The use of Article 4 Directions in practice The RICS has shown that the government’s impact assessment, published in 2013, was fundamentally flawed.10 It stated that:
‘it was difficult to predict the number of additional housing units that might result from PD, but it was expected that there would be 140 applications per year across England’. It also considered that, ‘it was unlikely the PD would result in housing built in unsustainable locations, such as industrial sites, as these would not prove attractive to housing developers’. In reality, 10,166 applications for Prior Approval were received in England between 2014 and 2017.11 A London Councils’ ‘Member Briefing’, published in May 2013, explained that in January of that year the government had asked local authorities to submit requests for areas that they wished to exempt from the imminent introduction of permitted development rights.12
There were two grounds on which exemption could be sought: ·· ‘(a) the loss of a nationally significant area of economic activity or ·· (b) substantial adverse economic consequences at the local authority level which are not offset by the positive benefits the new rights would bring.’ Of London’s 33 boroughs, 30 applied for exemption (all except Redbridge, Barking & Dagenham and Bexley), and the GLA submitted a bid to exempt the London Plan’s ‘Central Activity Zone’ (essentially Zone 1), ‘Tech City’ in Shoreditch/Dalston, the Royal Docks Enterprise Zone, Vauxhall/Nine Elms Opportunity Area and Canary Wharf. Of the 17 local authorities in England that received whole or partial exemption, at that early stage, 11 were in London. All of the areas sought by the GLA above were granted, as was as the whole of the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea. However, the government rejected the majority (19 out of 30) of London boroughs’ requests. Croydon is now among the boroughs that have Article 4 immunity; Islington and Lambeth among those who (after a fight) now have partial immunity (i.e. protection for part of their borough).
9