personally, there are three features I would like to see incorporated in the new London Plan.

First, a clear focus on the implementation strategy for its policies and proposals, possibly mirroring the Affordable Housing and Viability SPG model; strategic goals are important, but how those objectives will be delivered, and how they will produce effective changes, are both crucial for success;

Secondly, improved readability of the document, to make it accessible to as many Londoners as possible and to effectively open up the debate about future development strategies for the city; and

Thirdly, consideration to uses/functions other than housing given throughout. Housing, particularly affordable tenures, is clearly the number one priority in London at the moment and, accordingly, should be given the necessary consideration; however, this should not lead to overlooking the importance of other land uses (such as employment – including industry and affordable workspaces - and town centre uses), in guaranteeing London’s future success.

An ambitious strategy is a good starting point, but making it work is what really matters in the end.

Footnotes

Planning matters

GPDO – Light Industrial to Residential – Class PA

Class PA – premises in light industrial use to dwellinghouses

The Reaction

Paint the town incredible

Carepacity – making the case for care homes, and retirement and sheltered housing for the older population

The new London Plan: policy preview

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

1999

Planning matters

Class PA – premises in light industrial use to dwellinghouses

The Reaction

Subscribe