Call to close loophole which threatens affordable housing targets
Campaigners are calling on the Government to scrap office-to-residential conversions which they claim are getting in the way of affordable housing goals.
The Local Government Association (LGA) - the 'national voice of local government' - has found that about 28,000 affordable homes nationally haven’t been delivered in the past 11 years because of this.
Specifically, it is talking about Permitted Development Rights (PDR), a pathway which allows a developer to bypass the full planning process.
The original idea was to smooth the way for more housing to be created.
In a nutshell, the PDR pathway allows developers to convert office space into flats with internal changes only – provided the applicant meets a checklist of national requirements.
The policy predates the current Government by some way - but housing has been a big issue for Labour’s government from the get-go, which increased housing targets for more many local authorities to meet their assessment of demand.
Critics of the PDR have noted that the fast-track nature of it means that developers are not restricted by local council policies.
For example, the Borough Local Plan has an affordable housing requirement of 30-40 per cent for new developments of a certain size. But PDR proposals don't have to follow these rules.
In Maidenhead, one of the major past criticisms of PDR was that it was gobbling up office space, which ran the risk of leaving the town with too little.
In response, RBWM introduced special protections for specific sites, so offices there can't be converted to flats.
Nonetheless, there continues to be many applications coming into RBWM’s planning portal that are going the PDR route.
Though developers often slip up and fail to meet the national requirements, as long as they do meet them, RBWM’s planning team are obliged to approve the application. These may be proposals that RBWM may otherwise be inclined to turn down.
The LGA has long been critical of PDR.
As well as making councils unable to enforce affordable housing, it also means they are unable to insist on financial contributions towards local facilities, or ensure that new homes are of a high standard or suitably located.
Indeed, the LGA has staunch criticisms for the standards of the homes that come out of PDR.
“Studies, including the Government’s own research, have consistently shown that homes created through PDR are more likely to be substandard, smaller, darker, poorly ventilated and in unsuitable locations such as industrial estates and business parks,” the body wrote.
Now the LGA is making a fresh push to 'arrest the trend'. An amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill (which is currently making its way through Parliament) could remove ‘a raft’ of PDR.
This is being backed by other organisations and campaigners, including Shelter, the National Housing Federation, the Town and Country Planning Association, the Royal Town Planning Institute and the G15.
Cllr Louise Gittins, chair of the LGA, said that this amendment ‘could be a game changer' as councils face ‘the stark reality of limited and poor-quality housing supply’.
Baroness Dorothy Thornhill, a vice president of the LGA, is the one proposing the amendment. She said: “Councils – and communities – are losing out significantly because developers are able to circumvent the democratic planning process.
“Making this change could mean better quality development, which has the benefit of proper oversight and consideration, and helps bring forward much needed affordable housing.”
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been approached for comment.
