A study by the UCL Bartlett School of Planning evaluated homes created through Permitted Development Rights (PDR) and revealed significant quality and health concerns compared to traditional residential developments.
The study reports:
Under PD, there is reduced regulatory scope and ability of the local planning authority to influence the design of the scheme, with the principle of development assumed to be acceptable and only a few pre-set technical issues able to be checked before a development can proceed. Policies from the local plan, which may include those related to residential design and amenity and promoting more healthy environments cannot be applied or considered as part of decision-making. Health and wellbeing impacts of this policy change were not considered in the initial impact assessment (DCLG, 2013). Between 2013 and 2020, housing units created through PD were not required to have any windows at all. An amendment was introduced in June 2020 that required ‘adequate natural light to all habitable rooms’, albeit this does not actually require a window that permits views outdoors. Between 2013 and 2021, local authorities had no ability to consider the space standards of PD housing (since April 2021, they have had to comply with the Nationally Described Space Standard (defined in DCLG, 2015)).
Conclusions
A large number of studies considering the relationship between housing and health already exist. As many of the physical health effects of poor housing have been reduced in high income countries, there has been an increasing interest in mental health and psychosocial relationships with housing design (Clark and Kearns, 2012). The relationship and pathways can, of course, be complex. This includes issues related to the fact that exposure to poor environmental conditions is not randomly distributed but often associated with lower socioeconomic status where there may be multiple environmental risk exposures (Evans, 2003). Housing quality also needs to be considered holistically, including economic, political and ecological dimensions in addition to architectural and technical design dimensions (Lawrence, 1995). There are studies which show housing improvements appear to be associated with health improvements, including both physical health (Thomson et al, 2009; Rodgers et al, 2018) and mental health (Pevalin et al, 2017). And there is ample evidence of the continued existence of poor housing in general: recent data from the English Housing Survey estimates that 23% of private rental sector homes would not meet the Decent Homes Standard (Cromarty, 2022). This existing data is not specific to PD homes. Previous studies have shown a high rate of housing quality issues associated with PD housing and this has been the basis for speculation that there may be health and wellbeing implications for the residents of such housing (Marsh et al, 2020) but have called for further study. This project has helped to fill gaps in existing knowledge around the experience of living in PD housing in London, which is important given the relationship between housing and health.
See HERE for ‘An exploratory study investigating the health and wellbeing impacts of housing created through permitted development in London’ by Dr Ben Clifford, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London (UCL), Dr Helen Pineo Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, University College London (UCL), with Professor Rob Aldridge and Dr Max Eyre (UCL Institute of Health Informatics)
See summary signpost at
See also: here
and ‘Health and wellbeing impacts of housing converted from non-residential buildings: A mixed-methods exploratory study in London’, UK (Helen Pineo a b, Ben Clifford c, Max Eyre d, Robert W. Aldridge e) at Science Direct
