Turning offices into flats
where I raised the question whether conversion to residential adversely impact local economies, I also tweeted and emailed Lewisham's Head of Planning whether there were any economists against office to residential conversion. Below I give his response, which I can imagine he enjoyed composing, because it would leave me, or anyone other than a planning professional fairly well bamboozled.
But the substance of his response is in the first four paragraphs, and comes down to Lewisham having requested not to be included in this planning policy on economic grounds, but its case having been rejected, although 17 other councils were successful.
But this says nothing about what those economic grounds were, and whether there are any economists who would agree with them, so fails to answer the question. My suspicion is that Town Planners just take it as read that there are economic grounds for a policy just because it is to do with economics, and it is stated to be for economic reasons. Why shouldn't they - they are not professional economists themselves.
On the current big issue - of whether overall restrictive planning policies have led to the lack of new homes being built - the RTPI is prepared to tackle what it calls the myths perpetrated by professional economics such as Kate Barker of the 2004 Review of Housing Supply, although I'm not persuaded by them. But on this smaller question, I can find, as yet, no purported justification at all.
Maybe it's the planners themselves who are bamboozled - which would be a shame, because if they can't get to grips economists' arguments, and vice versa, then when we do get round to building more homes, it will happen more as economists think best, and without the actual benefits of professional planners. It's the second point I made here
That response in full:as a society we have some choices about how it happens:
- Sooner or later. If we build sooner, the generation currently paying absurd amounts of their income on housing will thank us for it
- Planned or unplanned. We should all want it to be well planned. If we choose not to think about it, it won't be, nor if professional planners just focus on getting the highest possible density given existing rules, we are all the losers
- Upwards or outwards. We can build higher, but if we insist on outwards, then we may well see little boxes spreading out over our countryside, back gardens, nature reserves, and further problems of water management
In April 2011, the government undertook consultation on the relaxation of planning rules which sought views on introducing permitted development rights for change of use from commercial to residential uses.
In September 2012, a ministerial statement announced the introduction of permitted development rights to enable change of use from commercial to residential purposes. These new permitted development rights build on the policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework to encourage developers to “bring underused offices back into effective use as houses for local residents”.
The Chief Planner wrote to all local planning authorities in January 2013 giving them the opportunity to seek a local exemption to these permitted development rights where this could be justified on economic grounds. The Council made a formal request in February 2013 for the exemption of all Strategic Industrial Locations (Surrey Canal Road and Bromley Road),all Local Employment Locations, Lewisham Town Centre and Catford Town Centre.
The Council was informed on 10 May 2013 that it’s application for exemption had been unsuccessful. In all, only 17 local planning authorities were successful in their applications for exemption.
On 30th May 2013, Class J, Part 3 was inserted into the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995 (As Amended). For a period of 3 years (until 30th May 2016), this allows for the change of use of a building and any land within its curtilage from a Class B1a (office) use to a use falling within Class C3 (dwelling houses) subject to certain restrictions and conditions. In order to benefit from these permitted development rights, the B1(a) office use must have existed on or immediately prior to 30th May 2013 and the building and any land must not be listed or be a scheduled ancient monument.
The change of use from B1a (office) to C3 (residential) is subject to the condition that before beginning the development, the developer shall apply to the local planning authority for a determination as to whether prior approval will be required as to:
The government has made it clear within the legislation that no other matters can be considered apart from those listed. It also specifies the level of consultation to be undertaken which is limited to a site notice and letters to any adjoining owner or occupier.
- Transport and highways impacts of the development;
- Contamination risks on the site; and
- Flooding risks on the site.
If prior approval is required for any of the specified matters, the Council have to determine whether the impacts are acceptable having regard to the those parts of the NPPF that deal with transport, contamination and flooding. The wording of the Order does not enable the Council to take into account any London Plan or local planning policies. The submission will have to specify and commit to measures that would adequately mitigate any impacts or risks related to transport, contamination and flooding in order gain prior approval.
The Council is unable to impose planning conditions or planning obligations via a Section 106 Agreement when issuing prior approval under Class J and applications will therefore have to include all the necessary commitments and delivery mechanisms as appropriate, to secure those measures. This may include the submission of a unilateral undertaking. This is a form of legal agreement whereby a developer offers obligations (as opposed to a Section 106 Agreement that the Council would also be a party to).
Given that the government has made clear that local planning authorities can consider a very limited set of issues, the council are unable to require any obligations on matters such as affordable housing, education and health irrespective of the impact a proposal may have as they are not matters which the Order allows the local planning authority to consider.
The local planning authority has 56 days in which to determine the application and notify the applicant as to whether prior approval is given or refused. Development shall not be begun before the receipt of:
Where development is permitted by Class J, the development must be carried out in accordance with the submitted details and the residential use must be begun by 30th May 2016. Class J cannot be applied for retrospectively.
- Written notice from the local planning authority that prior approval is not required,
- Written notice from the local planning authority giving their prior approval, or
- The expiry of 56 days following the date on which the application was received by the local planning authority without the authority notifying the applicant as to whether prior approval is given or refused.
The Class J prior approval process does not apply to any alterations or extensions to a building. Any such changes would require a separate planning application. Building Regulation approval may also be required.
I hope that this explains the position.