Agenda item

4.1       The Committee received a report which provided an overview of the proposed             changes to permitted development rights to enable changes of use from           Class E uses to residential use without the need for planning permission, which the Government recently consulted on during December 2020 and             January 2021. The proposed permitted development right would result in the             council having significantly less planning policy levers with which to deliver      sustainable economic growth through planned growth of existing commercial    clusters. Should the Government not introduce the mitigation measures        recommended in the council’s consultation response, the principal impacts of             the new right are likely to be:

·       Large scale commercial floorspace within the CAZ could be lost to residential impacting in the unique contribution the city makes to the local and national economy.

·       Uncontrolled increases in residential floorspace in the CAZ at the expense of commercial floorspace, irrespective of whether it is vacant or surplus to current demand, would undermine its unique character and function of the area.

·       Uncontrolled loss of retail and complementary town centre uses at ground floor level within our international, major, district and local shopping centres leading to a loss of overall commercial character and function and an erosion of their vitality and viability. Initial analysis suggests most significant impacts could be in local and district centres outside the CAZ where the offset between commercial and residential property values is typically greater.

·       Permitted development schemes could be brought forward without the need to provide any affordable housing or infrastructure to support the increased population, unlike schemes granted planning permission.

·       The council’s efforts to address the climate emergency would be undermined as permitted development schemes, which would not be required to comply with higher energy performance and sustainability standards in the London Plan and City Plan.

·       Permitted development schemes would not be required to optimise the use of residential land leading to inefficient development that fails to meet identified housing demand.

4.2       Members noted the following: -

·       That there were there had been limited studies to date looking at the size of floor plates and the potential loss of office units under the proposed permitted development rights scheme for Class E. Members noted that the data which was available focused on London and looked at various grades of office accommodation. The Sub-Committee were reminded that the CAZ within Westminster and other areas in London such as Canary Wharf and City of London had large floor plates and were subject to Article 4 Directions and therefore it was difficult at this stage to determine potential loss of commercial units or demand for conversions.

·       That prior-approval schemes had a shorter determination period and had a limited range of criteria in relation to suitability.  Members noted that applicants would be required to apply for a full planning application if they fail to meet the prior approval criteria and noted that the prior approval requirements were not as expansive compared to the planning regime.

·       That the mitigation measures recommended in the council’s consultation response include limiting developments up to 10 new units only and restricting the use of floorspace. These recommendations are also favoured by other local planning authorities.

·       That Central Governments purpose for the permitted development rights for Class E was to ensure that the High Street is revitalised and to allow flexibility in the use of units in areas where there are vacant properties. The Committee noted that residential units were of a higher value than commercial units and that there were concerns about this factor in relation to the High Streets. Members commented on the important role that retail units play in the local economy and employment and their contribution to the character of the area.

·       That there was current consultation on amendments to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and that these amendments will likely introduce extra protection in relation to sustainability. Members were concerned that planning reforms may not fully be effective in preserving conservation areas. Members were advised that the Planning White Paper has suggested that all conservation areas would be given ‘Protect’ zoning status and therefore the existing need for planning permission for most development within conservation areas would continue in future. Similarly listed buildings would continue to be afforded extra protection from development in future under the Government’s proposals.

·       That developments which require an Environmental Impact Assessment would require planning permission and be considered under the current planning regime.

·       Members commented that the Capital generates £63billion a year towards the economy and noted that London was an international city and part of this revenue came from footfalls of tourists. The Committee commented that this factor should be considered and stressed the importance of safeguarding retail units and noted that the Article 4 Direction aims to preserve the unique characteristics of the Central Activity Zone.

·       The Committee was informed that Central Government were aware of the unique characteristics of Westminster and had requested that officers liaise with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about the Council’s representation to the consultations. These include protection of ground floor uses in international centres and upper size limits on potential permitted development.

·       The Committee noted that Great Estates and landlords could determine usage of their properties in future should the level of planning control be eroded by the proposed permitted development rights. It would be incumbent on them, rather than the Council, to approve or refuse certain development proposals for changes of use.

·       That the proposed Article 4 Direction would cover all uses within under Class E, with the Direction likely to cover the Central Activities Zone.

·       That the Committee should hold further discussion on how secondary shopping areas could be maintained as an active street frontage following the introduction of the new permitted development rights.

·       Members agreed that a community impact on areas should be considered alongside the environmental impact and noted that residents were dependent on smaller convenient retail units and would be impacted by the proposed permitted developments rights.

·       The Committee commented that newly converted residential units should be marketed domestically and not to overseas buyers. 

  Resolved:

1. Members considered the contents of the report and noted the likely impacts of the proposed changes to permitted development rights to land uses and future development in Westminster should the Government bring forward the changes in the form consulted on, notwithstanding the significant concerns highlighted in the council’s consultation response.

2. That the Committee hold further discussion on how secondary shopping areas could be maintained as an active street frontage under the new planning regime.