change use_green paper

7/31/2019 Change Use_green Paper

1/50

Possible changes to the Use Classes Orderand temporary uses provisions


2/50

On 5th May 2006 the responsibilities of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) transferred to the Department forCommunities and Local Government.

Department for Communities and Local GovernmentEland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DUTelephone: 020 7944 4400

Website: www.communities.gov.uk

Documents downloaded from the www.communities.gov.uk website areCrown Copyrightunless otherwise stated, in whichcase copyright is assigned to Queens Printer and Controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office.

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, privatestudy or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and notused in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of thepublication specified.

Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-UseLicence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp or by writing to the Office

of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ.Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected].

This publication is only available online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk

Alternative formats under Disability Discrimination Act (DDA):if you require this publication in an alternative format pleaseemail [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]://www.communities.gov.uk/http://www.communities.gov.uk/


3/50

Publication title: Possible changes to the Use Classes Order and temporary uses provisionsConsultation period: 24 January 2002 to 24 April 2002Price: Free

Summary

The Planning Green Paper announced our intention to review the Use Classes Order (UCO) toensure that it is constructed in a way which allows the maximum possible deregulationconsistent with delivering planning policy objectives

This consultation paper seeks your views on whether any changes are desirable to the currentUCO and GPDO provisions.

Order

This publication is available free of charge from Communities and Local GovernmentPublications, PO Box 236, Wetherby LS23 7NB. Tel: 0870 1226 236, fax: 0870 1226 237,

textphone: 0870 1207 405, email: [email protected]. Please quote the product codewhen ordering. Delivery will be 5 to 7 days from receipt of order. A maximum quantityrestriction may apply.

Alternative formats under Disability Discrimination Act (DDA): if you require thispublication in an alternative format (eg Braille or audio) please [email protected] quoting the title and product code/ISBN of thepublication, and your address and telephone number.

Contents

Part 1: Responding to this consultation paper

Part 2: Introduction

Part 3: Objectives

Part 4: The A Use Classes

Part 5: The B Use Classes

Part 6: The C Use Classes

Part 7: The D Use Classes

Part 8 Temporary uses

Part 9: Summary of questions and recommendations

Part 10: Initial Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA)
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143180#P503_69778http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143179#P473_66412http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143178#P423_55697http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143177#P363_48186http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143176#P320_42871http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143175#P239_32292http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143174#P70_11771http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143173#P45_6652http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143172#P29_1474http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143171#P20_518mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/50

Part 11: Executive Summary from research report
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143181#P585_87342


5/50

Part 1: Responding to this consultation paper

We look forward to receiving your comments on the proposals in this consultation paper.

Please send your response to Iain Clark at the address below no later than 24 April 2002:

Development Control Policy DivisionDepartment for Transport, Local Government and the RegionsZone 4/J3Eland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DU

Tel: 020 7944 3947Fax: 020 7944 5004E-Mail: [email protected]

Further copies of the Consultation Paper are available from:

DTLR Free literaturePO BOX 236WetherbyWest YorkshireLS23 7NBTel: 0870 122 6236Fax: 0870 122 6237

We may wish to make responses to this consultation paper available to Parliament and for

public inspection in the Department's library. Unless you specifically state that your response,or any part of it, is confidential, we shall assume that you have no objection to thisarrangement. We shall nevertheless count confidential responses in any numerical analysis.
mailto:[email protected]


6/50

Go to table of contents

Part 2: Introduction

2.1 The Planning Green Paper (see endnote 1), published on 12 December 2001, set out theGovernment's proposals for reforming the planning system, making it faster, simpler and moreaccessible. The Green Paper announced our intention to review the Use Classes Order to

ensure that it is constructed in a way which allows the maximum possible deregulationconsistent with delivering planning policy objectives.

2.2 Planning permission is required for material change of use of buildings and land. However,certain uses are so similar in land-use planning terms - for example, noise, traffic generation,visual appearance, and parking - that an application for planning permission to changebetween them might be considered overly burdensome. In order to relieve the planning systemof a large number of unnecessary applications, the Town and Country Planning Act 1990excludes from the definition of development, and hence from planning control, any change ofuse where both existing and proposed uses fall within one class in an Order made by theSecretary of State.

2.3 The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (UCO) sets outclasses of uses. The UCO provides that a move between activities within the same class is notdevelopment and therefore does not require planning permission. The Town and CountryPlanning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) (GPDO) provides furtherflexibility by classifying certain moves between the Use Classes as permitted development,which similarly does not require express planning permission.

2.4 Whilst the UCO may permit the change of use of a building, planning permission may stillbe required for associated building works. In addition, certain changes of use in Sites ofSpecial Scientific Interest (SSSIs) require English Nature's consent even though they may be

permitted by the UCO.

2.5 From time to time the activities that need to be encompassed by the UCO change as theeconomy develops, new activities emerge and tastes change. It is therefore important toreview the UCO and GPDO provisions regularly and to consider whether any changes areappropriate.

2.6 In February 2000, the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions(DTLR) commissioned research to look at the impact of the Use Classes Order on the deliveryof planning policy objectives. The research contract was let to Baker Associates. As part oftheir investigations, the researchers discussed with the Local Government Association and

other groups the issues and concerns which they had raised. A questionnaire was sent to alldistrict and unitary authorities in England. The researchers explored in depth the issues thatemerged from the questionnaires, consultations and other representations, by examining theoperation and implications in specific situations through the use of case studies.

2.7 The research report (see endnote 2) was published on 12 September 2001. The ExecutiveSummary to this report is included at Part 11 of this consultation document.

2.8 The research report also considered the provisions of Part 4, Class B of the GPDO whichprovides for some activities to take place without the need for planning permission for up to 28
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#endnotes#endnoteshttp://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#endnotes#endnotes


7/50

days of the year, or for 14 days in the case of some of the specified uses. The freedomprovided by this part of the GPDO is intended to be beneficial to the community, by providingfor infrequent recreational and fund-raising events to be held by such bodies as communitygroups and charitable organisations. There are clear benefits to planning authorities fromavoiding the need for a very wide-ranging but generally harmless group of activities to besubject to planning procedures. However, in recent years there have been some concernsabout the amount of activity which this provision allows, and the ability of local planningauthorities to enforce the provisions.

2.9 This consultation paper seeks your views on whether any changes are desirable to thecurrent UCO and GPDO provisions. The paper includes possible options for the futurecomposition of the UCO and temporary uses provisions based on the Department'sconsideration of the research report and other representations received from interested bodiesand individuals. We would welcome your comments on the options proposed, and on anyalternatives you feel would be more appropriate. It would be particularly helpful to receive awide range of views reflecting both urban and rural perspectives.

2.10 Following consultation, we will analyse the responses and consider the most appropriateway forward. If we decide to make changes, we will introduce the necessary secondarylegislation to bring them into effect and will update Circular 13/87 which provides guidance onthe purpose and operation of the UCO.

2.11 This consultation paper concerns England only.

Endnotes1.Planning: Delivering a Fundamental Change - available from DTLR Free literature (tel 08701226 236)

2.Review of the Use Classes Order and Part 4 of the GPDO (Temporary Uses) - ISBN 1 85112506 X - available from DTLR's Publications Sales Centre (tel 01709 891 318) and onDTLR's web-site
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1146054http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/tmp/scratch15214/index.asp?id=1143142


8/50

Part 3: Objectives

Overall approach

3.1 The requirement that planning permission be obtained before development can be

undertaken is a regulatory mechanism. Intervention in the development process by the localplanning authority is justified on the grounds that it is in the public interest. However, the UCOand GPDO are intended to be deregulatory mechanisms that work by lessening the regulatoryrequirements of the planning system. They work on the basis of a balance to be struckbetween market freedoms and the need for control of certain types of activity. By allowing suchderegulation, the resources available for the operation of the planning system are able to bedeployed efficiently to achieve the greatest benefit.

