pgc all green working and signpost with lettering new colour 2
pgc all green working and signpost with lettering new colour 2
facebook icon twitter icon

See also...

05 October 2024

Enfield and Barnet councils have launched a joint project looking at the potential for improving the New Southgate area. The first phase is a public engagement aimed at finding out what the local community like about their area, what they don't like and their ideas for improvements.

25 September 2024

The Enfield Over 50s Forum has added its voice to the campaign against Enfield Council's proposals to close eight smaller libraries. It has launched a petition calling on the council to instead make use of community libraries to 'protect, serve and strengthen' the borough's neighbourhoods and...

24 September 2024

Watch a 5-minute video by the Guardians of Whitewebbs, created by musician and producer Avid Beats, presenting a view about the plans for Whitewebbs which is very different from that presented by Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Enfield Council.

19 June 2024

Enfield Council will be launching its updated Climate Action Plan at a "community networking and fun event" to be held at Edmonton Green Library on Saturday 22nd June.

19 June 2024

Mati Valdivieso from Palmers Green Action team asks "Who wants another betting shop on our high street?"

12 June 2024

Campaigners opposed to the leasing of part of Whitewebbs Park to Tottenham Hotspur Football Club have launched a crowdfunding campaign to raise money to launch an appeal against the judicial review which found that Enfield Council's decision to let the land is lawful.

 

Subject Tags

Architecture
Active Travel
Adult Education
Air quality
Archaeology
Art
Betting Shops
Broomfield House
Broomfield Park
Buses
Campaigning Groups
Charities
Children
Cinema & films
Co-Housing
Community Events
Community Groups
Community Projects
Conservation
Conservation Areas
Conway Rec
Council Services
Covid-19
Crafts
Crime and Policing
Crossrail 2
Cycle lanes
Cycling
Dance
Devonshire Square
Disability
Edmonton Incinerator
Education
Enfield Council
Enfield Local Plan
Environmental Protection
Festivals
Firs Farm
Fitness
Food & Drink
Fundraising
gambling
Gardening
Gardens
Green Belt
Green Dragon
Grovelands Park
Hazelwood Rec
Health Service
Healthy Streets
Heritage
Hobbies
Horticulture
Housing
Intimate Theatre
Lakes Estate Conservation Area
Libraries
Literature
Litter
Local Businesses
Local campaigns
Local democracy
Local events
Local History/Local Studies
Local People
Localism
London-wide Issues
Markets
Mental health
Merkur Slots
Mini Holland
Music
Nature
Neighbourhood Watches
New Southgate
North London Waste Plan
Older People
Palmers Green Festival
Palmers Green Town Centre
Palmers Scream
Parking
Parks
Parks/Tottenhall Rec
Pedestrians
Photography
Pinkham Way
Planning
Planning Laws
Play Streets
Poetry
Politics
Public Health
Public realm
Public Transport
Pymmes Brook
Quieter Neighbourhoods
Quieter Neighbourhoods - Bowes
Quieter Neighbourhoods - Connaught Gardens
Quieter Neighbourhoods - Fox Lane
Rail services
Recipes
Recycling
Regeneration
Research projects
Restaurants, cafés and pubs
Road safety
Roads
Rubbish
Ruth Winston Centre
School Streets
Schools
Shops
Small Business
Social Issues
Social prescribing
Social Services
Southgate
Southgate District Civic Trust,
Southgate Town Hall
Sport
Sport and exercise
St Harmonica's Online
Support Services
Sustainability
Tatem Park
The Fox
Theatre
Therapies
Traffic Calming
Training and skills
Trees
Trent Park
Triangle
Truro House
Underground
Urban Design
Video
Visual Arts
Volunteering
Ward Panels (CAPE)
Waste and recycling
Wellbeing
Whitewebbs
Winchmore Hill
Wood Green
Writing
Young People

Petition calls on council to prevent conversion of offices into 'human warehouses'

Share this article share on facebook share on twitter

BetterHomesEnfield logo2A campaign group called BetterHomes Enfield has launched an online petition calling on Enfield Council to follow the example of many other London boroughs and take steps to prevent developers using a planning loophole called "permitted rights" to convert office blocks into "human warehouses" - turning former offices into flats which are not fit for purpose. They are often far too small, have rooms without windows, are poorly ventilated and don't meet environmental standards. Developers are also able to avoid making contributions towards affordable homes and community payments.

image

Refuge House, Enfield Town, is being converted into 52 flats (Photo: Google)

Another issue highlighted by BetterHomes Enfield is that in some cases the converted office blocks are still occupied by businesses, which are forced to move, often out of the borough. For example, they estimate that the conversion of Refuge House in Enfield Town into 52 "studio flats" involves the displacement of between 80 and 100 jobs.

