Search for something...
Searching...
Since their expansion under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (GPDO 2015), permitted development rights have facilitated an increasing range of development types and changes of use without the need for a full planning application. Natural light, however, has become a key consideration within the permitted development framework following amendments to the GPDO 2015.
In this article, we explore the statutory provisions for prior approval by the local planning authority (LPA) of matters concerning natural light. We highlight a flaw in the approach taken by some LPAs and demonstrate how knowledge in this area can assist developers in securing permission and progressing their schemes.
The Government has progressively expanded permitted development rights to promote economic growth and housing delivery.
LPAs have the power to adopt Article 4 Directions to limit or prohibit specific permitted development rights depending on the local area’s needs and to meet the goals of the Local Plan. For example, the City of London has utilised an Article 4 Direction to block permitted development rights throughout the City for change of use from office-use to residential.
The original GPDO 2015 lacked any provisions relating to natural light. However, widespread criticism of the quality of some of the housing created through permitted development, including a study by University College London, led to a series of amendments. Now, prior approval is required from the LPA in relation to:
These changes highlight the importance of natural light to amenity of homes and the health and wellbeing of their occupiers.
Under the amended GPDO 2015, where the class of permitted development requires the provision of adequate natural light to new dwellings, the LPA must refuse prior approval if adequate natural light is not provided in all the habitable rooms of the dwellinghouses. However, “adequate natural light” is not defined in the 2015 Order. Interpretation should therefore turn on the plain and ordinary meaning of the phrase and any industry guidelines, such as those published by the Building Research Establishment (BRE)[1].
The BRE guidelines are not mandatory and should be applied flexibly since natural lighting is only one of many factors in development design. Crucially, the GPDO 2015 requires that when determining an application for prior approval, the LPA must have regard to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), so far as relevant to the subject matter of the prior approval, as if the application was a planning application.
Unfortunately, the significance of this point appears to have been missed by some applicants and LPAs, with the latter often slavishly (and incorrectly) applying the presumption that anything less than full adherence to the BRE guidelines must result in refusal of prior approval. This misses the point of the NPPF, which states that when considering applications for housing, LPAs should take a flexible approach in applying policies or guidance relating to daylight and sunlight as long as the resulting scheme would provide acceptable living standards.
The question should not be whether the proposed habitable rooms fully meet the BRE guidelines on daylight and sunlight provision, but whether adequate light will be provided to achieve acceptable living conditions for the site context.
Taking the more enlightened approach advocated in this article, which accords with the line adopted in several recent Appeal decisions, should result in fewer applications for prior approval being refused by LPAs (or at appeal). In turn, this should lead to greater delivery of new housing, which is a key strand of current government policy.
For more information on our light advisory services, or to understand how your scheme can be refined in order to optimise your chance of securing prior approval or full planning permission, please contact us.
[1] ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight – A guide to good practice’ (BR209, 3rd edition, 2022)