3.2 The UCO is permissive. It removes the need for planning permission between certainspecified uses. It cannot be used to require an application for planning permission for changesbetween activities in different classes (or those not in a class). Whether a planning application

is needed in any particular case will depend upon whether there has been any material changeof use. Within these parameters, we want to ensure that the UCO serves Government policyeffectively.

Key principles

3.3 Our review of the Use Classes Order has been informed by one key principle which webelieve should govern any change to the current composition of the Order. This is that theUCO and GPDO provisions should be constructed in a way which allows the maximumpossible deregulation consistent with delivering planning policy and wider objectives, includingprotecting amenity.

Question 1 - Do you agree that the UCO and GPDO provisionsshould be constructed in a way which allows the maximum possiblederegulation consistent with delivering planning policy and widerobjectives, including protecting amenity?

Local flexibility

3.4 A well constructed set of nationally applicable rules which governs the ability to change usewithout planning permission is likely to be appropriate for the majority of situations. However,we believe that local planning authorities should be able to introduce even greater flexibility bybeing able to relax the boundaries of the GPDO provisions to facilitate changes of use between

classes in order to deal with particular local circumstances.

3.5 The Planning Green Paper seeks views on whether local orders would help or hinderefficient planning. Local orders could give authorities some flexibility to relax national planningrules by extending permitted development rights locally to suit local circumstances, forexample to help authorities to be proactive in promoting sustainable development, particularlyin helping rural businesses adapt to changing circumstances. Subject to the widerconsideration of whether local permitted development rights should be introduced, we believethat the same approach should be applied to changes of use between classes. However, this


9/50

will require primary legislation, so may not be achievable in the short term.

Question 2 - Do you agree that local authorities should be able torelax the need for permission for changes of use in certain specifiedareas?

Question 3 - Do you believe that this can be done through localorders as set out in the Planning Green Paper?

Restricting Changes of Use

3.6 Circular 13/87 discourages the use of planning conditions to limit the uses into which abuilding could change within its class, since the widespread use of conditions would negate thecertainty and freedom from detailed control envisaged by the UCO. We believe that the use ofconditions should continue to be discouraged. However, we recognise that, in exceptionalcircumstances, the use of conditions might be appropriate to address significant local problemswhere there is a clear justification for doing so. In order to ensure that the use of conditions islimited to exceptional circumstances, we propose that conditions should only be used where anauthority's local plan (or whatever might succeed this as a result of measures proposed in thePlanning Green Paper) sets out appropriate policy establishing where such conditions wouldbe applied.

Question 4 - Do you agree that local authorities should be able tolimit the scope for changes of use by the use of conditions only inexceptional circumstances?

Question 5 - Do you agree that this should be limited tocircumstances which have been set out in an authority's local plan?

3.7 In addition to the use of planning conditions, local planning authorities can removespecified permitted development rights by means of a direction under Article 4 of the GeneralPermitted Development Order. An Article 4 direction cannot change the composition of the UseClasses Order, but can be used to remove the ability to change between classes. Where alocal planning authority wishes to issue an Article 4 direction, it will need to seek theagreement of the Secretary of State (through the relevant Government Office for the Region). Itmay also be liable to pay compensation where a subsequent application for planningpermission is refused or granted subject to conditions.


10/50

Part 4: The A Use Classes

Table 1 - Current provision

Use Class Use Whether changepermitted

A1Shops

Sale of goods and cold food, retailwarehouses, hairdressers, traveland ticket agencies, post offices,domestic hire shops, funeraldirectors, dry cleaners

No change of use withoutpermission, except to A1plus single flat

A2Financial andprofessional

services

Professional (excluding health andmedical services) and financialservices (banks and buildingsocieties); other services

appropriate in a shopping areawhere the services are providedprincipally to visiting members of thepublic

Change to A1 permittedonly if there is a ground floordisplay window

A3Food and drink

Sale of food and drink forconsumption on premises, eg inrestaurants, pubs, cafes and winebars; shops for sale of hot food to betaken away

Change to A1 or A2permitted

Sui Generis Shops selling or displaying motorvehicles for sale

Change to A1 permitted

Launderettes, taxi businesses, carhire businesses, filling stations,scrapyards

No change of use permitted

4.1 Activities currently within the A Use Classes attracted most comment and concern duringthe research project. It is therefore not surprising that it is to this Class that the researchersrecommended the greatest amount of change.

Objectives

4.2 The Government's planning policy objectives relevant to these uses are:

to sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of town centres - which includes city, townx

and district centres; andto safeguard and strengthen existing local centres, in both urban and rural areas, whichxoffer a range of everyday community, shopping and employment opportunities.

Concerns about the current uses within the A Class


11/50

Public houses and bars

4.3 The greatest concern found by the researchers (reported by 85 per cent of respondents totheir survey) and reported to the Department by concerned individuals and groups is with the

A3 food and drink Use Class. This frequently relates to noise, particularly from bars. Problemsof noise stem from the inadequate sound insulation; the playing of loud music to attract customwhich is exacerbated by opening of windows and shop fronts, and also the spilling ofcustomers onto the pavements. A second major concern is an increase in crime and anti-socialbehaviour, including people fouling and urinating in doorways, vomiting in the street, as well asother general rowdiness. A third is the hours of operation, which, although also the subject oflicensing control, affect the degree of disturbance caused.

4.4 There are also other environmental concerns. Premises can be hard to service with refuseand cleansing vehicles leading to an increase in the amount of rubbish on the streets. Therecan also be problems with noise and air quality relating to the smells and fumes from ducts andventilation shafts in food establishments.

4.5 A further concern is the proliferation of larger pubs and bars, with many new style baroperations being able to accommodate often more than 500 patrons. Many of these 'super-pubs' are often located very closely to one another. The result of these concentrations of largebars and pubs is noise emanating from the premises and from clients departing in the earlyhours of the morning and behaving in an anti-social manner.

4.6 It is important that the planning system is not used as a means of duplicating controlsexercised by other control mechanisms. The licensing regime and local authorityenvironmental health controls exist to deal with many of the behavioural difficulties sometimesassociated with the consumption of alcohol.

4.7 In particular, on 1 December 2001, Section 17 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001

came into force. This creates new police powers to close down instantly for up to 24 hoursdisorderly and excessively noisy on-licensed premises, which includes pubs, nightclubs, bars,wine-bars, restaurants and hotels. The Act also introduced new powers for the police or thelocal authorities to close unlicensed drinking dens which have a significant impact on crimeand disorder in the local vicinity between the hours of 3.00am and 8.00am.

4.8 The Home Office issued a White Paper in 2000 on proposals to deregulate licensing lawsand the Government is committed to introducing a draft Alcohol and Entertainment Bill as soonas Parliamentary time permits. The proposals in the White Paper would enable a pub orlicensed premises to extend its opening hours on application for a premises license. Concernhas been expressed that this relaxation could have a negative affect on amenity both in town

centres and in residential areas, through increased noise, rowdiness and litter. However, underthe current proposals, local authorities will need to consider the social implications beforeagreeing any such extension of opening hours. In addition, it should be noted that theproposals to introduce more flexible drinking hours were welcomed by the Association of ChiefPolice Officers because fixed artificially early closing times actively cause crime and disorder.For example, in the Isle of Man, permitted licensing hours were abolished in July 2001. Earlypolice estimates indicate a drop in alcohol-related crime of 40 per cent. Furthermore, localpeople have praised the scheme because it has ended the concentration of people on the


12/50

streets at closing time which caused a concentration of noise and disturbance.

Fast-food takeaways

4.9 A major issue concerning the Use Classes Order is the conversion of public houses intofast-food restaurants under the A3 class. Under the current structure, pubs and restaurantscome under the same classification. This allows fast-food chains to buy former pubs andconvert them into fast-food restaurants without the need for express planning permission.