The campaigners say that there is an "easy solution": Enfield should issue an "Article 4" directive, as used by most other London boroughs, to block this type of permitted development.

Writing in Enfield Dispatch, Al Sims from BetterHomes concludes:

By signing our petition, you’ll be helping to reduce misery, increase affordable housing, save jobs, improve the borough’s finances and help the environment. It’s not often that a single petition can have so many positive outcomes for our borough!

Petition text

We the undersigned petition the Council to enact an Article 4 Directive to remove permitted development rights for office to residential conversions across the borough.

Please sign our petition to stop “human warehouses” being developed in Enfield.

We are a group of Enfield residents who are concerned about the large quantity of poor quality homes being developed in our borough under a planning loophole (called permitted development rights). This impacts all of us, please read why.

The problems with the loophole are that:

  • Property developers can change offices into residential units without any planning permission.
  • Property developers can create very cramped and overcrowded homes that are significantly smaller than the minimum usually allowed.
  • Enfield is losing a lot of money as property developers can avoid paying their share of infrastructure contributions.
  • Enfield is losing affordable homes as property developers can avoided contributions towards affordable homes in the borough.
  • Neither Enfield Council nor residents have any control over these office conversions.
  • Enfield residents are picking up the costs for this!

We have discovered residential units that are very small, overcrowded, have no outdoor space and do not meet basic environmental standards. Some studio flats are as small as a car parking space (9 square metres) and many are the size of a budget hotel room.
Some flats are being created with no external windows. There has been a lot of coverage in the press calling these developments the “slums of the future” and “human warehouses”. Major housing charities (e.g. Shelter and Crisis) are against permitted development rights.

This affects everyone in Enfield, not just those living in or near these developments, as property developers are able to avoid paying their share of infrastructure contributions. Based on the information provided to us from the council, we estimate that the council has lost at least £1.2 million pounds over the last few years. These are funds that are desperately needed for our borough and if developers don’t pay them then Enfield’s residents will need to make up the short fall.

Furthermore, developers avoid contributing towards affordable homes in the borough. We estimate that Enfield has lost around 200 affordable homes as a result of the loopholes these permitted development rights have created.

There is a solution. If the council put an Article 4 Directive in place, it would close the loophole and force property developers go through normal planning processes (instead of bypassing them). That means that residential units would need to be of a decent size, have proper windows and meet environmental standards. Furthermore, property developers would need to pay their fair share. An Article 4 Directive does not stop homes from being built, it simply makes sure that they are of a decent quality.

Nearly all the councils in London have put an Article 4 Directive in place EXCEPT ENFIELD!

Please sign our petition and follow us on Twitter BetterHomesEnfield @BetterEnfield

This Petition runs from 21/07/2019 to 10/09/2019

Links

Petition on Enfield Council website

BetterEnfieldHomes on Twitter

BetterHomesEnfield on Facebook

We need better homes (Enfield Dispatch August 2019)

Log in to comment
Posts in discussion: Petition calls on council to prevent conversion of offices into 'human warehouses'
PGC Webmaster posted a reply
#4865
06 Nov 2019 20:19
[img


A message from Matt Burn of Better Homes Enfield

I wanted to let you know that a new permitted development application has been submitted for Refuge House in Enfield Town, this time to convert the office into 76 studio units.

Almost all the units are more than a third smaller than the minimum normally allowed. Many of the units will be poorly ventilated, with limited natural daylight and there is no outdoor space. It seems likely that the building will be used to house vulnerable people requiring temporary accommodation.

The units proposed for Refuge House are substantially smaller than the single room units at Brickfield House, another large-scale office conversion. Residents living at Brickfield House complain about noise, not being able to sleep, drug taking, cramped conditions, poor ventilation, overcrowding and cockroaches. There are police notices warning residents about anti-social behaviour and drug use.

Apart from the serious consequences for health and wellbeing, these developments also put pressure on local resources.

We are asking that people object to these plans via the online portal on the Council’s website and to email their Councillors to express their objection.

The portal is at https://planningandbuildingcontrol.enfield.gov.uk/online-applications/ and the reference is 19/03612/PRJ.
PGC Webmaster posted a reply
#4866
06 Nov 2019 23:12
Some more information from Matt Burn:

A few people have asked for a link to the plans and asked whether it is worth objecting as it is a permitted development application - so I have pasted my response below in case it is of interest.

