Homes created under PDRs are also more likely to be in places with little access to green spaces, or in places with less access to public transport – compared to properties built with planning permission.
Ben Cooper is Research Manager at the Fabian Society.
This year is make-or-break for the government’s target to build 1.5 million new homes. They will hopefully set out an agenda of sufficient ambition to meet the scale of the housing crisis – with the Comprehensive Spending Review, the Housing Strategy, and further planning reforms in the next few months.
As part of the forthcoming Housing Strategy, the government should reform permitted development rights to ensure new homes are of sufficient quality.
The Coalition government made it much easier for developers to turn existing buildings into new houses and flats, without the need for planning permission. Between 2015/16 and 2022/23, over 100,000 homes in England have been created through these rights – mainly by converting offices and other commercial units. For a government that rightly wants to make it easier to build, permitted development rights could be perceived as a useful tool to meet their ambitious target.
However, PDRs conflict with the government’s aim of building, in the words of the housing minister, “well-designed, affordable, attractive homes”. That’s because properties built under these rights are often poor-quality, contributing to the housing quality crisis that means more than 3.8m homes fail to meet the basic Decent Homes Standard. Such properties are often smaller and badly designed, which affects people’s health, wellbeing and quality of life. One study found just 22 per cent of PDR dwellings met the national space standards – compared to 72 per cent for properties built with planning permission.
Homes created under PDRs are also more likely to be in places with little access to green spaces, or in places with less access to public transport – compared to properties built with planning permission. They are eight times more likely to be in places like business parks and industrial estates than those built through planning permission. Continuing with these rights will undermine wider efforts to improve housing standards, creating new problem properties that the government will have to address in the future.
PDRs could also undermine public support for building more homes. Voters clearly care about housing quality, prioritising it over new developments – if forced to choose. Our survey with YouGov found 66 per cent of English adults supported investment to ‘improve existing properties to meet basic housing standards, even if it means reducing the number of homes that are built each year’. Just 15 per cent favoured the opposite – investment to ‘build more new homes each year in the places that need them, even if it means neglecting improvements to existing properties’.
In practice, the government will need to both build more and improve quality of existing stock. But this polling shows how securing public support for more homes requires communities to have confidence in a planning system, which makes it easier to build great places to live, not to just create poor quality homes in poor locations.
These PDR reforms have also undermined social and affordable housing, which are essential for tackling the housing crisis. Since they were implemented, England has missed out on more than 22,000 affordable homes, according to a Local Government Association estimate. That’s because developers are not required to meet the usual obligations to build some affordable homes, if they use permitted development rights. By reforming planning and removing PDRs, we can make it easier to build and deliver thousands more social homes.
The government should reverse the Coalition government’s expansion of permitted development rights. These rights should only be used for extensions and improvements to existing homes and buildings – not for creating new homes.
At a minimum, the government should freely allow councils to use ‘article 4 declarations’ to restrict or remove permitted development rights in a local area. No longer should the Secretary of State be able to step in to amend or cancel such declarations. Such a reform would empower local authorities to do what is right for the local area – and ensure the supply of affordable, decent housing.
Delivering 1.5m homes is rightly a critical priority for the government, but it must lead to a decent, affordable home for all. Permitted development rights make it much harder for the government to deliver. Labour should scrap them.
Ben Cooper is Research Manager at the Fabian Society
Left Foot Forward doesn’t have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