4.10 Pubs in peripheral locations are attractive to fast-food developers as they usually havelarge car parks and are surrounded by open space needed to develop a drive-through facility.Many of the premises taken up by fast-food operators to date have been ones where the pubhas closed down or been sold by the breweries on the basis that they are no longer viable.However, this is not always the case.

4.11 In addition to concerns about the loss of a local facility, many local residents haveconcerns over the impacts that a fast-food takeaway will have with regard to traffic, inparticular, for noise, safety and air pollution. There are provisions within the environmental

health legislation for dealing with the nuisance that can arise from cooking smells and extractorfan noise. However, the pattern of activity arising from takeaways can involve late night useand the congregation of groups of people in the vicinity, not dissimilar in some respects topublic houses and clubs. Unlike these uses though there are no licensing provisions to assistin the management of the use of the premises, or to place any onus on the operators toinfluence the behaviour of customers. In addition, the car traffic that can be generated bytakeaways may be significant, with trips at unsociable hours and the disturbance associatedwith short term on-street parking.

Sandwich shops

4.12 In recent years there have been dramatic changes in the food and drink industry, whichhas seen an increase in the popularity of sandwich shops, coffee shops, juicebars and soupbars. These establishments have grown around shopping and transport links and operators arecontinuing to look to purchase sites in central locations. Such establishments usually fall underUse Class A1 (Shops). However, some of these establishments no longer resemble traditionalshops and may be more like cafs, requiring planning permission for a change of use to Class

A3. There are concerns that it is not always clear at what point a change of use happensbetween Class A1 and A3.

4.13 Sandwich shops (etc) can contribute positively to the shopping economy and create fewor no amenity problems. However, some authorities have raised concerns over the loss of

former retail shops in the high street, especially to new coffee shops. This is mainly due to thegrowth in numbers of sandwich shops and coffee shops and the size of the units (in particularwhere a former large retail unit has been lost).

Warehouse clubs

4.14 Warehouse clubs commonly offer a narrow selection of products within a wide range ofproduct categories at wholesale prices. They tend to attract small businesses but are alsoavailable to members of the public who subscribe to an annual membership. There has been


13/50

uncertainty in the past regarding warehouse clubs and where they fit within the UCO. Inparticular, the classification of warehouse clubs in A1 has been held to be contentious becausethe use is not wholly available to "visiting members of the public" as entry is limited tomembers only. Indeed, UK case law (see endnote 3) has endorsed the view that warehouseclubs are not a UCO class A1 "shop", but are in fact sui generis and would therefore requireplanning permission to change to A1.

Internet shops/cafs

4.15 Internet shops/cafs are a type of activity that has emerged relatively recently, and thequestion of how this new use should be dealt with by the UCO and GPDO has been raised bya number of planning authorities. Such establishments provide benefit to the community (inrural as well as urban areas) in ensuring that everyone has access to the Internet, and as suchthe Government supports their introduction. However, representatives of the industry havereported delays and frustration in dealing with planning authorities uncertain or inconsistent intheir approach to the use of property for the sale of access to internet services.

4.16 These facilities vary considerably, from something akin to a high street financial servicesoutlet (that is, a use providing a service to visiting members of the public and characterised bydesks and computer terminals) to something more like a caf (that is, a place for food anddrink, with sofas and coffee tables, but with some computers). Most are small in scale andoften ancillary to the main use of the premises, but a few are large-scale, single-purposeoperations which do not readily fit into the current UCO. Whilst the number of such facilities isnot particularly significant, there is a need to clarify the way that internet shops/cafs should bedealt with under the UCO.

Motor sales

4.17 Movement of activity from a car showroom to A1 retail is currently permitted by the

GPDO. Given the number of car showrooms in out of town locations, well placed for access bycar, there was a concern that this flexibility allowed the development of out-of-town shoppingestablishments with the potential for supermarkets to buy up former car showrooms.

Options for change

Option 1

4.18 The researchers recommended that, subject to a number of limitations, there could bescope for introducing greater flexibility within the A use classes by combining the current A1,

A2 and A3 classes to form a single new "mixed retail" uses Class. They made thisrecommendation based on the principle that the mix of uses within a centre should be primarilydetermined by the market. They suggested that the inclusion of a range of activities within thismixed retail use - shops, post offices, small cafs/bars, financial services, banks and travelagents - would maximise the opportunities for the full use of premises.

4.19 However, the researchers also recommended that control should be maintained overcertain uses which were likely to give rise to the greater impacts. In particular, theyrecommended the introduction of a maximum size threshold of 100 square metres of gross
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#endnotes#endnotes


14/50

lettable area (GLA) for changes into or out of the new "mixed retail" uses class for the differentactivities that were formerly within the A3 Use Class (restaurants, pubs, cafes etc). Below thisthreshold, such establishments could be part of the new "mixed retail" use.

4.20 Above the size threshold, the researchers recommended that separate use classesshould be set for establishments where the primary purpose was the sale and consumption ofalcoholic drink, and establishments for the sale of food and drink primarily for consumption onthe premises. Establishments for the sale of hot food to be taken away should be sui generis.

4.21 The researchers further recommended that:

internet shops/cafs where the primary purpose is the sale of access to internet servicesx

should be within the new "mixed retail" use, or if they are above the size threshold andhave as a primary purpose the consumption of food on the premises or the consumptionof alcohol on the premises, to be classified according to their primary purpose;sandwich shops and coffee shops should be part of the new "mixed retail" use if they arexbelow the size threshold and otherwise to be classified with uses where the primary

purpose is the consumption of food on the premises;the provision for motor sales to change to shops as permitted development should bexremoved; andwarehouse clubs should be included within the 'Aa' mixed retail class.x

4.22 The researchers proposals would result in a new A Use Class as set out in table 2.

Table 2 - Option 1 for "A" Use Classes

Use Class Use Whether changepermitted

Aa'Mixed Retail' Uses

Sale or provision of goods and services tovisiting members of the public including:

sale of goods and cold food,x

including through warehouse clubs;financial and professional servicesx

(including the sale of access tointernet services), excluding healthand medical services; andsale of food and drink forxconsumption on premises, includingsandwich shops and coffee shops,subject to a maximum GLA of 100 sqm

Change to Aa plussingle flat allowed

AbRestaurants and

Sale of food and drink primarily forconsumption on the premises, but

Change to Aaallowed
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#tab2#tab2


15/50

Cafes including sandwich shops and coffeeshops, where the GLA of the enclosedfloorspace is greater than 100sq m

AcPublic Houses, Bars

and Nightclubs

Sale of drink and food for consumption onpremises where the primary purpose isthe sale and consumption of alcoholicdrink, where the GLA of the enclosedfloorspace is greater than 100sq m

Change to Aa andAb allowed

Sui generis Shops for the sale of hot food to be takenaway (including drive-through restaurants)

Change to Aa andAb allowed

Shops selling or displaying motor vehiclesfor sale; launderettes, taxi businesses, carhire businesses, filling stations,scrapyards

No change of useallowed

4.23 The issue of nightclubs, which the researchers recommended should be part of theproposed class Ac, is considered in Part 7.

4.24 The researchers did not carry out any research into the effect of setting the size thresholdat 100sq m GLA. The Government is considering this issue further and would welcome yourviews on whether you think such a threshold is appropriate.

Option 2

4.25 An alternative option, based on that recommended by the researchers, would be to mergeuse classes A1 and A2 to form a new "mixed retail" use, whilst excluding A3 uses entirely fromthis new class. This would increase flexibility to change between shops and other services forvisiting members of the public, but would ensure that local planning authorities could retaincontrol over all establishments for eating and drinking (ie not just those over 100 sq m GLA).

4.26 In this and subsequent options, warehouse clubs have been classified as sui generis astheir position in the "mixed retail" class could lead to inappropriate out-of-town shopping.