We are hoping to get as many objections as possible as this will help us to get it decided in an open forum at the Planning Committee, rather than it being decided solely by a Council Officer.

If we can get it to the Planning Committee, we will try to persuade them to enact an emergency/immediate Article 4 direction, which the Council has the power to do and would stop this application.

Previously the planning officer discouraged objections from residents by saying there is no point in objecting as the application is decided on material fact not planning policy – there is some truth to this. However, when the planning officer was asked why he did not call in the decision last time as he was requested to, one of the reasons he gave was that he had not received many objections!
Darren Edgar posted a reply
#4868
07 Nov 2019 11:06
PDR is not a "loophole".

Is there any evidence to support this statement: "It seems likely that the building will be used to house vulnerable people requiring temporary accommodation."; or is it just fear-mongering hyperbole?

Also, I would be grateful of an explanation as to what Brickfield House has to do with Refuge House? Is it the same developer or in any other way linked?

Developers can't just force businesses to move willy-nilly for PDR, any more than they can if going through the full development application process. There is no interaction between PDR legislation and statutory landlord & tenant rights.
Matt Burn posted a reply
#4872
08 Nov 2019 10:50
Hi David,

PDR has created numerous loopholes (i.e. an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded). For example, the aim of the legislation was to speed up the conversion of empty or under used office buildings to be converted into homes. However, this is not what is happening, as many of the offices are not empty. It also enables developers to avoid making affordable home contributions, CIL payments, S106 payments and, avoid meeting planning regulations (e.g. minimum room sizes). Conservative MP Robert Halfon described it as, “… a policy that is possibly the most ill-thought-out, ill-conceived and subject to the law of unintended consequences, than almost any other policy … over the past few years”.

In terms of it being likely to be used as temporary accommodation - this is based on the evidence of other similar office conversions in and around Enfield (i.e. office conversions of a similar scale, room sizes, etc. are often used as temporary accommodation). There have been previous applications for Refuge House (e.g. for 31-units) and we did not claim that these were likely to be used as temporary accommodation, as they did not so clearly match the characteristics - this latest application for 76 units does more clearly match the characteristics of a block that will be used for temporary accommodation. Brickfield House is given as an example of a nearby conversion as it is in Enfield and has similar characteristics in terms of scale, room sizes, amenity space etc. and it shows what can happen if such developments are allowed to proceed unchallenged.

Over the last few months we have spoken to quite a few of the businesses and people working in Refuge House, who now need to pay the cost and upheaval of moving office location. They say their tenancies are either not being renewed or they are being offered short tenancies, which they feel make managing their business and business planning very hard - so they feel they are having to move out.
Darren Edgar posted a reply
#4873
08 Nov 2019 15:03
PDR is not a loophole. It is an piece of legislation. That it circumvents elements of previous planning control (legally) does not mean it is a "loophole".

Do you have evidence that PDR is not being applied to offices? Ask Croydon, huge amount of low quality office stock has been converted to resi there. Or are you saying there are examples where office blocks have resi conversions on one floor and continuing office uses on another? I would be interested to hear which examples they are (i.e. your "many of the offices are not empty").

I do not disagree that PDR means no CILs or s106s etc, that's why local authorities all hate it - but they simply can't/won't hit housing delivery targets without it therefore their responses are hamstrung.

Thank you for confirming there is no link to Brickfield house nor any actual evidence of an intended purpose of temporary accommodation, just postulation.

The impact of those business tenants at Refuge House is no different from if the Landlord wish to redevelop for any other reason or use.
0

Find us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter

Become a Friend of Cooking Champions today!

Become a Friend of Cooking Champions today!

While we admire and support the Christmas campaigns that we see pop up in December, we also know that help is urgently needed all year round, each and every year. As some people pack away after the festive break, we are still here.

Our support is not limited to a food package, but it leaps beyond - we form connections, we listen and respond to everyone who steps through our doors. We open up a warm, safe, environment which aims to feel like a home away from home.

For us to continue to thrive and grow, and keep supporting as many people as possible, we are asking you to become a Friend of Cooking Champions. Even a donation of just £5-10 per month can make a HUGE impact on the lives of those who come through our doors.

Pop to our People's Fundraising page to donate, and we promise to keep you updated with how your support is making a difference. Thank you, we appreciate you! Team Cooking Champions

Clicky