Use Class Use Whetherchange

permittedAa

'Mixed

Retail' Uses

Sale or provision of goods and servicesto visiting members of the public,

including:

sale of goods and cold food; andx

financial and professional servicesx

(including the sale of access tointernet services), excluding healthand medical services

Change to Aaplus single flat

allowed

Ab Sale of food and drink primarily for Change to Aa


16/50

Restaurantsand Cafes

consumption on the premises, butincluding sandwich shops and coffeeshops

allowed

AcPublic

Houses andBars

Sale of drink and food for consumptionon premises where the primary purposeis the sale and consumption of alcoholicdrink

Change to Aaand Aballowed

Sui generisShops for the sale of hot food to betaken away (including drive-throughrestaurants)

Change to Aaand Aballowed

Shops selling or displaying motorvehicles for sale; launderettes,warehouse clubs, taxi businesses, carhire businesses, filling stations,scrapyards

No change ofuse allowed

Option 3

4.27 A further option, based on option 2, would be to include premises for the sale of food anddrink primarily for consumption on the premises, within the new "mixed retail" use, whilstexcluding from this new class premises where the primary purpose is the sale andconsumption of alcoholic drink. This would increase flexibility still further, by the ability tochange from, for example, a shop to a caf, but would ensure that local planning authoritiescould retain control over pubs and bars which could have significant impacts on amenity.


Use Class Use Whether

changepermittedAa

'Mixed Retail'Uses (includingRestaurants and

Cafes)

Sale or provision of goods andservices to visiting members of thepublic, including:

sale of goods and cold food;x

andfinancial and professionalx

services (including the sale ofaccess to internet services),

excluding health and medicalservicessale of food and drink primarilyx

for consumption on thepremises

Change toAa plussingle flatallowed

AbPublic Houses

and Bars

Sale of drink and food forconsumption on premises wherethe primary purpose is the sale and

Change toAa allowed
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2


17/50

consumption of alcoholic drink

Sui generis Shops for the sale of hot food to betaken away (including drive-throughrestaurants)

Change toAa allowed

Shops selling or displaying motorvehicles for sale; launderettes,

warehouse clubs, taxi businesses,car hire businesses, filling stations,scrapyards

No change of

use allowed

Option 4

4.28 Options 2 and 3 retained the researchers proposed split of A3 into premises where theprimary use is for food and drink and premises where the primary use is for the sale of alcohol.Option 4, would keep A3 as it currently is (but excluding take-aways), and would allowestablishments to change between restaurants, cafs, pubs, and bars without the need forplanning permission.


UseClass

Use Whetherchange

permitted

Aa'MixedRetail'Uses

Sale or provision of goods and services tovisiting members of the public including:

sale of goods and cold food; andxfinancial and professional servicesx

(including the sale of access to

internet services) excluding healthand medical services

Change to Aaplus single flatallowed

AbFoodand

drink

Sale of food and drink (including alcohol)primarily for consumption on thepremises, including sandwich shops andcoffee shops

Change to Aaallowed

Suigeneris

Shops for the sale of hot food to be takenaway (including drive-through restaurants)

Change to Aaand Ab allowed

Shops selling or displaying motor vehiclesfor sale; launderettes, warehouse clubs,

Taxi businesses, car hire businesses,filling stations, scrapyards

No change of

use allowed

Option 5

4.29 In options 2, 3 and 4, hot food takeaways are considered to be sui generis. Option 5,would therefore be to adopt option 2, 3, or4, but with the sale of hot food to be included withinthe sale of food class. This would avoid difficulties of definition (for example where a fast-foodrestaurant includes eat-in and take-away facilities in equal amounts), but would not allow
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option4#option4http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option3#option3http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option5#option5http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option4#option4http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option3#option3http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option4#option4http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option3#option3http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2


18/50

control over the potential adverse effects of the take-away trade.

Question 6 - Which option for Use Class A do you think would mostmeet the objectives set out at paragraph 4.2 with regard both totown and city centres and to local/neighbourhood centres? Wouldyou prefer to leave Use Class A as it currently is (the "do nothing"option)? Would you prefer an alternative option not set out in thispaper?

Question 7 - Why do you prefer your chosen option?

Question 8 - If a size threshold were introduced in the wayrecommended by the researchers, do you think that 100sq m GLAwould be appropriate? In your view, what would be the effect ofsetting such a threshold on the mix of uses in:

a) town and city centres? andb) local/neighbourhood centres?

Endnotes3. R v Thurrock Borough Council and others, ex parte Tesco Stores Ltd and others - October1993.
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#4.2#4.2


19/50

Part 5: The B Use Classes



changepermitted

B1Business

a Offices other than financialand professional servicesproviding for the visitingmembers of the publicb Research and developmentc Other industrial processesappropriate in a residential area

Change to B8(only up to 235m2 of floorspace) permitted

B2

Generalindustrial

General industry, not within B1 Change to B1 or

B8 (only up to235 m2 of floorspace)

B8Storage ordistribution

Storage or distribution centres Change to B1(only up to 235m2 of floorspace) permitted

Sui Generis Work registerable under Alkali etc,Works Regulation Act

No change ofuse permitted

Objectives5.1 The Government's planning policy objectives relevant to these uses are generally to locatedevelopment so as:

to promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight;x

to promote accessibility to jobs by public transport, walking and cycling; andx

to reduce the need to travel, especially by car.x

5.2 More specifically for the different elements of the B use class the Government is seeking:

Offices: to focus office development in city, town and district centres and near to majorxurban public transport interchanges;Research & Development: to facilitate the development of clusters of high-technology,x

knowledge-driven companies;Industry: to ensure that there is a supply of sites with a choice of means of access; andx

Distribution: to promote sustainable distribution, including where feasible, the movementx

of freight by rail or water by:


20/50

o locating distribution and warehousing facilities, particularly of bulky goods, away fromcongested central areas and residential areas and ensure adequate access to trunk roads; and

o promoting opportunities for freight generating development to be served by rail or

waterways by identifying and protecting sites adjacent or close to such infrastructure.

Concerns about the current uses within the B Class

Class B1

5.3 The current B1 Use Class brings together into a single class a number of uses which it wasconsidered would be capable of being undertaken "in any residential area without detriment tothe amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust orgrit", although this definition took no account of scale, traffic generation or parking problems. It

provides considerable flexibility for development in an area where it can be difficult todifferentiate between uses. For example, most R&D and light industrial premises are likely tohave ancillary office accommodation, and it is quite possible for all three uses to take placewithin the same building.

5.4 This flexibility was introduced following a review of the Use Classes Order in 1987 as aderegulatory measure. However, it has been suggested that the current composition of the B1use class can act against our policy of promoting office development in town centres wherethere is readily accessible public transport infrastructure since it does not distinguish officeuses from research and development and light industry. There is a concern that this couldencourage developers who receive planning permission for a science park, for example, to use

that planning permission instead for office accommodation, which might attract higher rents.However, it could also be argued that the very fact that a science park can turn into officeaccommodation has led to more science parks being developed than would otherwise havebeen the case, since the developer has the reassurance that he could subsequently use thesite for offices if the science park venture was not successful.

The B2 and B8 Use Classes

5.5 Property managers with a significant portfolio of industrial and storage space suggested, inthe researchers' survey, that the buildings in the storage and distribution Use Class (B8) inpractice divided into two main types. The first of these comprised buildings that were similar to

general industrial sheds and which occurred on most industrial estates (and so were similar toB2 use). The second type could be described as 'high-bay distribution'. These buildings wereoften designed, built and located for the express purpose of handling a very large throughputusing the most advanced and high-capacity storage, access and handling systems. It has beensuggested that due to the similarity in the use of space and impact of certain types of class B2use, and part of the range of activity encountered within the B8 use class, there was scope forgreater flexibility in the use of space by merging all or parts of these categories of use.

5.6 An alternative view, however, is that B8 uses may have very specific locational


21/50

requirements, such as sites next to railway sidings, wharves or near motorway junctions andthat such sites therefore need to be reserved or safeguarded for such uses.

Changes from B1 & B2 to B8

5.7 The researchers found that there were some problems emanating from the ability tochange from B1 and B2 to B8. These included concerns over increases in traffic movements(should the total storage area increase) and the loss of jobs (as B8 uses were generally lessemployment intensive).

Flexibility to change within the B Class

5.8 Under the current composition, permitted development rights allow changes between B1and B8 (both to and from) and from B2 to B8, up to 235 m2 of floor space. This flexibility hasbeen in existence for many years and has not provoked any strong comments. However, theresearchers heard evidence that subdivision of units had been used as a means of overcomingarea constraints, enabling incremental change to take place. Cumulatively, this could amountto a significant degree of change and the impacts much more pronounced.

Options for change

5.9 Paragraphs 5.3 and 5.4 considered different views about the current composition of the B1Use Class. Before reaching any decisions on this issue, we would welcome your views onwhether you think that allowing more use to be made of the existing sub-divisions of the B1Use Class (for example by splitting them into separate use classes) would help or hinder ourpolicy objectives as set out in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2. We would, in particular, like to hear ofany examples of where the current composition of the B1 Use Class has had a direct affect(either desirable or undesirable) on the promotion of our policy objectives.

5.10 In advance of hearing your views on the above, we have only set out two options here.The first is the option recommended by the researchers. The second is a "do nothing" option.

Option 1

5.11 The researchers recommended that those uses which could be categorised as primarilyinvolving the production of artefacts (currently Class B1(c)) should be separated from thoseuses categorised by the primary purposes of research and development (Class B1(b)) or useas offices (Class B1(a)), which should remain together. They also recommended that "otherindustrial processes appropriate in a residential area" should be renamed as "cleanproduction".

5.12 As a consequence of this change, the researchers recommended that provision forgeneral industrial space (Class B2) to move without planning control should be limited to amove to clean production use only (Class B1(c)).

5.13 The researchers noted that there were some potential drawbacks to theserecommendations. In particular, there would be a loss of some of the automatic flexibility fromwhich the users of some Class B1 space currently benefit. However, the researchers felt thatthis was not an undue restriction. New premises could be given a planning permission that
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.2#5.2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.1#5.1http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.4#5.4http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.3#5.3


22/50

embraces office, research and development and light industrial use where the location wassuitable, and where the policy context based on a full range of economic and social as well asenvironmental considerations was supportive.

5.14 The researchers considered that the promotion of a science park rather than a generalbusiness park ought to be achieved through carefully specified and justified allocations withindevelopment plans, to be implemented through development briefs and section 106agreements. The future of section 106 agreements , or planning obligations, is the subject of aseparate consultation document "Reforming Planning Obligations" published on 19 December2001. A copy of the document is available from DTLR Free literature (tel 0870 1226 236) andon DTLR's website at www.planning.dtlr.gov.uk

5.15Table 7 illustrates the researchers recommended option.

Table 7 - Option 1 for "B" Use Classes

UseClass

Use Whether changepermitted

BaOffices

and R&D

Offices, other than financial and professionalservices providing for the visiting members ofthe public. Research and development

Change to B8 (only up to235 m2 of floor space)permitted

BbClean

production

Clean production processes Change to B8 (only up to235 m2 of floor space)permitted

B2General

production

General production processes Change to Bb or B8 (B8only up to 235 m2 of floorspace) permitted

B8Storage

anddistributi

on

Storage and distribution Change to Ba and Bb (onlyup to 235 m2 of floorspace) permitted

SuiGeneris

Work registerable under Alkali etc, WorksRegulation Act

No change of usepermitted

Option 2

5.16Option 2 would be to leave Use Class B as it currently is. The advantage of such anapproach would be to retain the current flexibility and simplicity of the existing B1 Use Class. Ithas been argued that maintaining the B1 Use class would prevent the need for difficultdecisions on which use (office, clean production or research processes) was primary in anyparticular site or building, and which was ancillary, particularly given that these uses couldfluctuate naturally over time. However, this might have implications for meeting the planningpolicy objectives set out in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2 above.

Question 9 - Do you think that allowing more use to be made of theexisting sub-divisions of the B1 Use Class (for example by splittingthem into separate use classes) would help or hinder our policy
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.2#5.2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.1#5.1http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#tab7#tab7


23/50

objectives as set out in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2? It would be helpfulif you could illustrate your answer with examples of where thecurrent composition of the B1 Use Class has had a direct affect(either desirable or undesirable) on the promotion of our policyobjectives.

Question 10 - Do you think that either of the options set out abovefor Use Class B would meet the objectives set out at paragraphs 5.1and 5.2? Would you prefer an alternative option not set out in thispaper?

http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.2#5.2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.1#5.1http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.2#5.2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#5.1#5.1


24/50

Part 6: The C Use Classes


Use Class Use Whether change

permittedC1Hotels

Hotels, boarding and guesthouses, provided that care isnot provided


C2Residentialinstitutions

Residential accommodation forprovision of care (eg old agehomes); residential schoolsand colleges and trainingcentres; hospitals and nursinghomes


C3

Dwellinghouses

Dwellinghouses for individuals,

families and up to sixindividuals living as a singlehousehold

Subdivision of

dwellinghouses intotwo or more dwellinghouses not permitted

Sui Generis Hostels No change of usepermitted

Objectives

6.1 The Government's main planning policy objective relevant to these uses is that:

the Government intends that everyone should have the opportunity of a decent home. Itsxaim is to widen housing opportunity and choice, and secure a better mix in the size andtype of housing than is currently available, including for those in need of affordable andspecial needs housing.

Concerns about the current uses within the C Class

Definition of a hotel and a hostel

6.2 Concern has been expressed about the lack of clarity over the precise definition of a hoteland a hostel, making it difficult to differentiate between the two. Hostels have been treated as

sui generis since 1994. This was initially introduced in order to help prevent the erosion of thecharacter of traditional holiday resorts. In more recent years, the definition of a hostel hascome into question where local planning authorities have sought to make provision forrefugees. Hostels also provide an important source of affordable housing for young employeesand students and their loss to tourist accommodation would be inappropriate.

Residential institutions

6.3 It has been suggested that the definition of C2 use is too wide, encompassing uses as


25/50

diverse as care homes for those with special needs, nursing homes for the elderly, and halls ofresidence. These could have quite different impacts in terms of noise, transport and generallevels of activity. There has also been the suggestion that this allows inappropriatedevelopment in residential areas.

Houses in multiple occupancy

6.4 The Department has received a large number of representations about housing in multipleoccupancy, and in particular student housing. Some people have sought additional planningcontrols as they argue that the occupation of a house by six students gives rise to differentimpacts from the occupation by a family. This can include impacts on noise, traffic, parking andthe visual appearance of the building. People have also expressed concern about the effect onthe character of an area where a large number of dwelling houses are occupied by students.This stems in part from the way the houses are maintained and managed by the landlord andin part from the behaviour of the occupants, neither of which are subject to planning control.

Homes for care in the community patients

6.5 Another concern with the C3 class over the last decade has been the practice of somelocal authorities buying up property for housing care in the community patients. Many localpeople have objected that this has affected the amenity of their area.

Short-term housing

6.6 Another issue that has arisen regarding use class C is the potential for loss of permanenthomes to the provision of short-term lets for business or other visitors, including aparthotelsand serviced accommodation through to time-share units. Developers have turned many flatsinto luxury temporary accommodation in the London area. The Court of Appeal recently foundin a case concerning flats overlooking Hyde Park that this change of use did not constitute

development under the C use class (see endnote 4). Some local planning authorities haveintroduced local policies to try to address this problem. In particular, Westminster's UnitaryDevelopment Plan says that "planning permission will not be granted for the use of housing astemporary sleeping accommodation. The Council will attach conditions to grants of planningpermission for new or converted housing to prevent the use of housing for this purpose".

Options for change

6.7 The researchers did not make any recommendations for changes to the C Use Classes.Their reasons for not doing so were in part confirmation that the UCO and GPDO workreasonably well, and in part a belief that where there were concerns raised over theconstruction and definition of the UCO and GPDO, there was not an alternative that wouldclearly be better.

6.8 This paper does not suggest any alternative options for the C use classes as it is unlikelythat a change in the composition of Class C would help to resolve the concerns mentionedabove. As set out in part 3, local planning authorities can already introduce local policies forusing planning conditions in exceptional circumstances and where there is a clear justification


26/50

for doing so.. We would, however, welcome your thoughts on this.

Question 12 - Do you consider that a change to the C Use classwould better meet the objectives set out in paragraph 6.1 above?

Question 13 - If yes, what would you recommend and what do youconsider would be the benefits?

Endnotes4. Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, civil division 26thJanuary 2000


27/50

Part 7: The D Use Classes



changepermitted

D1Non-

residentialinstitutions

Clinics, health centres, crches, daynurseries, day centres, consulting rooms(not attached to doctor's house); museums,libraries, art galleries, public and exhibitionhalls; non-residential schools, colleges andother educational centres; public worship orreligious instruction

No changeof usepermitted

D2Assembly

and leisure

Cinemas, dance and concert halls;swimming pools, skating rinks, gymnasiums;

other indoor and outdoor sports and leisureuses, bingo halls, casinos

No changeof use

permitted

SuiGeneris

Theatres, amusement arcades and centres,fun fairs

No changeof usepermitted

Objectives

7.1 The Government's planning policy objectives relevant to these uses are:

To focus land uses which are major generators of travel demand in city, town, district andxlocal centres, the type of centre it goes into depending on the nature and scale of the useand the catchment served.City and town centres will be most appropriate for those uses serving large catchments,x

such as museums, central libraries, art galleries, public and exhibition halls, cinemas,concert halls, theatres and casinos.District and local centres will be most appropriate for those uses serving a more localx

catchment, such as clinics, health centres, day centres, doctor's consulting rooms, branchlibraries and bingo.Some uses may be appropriate in either type of centre, such as swimming pools,x

gymnasiums and amusement arcades.

Concerns about the current uses within the D Class

Breadth of Classes D1 and D2

7.2 Concern has been expressed about the breadth of Classes D1 and D2. These UseClasses can be seen as "default" categories into which uses are placed that are not specific toany other Class, rather than them being similar in nature and impact. The operators ofbuildings in these uses often require purpose-built buildings, and, until PPG6 encouraged their


28/50

location in existing centres, those promoting leisure uses in particular tended to seek sites onretail warehouse parks or in edge-of-town locations with high car access and plenty of parking.Since PPG6 was issued in 1996, planning policy encourages these uses to locate inappropriate types of centres.

Nightclubs

7.3 The part of the D Use Classes that has caused the most concern is the inclusion withinClass D2 of 'dance halls'. The common concern was with nightclubs, which might come withinClass D2, within Class A3, or could be sui generis. The researchers found this to be a difficultarea, not least because dance halls could include not only nightclubs, but everything andeverybody from tea dances to lap dancers. In addition, different uses could take place indifferent parts of the same building under the same management, and different uses could takeplace at different times of the day.

Potential loss of cinemas

7.4 Concern has been expressed through the survey at the potential for the loss of cinema

facilities to other uses in D2. The researchers found that in most towns, more traditionalcinemas had closed in town centres and large multiplex cinemas had opened, often in out-of-town locations. The researchers felt that this was the result of consumer preference and thegrant of planning permissions for modern, purpose-built facilities.

Theatres

7.5 A number of people have expressed surprise that theatres are classified as sui generis andnot included in the same Class as cinemas. This classification was made following the 1987review. It was introduced because of the special protection promoted by the Theatres Trust Act1976 and the consequent requirement in the General Development Order for consultation with

the Theatres Trust before granting planning permission on land which includes a theatre. TheTheatres Trust is also a statutory consultee for development involving any land on which thereis a theatre. However, as set out in the Planning Green Paper, we propose to reduce thenumber of statutory consultees so that only those bodies whose advice has health and safetyimplications or which operate another parallel consent regime (such as listed building, playingfield or environmental consents) will be given statutory consultee status.

Gambling premises

7.6 The Government is currently considering comments from interested bodies and membersof the public on the report of the Gambling Review Body, which it published in July (CM5206).

The report recommended that gambling-specific premises (such as betting shops and casinos)should be subject to a new system of licensing by local authorities, to run parallel to regulationby a proposed new Gambling Commission. It has been suggested that a separate use classcould be set up for premises whose primary purpose is gambling, or alternatively that allgambling-specific premises should be sui generis. However, a separate use would only be

justified if there were well defined land use planning reasons for separating gambling premisesfrom other leisure uses. The Government is still considering options and no decisions have yetbeen reached.


29/50

Options for change

Option 1

7.7 The only change proposed by the researchers to the current composition of the D Use

Class is that nightclubs above 100 square metres of gross lettable area should be specificallyincluded in the A use class for premises where the primary purpose is the sale andconsumption of alcoholic drink. Clearly this option will be dependent upon what is decided forthe treatment of pubs and bars in the A Use Class.

Option 2

7.8 In response to the research report, it has been suggested that nightclubs are no moresimilar to traditional pubs than they are to other dance halls. Option 2 therefore proposes thatnightclubs should be in a Class of their own. This could come either under the D Class (wherechange of use to D2 Uses could be permitted) or under the A Class (where change of use to

pubs, restaurants or mixed retail use could be permitted). We would welcome your views onwhich Class would be most suitable.

Option 3

7.9 It has been suggested that since the uses in Class D are all so disparate, there is nobenefit to be gained in distinguishing between D1 and D2 use. For example, it has beensuggested that places of worship might have very similar patterns of visitors to cinemas andconcert halls. Option 3 therefore creates just one assembly and leisure class. Table 10illustrates this option

Table 10 - Option 3 for "D" Use Classes

UseClass

Use Whetherchange

permittedD1Assembly andleisure

Clinics, health centres, crches, day nurseries,day centres, consulting rooms (not attached todoctor's house); museums, libraries, artgalleries, public and exhibition halls; non-residential schools, colleges and othereducational centres; public worship or religious

instruction; cinemas, dance and concert halls;swimming pools, skating rinks, gymnasiums;other indoor and outdoor sports and leisureuses, bingo halls, casinos

Nochange ofusepermitted

SuiGeneris

Theatres, amusement arcades and centres,fun fairs

Nochange ofusepermitted

Question 14 - Which option for Use Class D do you think would
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#tab10#tab10http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2


30/50

most meet the objectives set out in paragraph 7.1? Would youprefer to leave Use Class D as it currently is (the "do nothing"option)? Would you prefer an alternative option not set out in thispaper?


Question 16 - What treatment do you prefer for nightclubs? Why doyou prefer your chosen option?


31/50


Part 8 Temporary uses

8.1 Part 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995permits the temporary use of any land for any purpose for not more than 28 days in total in anycalendar year (although some purposes are restricted to no more than 14 days in total) and the

provision on the land of any moveable structure for the purposes of that use, unless:

the land in question is a building or is within the curtlilage of a buildingx

the use of the land is for a caravan sitex

the land is, or is within, a site of special scientific interest and the use of the land is for: -x

(i) motor sportso

(ii) clay pigeon shooting oro

(iii) any war game (see endnote 5), oro

the use of the land is for the display of an advertisementx

8.2 The following temporary uses are restricted to no more than 14 days:

the holding of a market, orx

motor car and motorcycle racing including trials of speedx

Objectives

8.3 The provision for temporary uses without the need for planning permission is intended tobe beneficial to the community, by providing for infrequent recreational and fund raising eventsto be held. In particular, the temporary use provisions can be of great benefit to the ruraleconomy, for example by allowing farmers markets and similar events to take place. There areclear benefits to planning authorities from avoiding the need for a very wide ranging butgenerally harmless (by their nature, and/or by being intermittent or infrequent) group ofactivities to be subject to planning procedures.

8.4 The provisions in the GPDO do, however, contain some quite specific exceptions to thegeneral freedoms provided. This reflects particular types of impact that might arise, and thetypes of location that might be affected, for which the general freedom is not seen as beingappropriate.

Concerns about the current temporary uses provisions


32/50

Car boot sale and weekend markets

8.5 The principal concern arising from the temporary use provisions is with car boot sale andweekend markets (see endnote 6). If operators are inclined to hold markets on more days in ayear than provided for in the GPDO there are practical difficulties in enforcing the provisions.Monitoring the activity, and distinguishing between the landowner, the operators and vendorsto establish the identity of the responsible persons are onerous tasks.

8.6 In some cases the problems are exacerbated by the operator having more than one site inthe same general location, for example with sites on different sides of the same village or evenof the same road. By this device the same operator can operate a similar market to attractcustomers from the same catchment area every weekend of the year.

8.7 Traffic is the most frequently reported problem with localised congestion, danger to otherroad users and pedestrians, and inconvenience to residents through parking and noise allarising in some cases. Other concerns include considerable disturbance to local residentsarising from the hours of working, litter, inadequate on-site facilities and the detrimental visualimpact of these events in the countryside.

8.8 The holding of markets in some towns is a privilege granted by royal charter. Wherecharter markets exist, the laws relating to these have been used to limit locations wheremarkets can take place, and the days on which they can be held. A market cannot be held onthe same day as a charter market within 6 2/3 miles of the site of the charter market. Thisprovision, though it is used, is insufficient to deal with the issue of weekend markets as far asthose authorities with charter markets are concerned, because another day will be available,and this distance has little significance for car users. Subject to the outcome of this review oftemporary uses, the Government will consider whether the charter market provisions continueto serve any useful purpose.

Motor-Sports

8.9 The second most common problem is the inclusion of motor sports, including activitiessuch as motor cycling scrambling, stock-car racing and car racing. The primary objection tothese was the noise they create. These activities can be seasonal and take place in the middleof summer so local residents could be subjected to noise for several weekends running.

Clay-pigeon Shooting

8.10 Concern has also been raised about the noise this activity created, which can carry for upto three to four miles away.

Options for change

Option 1

8.11Option 1 is to retain the current temporary use provisions. Local planning authorities canalready remove specified permitted development rights by means of a direction under Article 4of the General Permitted Development Order. Under an Article 4 direction, the removal ofpermitted development rights can be tailored to the particular needs of a site or area and can
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option1#option1http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#endnotes#endnotes


33/50

therefore be kept to a necessary minimum.

8.12 However, there are difficulties in adopting this approach. Most significantly, there may bean ongoing liability on the local planning authority to pay compensation where a subsequentapplication for planning permission is refused or granted subject to conditions. If Governmentamends the General Permitted Development Order to remove certain permitted developmentrights (which would be the case under the following options) compensation may still bepayable, but it is limited to the first twelve months after the change is introduced.

Option 2

8.13 The researchers acknowledged that there was a great deal of activity that took advantageof the permitted development rights which causes no harm to issues of acknowledged planningimportance and indeed which might be desirable. However, having considered a range ofoptions, the researchers concluded that only the complete removal of temporary use provisionswould really address the problems adequately. They therefore recommended that thetemporary use provisions be removed for all temporary uses currently under Class B of Part 4of the GPDO, and be replaced with a requirement that events organisers seek planning

permission for a site on which they might wish to hold activities from time to time.

Option 3

8.14 In order to address the specific problems identified, but to retain the benefits of temporaryuse provisions, and alternative option would be to remove permitted development rights fortemporary markets, all motor sports, and clay pigeon shooting.

8.15 This option would provide local planning authorities with the opportunity to consider theplanning implications for those activities which cause the most local controversy anddisruption. However, both this option and option 2 would also remove permitted development

rights for farmers markets, which are strongly supported by Government.

8.16 These options would not, of course, stop such activities taking place, since an organisercould still apply for planning permission. This might be on the basis of a certain number ofactivities on a specific site within a year. This would have the advantage of allowing the localplanning authority to impose any necessary conditions, including on the duration of theplanning permission, without being too burdensome on both the organiser and the authority.

8.17 In both options 2 and 3, removing permitted development rights for temporary marketswould not, of itself, remove the market franchise rights bestowed by Royal Charters to whichsome local authorities and private markets are privy. Local planning authorities would still,

therefore, be constrained in their ability to grant planning permission to a proposed temporarymarket which was within 6 2/3 miles of the site of the charter market.

Option 4

8.18 It has been suggested that reducing the number of days on which temporary uses canoccur would help to reduce the impact. Option 4 is therefore to reduce the number of days onwhich temporary markets, all motor sports, and clay pigeon shooting can operate withoutplanning permission to 7 days in any one year. Whilst this would half the number of occasions
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option4#option4http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option3#option3http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option2#option2


34/50

on which such activity could take place, it would not allow local planning authorities to controlthe potentially adverse effects on those days when the markets etc were operating. In addition,it would not help to solve the problem where an organiser has access to a number of separatesites within a small location.

Option 5

8.19Option 5 would be to introduce a size threshold above which permitted developmentrights would be removed for temporary markets, all motor sports, and clay pigeon shooting.Different thresholds would need to be established for each activity. For example, a suitablesize threshold for car boot sales could, perhaps, be based on the number of stalls, or "carboots", or the expected number of people attending such markets. This would allow localplanning authorities to control the larger activities which could be expected to have the greatestadverse impact. However, it would have difficulties in terms of enforcement, as well as inensuring that whatever threshold was set did not catch fetes or other one off charitable events.

Option 6

8.20Option 6 would be to introduce a notification procedure. Some local planning authoritieshave recommended a simplified notification system, whereby event organisers could ask theauthority if they needed planning permission in advance. If the authority felt that the eventwould cause no harm they could go ahead with it, whereas if there were any potential effectsthe authority could require planning permission. A significant problem with this idea is that ifplanning permission was required for a one off event it could take a long time to be authorised,putting the event into jeopardy. In cases where planning permission was refused, there wouldalso be a need to ensure that any subsequent appeals were dealt with speedily. This optionwould reduce the level of certainty and clarity. Problems may also arise in deciding whataction, if any, should be taken if the local authority is not informed of an event taking place.

Question 17 - Which option for temporary use provision do youmost favour. Would you prefer an alternative option not set out inthis paper?


Endnotes5. "war game" means an enacted, mock or imaginary battle conducted with weapons which aredesigned not to injure (including smoke bombs, or guns or grenades which fire or spray paintor are otherwise used to mark participants), but excludes military activities or training exercises

organised by or with the authority of the Secretary of State for Defence.6. It has been established by case law that there can be no difference between car boot salesand weekend markets as far as planning is concerned.
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option6#option6http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option5#option5


35/50


Part 9: Summary of questions and recommendations

Key Principles

Question 1 - Do you agree that the UCO and GPDO provisions should be constructed in a

way which allows the maximum possible deregulation consistent with delivering planning policyand wider objectives, including protecting amenity?

Local flexibility

Question 2 - Do you agree that local authorities should be able to relax the need forpermission for changes of use in certain specified areas?

Question 3 - Do you believe that this can be done through local orders as set out in thePlanning Green Paper?

Restricting Change of Use

Question 4 - Do you agree that local authorities should be able to limit the scope for changesof use by the use of conditions only in exceptional circumstances?

Question 5 - Do you agree that this should be limited to circumstances which have been setout in an authority's local plan?

A Use Classes

Question 6 - Which of the options set out in Part 4 of the consultation paper for Use Class Ado you think would most meet the objectives set out at paragraph 4.2 with regard both to townand city centres and to local/neighbourhood centres? Would you prefer to leave Use Class Aas it currently is (the "do nothing" option)? Would you prefer an alternative option not set out inthis paper?


Question 8 - If a size threshold were introduced in the way recommended by the researchers,do you think that 100 sq m GLA would be appropriate? In your view, what would be the effectof setting such a threshold on the mix of uses in:

a) town and city centres? andb) local/neighbourhood centres?

B Use Classes

Question 9 - Do you think that allowing more use to be made of the existing sub-divisions ofthe B1 Use Class (for example by splitting them into separate use classes) would help orhinder our policy objectives as set out in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2? It would be helpful if you


36/50

could illustrate your answer with examples of where the current composition of the B1 UseClass has had a direct affect (either desirable or undesirable) on the promotion of our policyobjectives.

Question 10 - Do you think that either of the option set out in Part 5 of the consultation paperfor Use Class B would meet the objectives set out at paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2? Would youprefer an alternative option not set out in this paper?


C Use Classes

Question 12 - Do you consider that a change to the C Use class would better meet theobjectives set out at paragraph 6.1?

Question 13 - If yes, what would you recommend and what do you consider would be thebenefits?

D Use Classes

Question 14 - Which of the options set out in Part 7 of the consultation paper for Use Class Ddo you think would most meet the objectives set out at paragraph 7.1? Would you prefer toleave Use Class D as it currently is (the "do nothing" option)? Would you prefer an alternativeoption not set out in this paper?


Question 16 - What treatment do you prefer for nightclubs? Why do you prefer your chosen

option?

Temporary Uses

Question 17 - Which of the option set out in Part 8 of the consultation paper option fortemporary use provision do you most favour. Would you prefer an alternative option not set outin this paper?



37/50

Part 10: Initial Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA)

Use Classes Order And Parts 3 And 4 Of The General Permitted Development Order

Issue and Objectives

10.1 The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (UCO) sets outclasses of uses (eg shops, business, residential institutions etc). The UCO provides that amove between activities within the same class is not development and therefore does notrequire planning permission. The Town and Country Planning (General PermittedDevelopment) Order 1995 (as amended) (GPDO) provides further flexibility by classifyingcertain moves between the Use Classes as permitted development, which similarly does notrequire express planning permission.

10.2 The Planning Green Paper, published on 12 December 2001 set out the Government'sproposals for reforming the planning system, making it faster, simpler and more accessible.The Green Paper announced our intention to review the UCO to ensure that it is constructed ina way which allows the maximum possible deregulation consistent with delivering planningpolicy objectives. Our consultation paper sets out our proposals in more detail.

10.3 In addition to considering the framework for changes of use, the consultation paper alsolooks at the current temporary use provisions under Part 4 of the GPDO.

10.4 In considering any changes to the UCO and related GPDO provisions, our key principle isthat the UCO and GPDO provisions should be constructed in a way which allows the maximumpossible deregulation consistent with delivering planning policy and wider objectives, includingprotecting amenity.

Risk

10.5 The options proposed in the consultation paper do not seek to address a specific risk, butare aimed at meeting the objectives set out above. The existing provisions within the UCO andGPDO which allow change of use without an application for planning permission wereformulated on the basis that it served no-one's interest to require planning permission for types

of development that generally did not damage amenity. Our thinking has moved on, and wenow wish to see a UCO which is able to respond to the above objectives, and in particularwhich is as deregulatory as possible consistent with delivering planning policy objectives.

Options and Benefits

10.6 The consultation paper sets out a range of options for changes to the use classprovisions. We do not have a preferred option, since we would welcome comments on each


38/50

before deciding on the most appropriate way forward. In addition, there may be alternativeoptions not set out in the consultation paper which, as a result of consultation, we believewould best deliver our objectives for change. Each options set out in the consultation paper isconsidered below under the relevant use classes.

10.7 The consultation paper also proposes that local flexibility should be encouraged in areaswhere the national composition of the UCO and GPDO provisions might have specificundesirable implications. This flexibility should be limited to circumstances where suchflexibility is genuinely required to help deliver planning policy objectives. We therefore proposethat it should only be used where an authority's local plan sets out appropriate policyestablishing where such flexibility should be applied.

A Use Classes

10.8 The A Use Classes cover shops (A1), financial and professional services (A2), and foodand drink establishments (A3). Some of the following options propose that one or more of

these use classes should be merged. This will benefit developers and owners of such propertyas they will no longer require an application for planing permission to change use within thenew larger use class. This may also benefit local planning authorities since they will have fewerapplications to deal with, and ultimately it may benefit local communities as the market will beable to respond faster to the changing needs of consumers. However, where one or more useclasses are merged, there will inevitably be a reduction in the opportunity for local people toinfluence the type of uses to which a building may be put, and a reduction in the ability of thelocal planning authority to impose appropriate planning conditions.

10.9 Some of the following options also propose that one or more existing use class should besplit (for example A3 food and drink). This is likely to increase the workload on local planning

authorities, but will allow them the opportunity to control potentially inappropriate development,and will provide local people with an opportunity to comment on a proposed change of use intoa different use class.

Option 1

10.10Option 1 is to create a new "mixed retail" use class by combining the current A1 and A2classes and the A3 class below a set size threshold of 100 square metres of gross lettablearea (GLA). Above this size threshold, separate use classes would be set for establishmentswhere the primary purpose was the sale and consumption of alcoholic drink, andestablishments for the sale of food and drink primarily for consumption on the premises.

Establishments for the sale of hot food to be taken away would not fall within a specific class(and so would be treaded as sui generis).

10.11 The benefits of this option are that there would be greater flexibility for change, thusreducing the need for planning permission and thereby saving both time and money for localauthorities and developers. The inclusion of a range of activities within this mixed retail use -shops, post offices, small cafs/bars, financial services, banks and travel agents - shouldmaximise the opportunities for the full use of premises.
http://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/KPRICE/Desktop/index.doc#option1#option1


39/50

Option 2

10.12Option 2 is to create a new "mixed retail" use class by combining the current A1 and A2classes, but exclude A3 uses entirely from this new class. A3 uses would be split betweenestablishments where the primary purpose was the sale and consumption of alcoholic drink;establishments for the sale of food and drink primarily for consumption on the premises; andestablishments for the sale of hot food to be taken away.

10.13 The benefits of this option are that the greater flexibility for change between A1 and A2uses would be introduced, but local planning authorities would be able to retain control over allestablishments for eating and drinking.

Option 3

10.14Option 3 is to create a new "mixed retail" use class by combining the current A1 and A2classes, and to include in this new class premises for the sale of food and drink primarily onthe premises (but excluding take-aways restaurants). Premises for the sale and consumptionof alcohol would be a separate use class.

10.15 The benefits of this option are even greater flexibility for use of buildings in a towncentre, whilst allowing local planning authorities the ability to retain control over pubs and barswhich could have significnat impacts on amenity.

Option 4

10.16Option 4 is to create a new "mixed retail" use class by combining the current A1 and A2classes, whilst keeping A3 uses as a separate use class retaining both food and drink, butexcluding take-away restaurants.

10.17 The benefits of this option are the same as those set out foroptions 2 and 3 above.Additionally, this option would retain the current flexibility for establishments to change fromrestaurants to bars (or visa versa) without the need for planing permission, thus avoidingdifficult decisions over whether such a material change had or had not occurred.

Option 5

10.18Option 5 is to adopt option 2, 3 or4, but to include the sale of hot food within the use forthe sale of food.

10.19 The benefits of this option are as stated in options 2, 3 or4 above but with t