020 8859 1700 Book a Demo

Are Article 4 Directives Good For University Cities?

Are Article 4 Directives Good For University Cities?

University of Kent @ Canterbury

It has been a hard fought battle but Canterbury City Council, here in Kent the garden of England, last month activated laws imposing curbs on the conversion of family homes into Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMOs).

In the main, HMO's in Canterbury are needed to house the ever growing student population as house sharing is far cheaper than renting your own apartment.

Known as an Article 4 directive now anyone wishing to convert a property into an HMO within certain areas, will have to apply for planning permission. The council say that the directive, along with its 10% cap on HMOs on any given street, will help with "the creation of a more integrated student body into the Canterbury community as a whole".

Many Article 4 directives have been implemented by other councils over the past few years, usually in busy University towns (Bath, Bristol, Brighton, Newcastle, Manchester to name but a few) to prevent areas closest to the Universities being overrun with students.

To say that the passing of the Article 4 directive here in Canterbury has been a hard fought battle, is really an understatement. In 2010 two consultations were carried out by the council to determine local opinion on a proposed implementation of the initiative as well as a proposed 20% cap on HMOs in any 100 metres and the results were largely negative. 64% were opposed to the Article 4 directive whilst 71% rejected the idea of a cap.

Fast forward a year and a half to the summer of 2012 and shock-waves rippled through the council when a vote widely considered to be a foregone conclusion in favour of Article 4 decided against its implementation. It was to be a further three years until the directive was finally and definitively passed, in September 2015. The policy came into effect on the 26th of February 2016. This will initiate the commencement of the mandatory consultation period of 21 days. Once complete, responses to the consultation will be reviewed and reported to Members, when a decision on whether to confirm the Article 4 Direction will be taken.

Speaking after the new power came into force on Thursday, city council leader Simon Cook said: "Houses of multiple occupation are an important part of the economy and vibrancy of Canterbury, but for some time now the feeling has been that they are concentrated in specific areas rather than being spread around the city. Article 4 allows us to get a better balance of these properties across all communities."

Some say article 4 reduces the associated negative impacts of student areas such as, parking issues, noise, litter and poorly maintained housing. Plus it controls the conversion of family homes, re-balancing the number of properties available to families and preventing areas becoming over saturated with HMO's. Thereby stopping family properties losing value which affects the areas current residents.

But students also stimulate the local economy (bars, takeaways, taxi firms, cafes, cinema, theatre, nightclubs etc.) and the impact of the planning law only on specific areas of the city may simply push the potential issues of 'studentification' and even student 'ghetto's' into neighbouring areas. The rents paid for accommodation closest to the University will invariably increase too, enabling only the wealthiest of students to live close to their chosen place of study and the area which this Article 4 directive covers seems huge, which will then involve increased travel costs.

But more significant than this, Article 4 also takes away the freedom of people to choose where they want to live. It allows local authorities to engage in social engineering, restricting who can live in what part of local authority area. The question is, should we really be using planning powers that prevent individuals who have a certain status from living in specific areas? Should we become involved in social engineering of this kind and is it right for us to decide that students should be barred from living in certain areas? Freedom of movement does apply to all, doesn't it?

Deb Roberts

Written by Deb Roberts

Source Estates IT Ltd

Other Related News: General

EstatesIT

An Independent Software Company's View On The Zoopla Property Group's Purchase Of The Property Software Group

PSG systems are reported to be used in over 8,000 UK agency branches. They say their software is used on a daily basis by over 40,000 agents and that's an awful lot of agents' data for ZPG to gain access to.

Deb Roberts


Written by Deb Roberts
Source Estates IT Ltd

Read more
Extended Family

Are Granny Flats Classed As Second Homes?

As many as 33,000 homeowners live in properties with a self-contained flat for an elderly relative but under the new Stamp Duty tax rules, they will be classed as owning two properties if they try to sell up.

Deb Roberts


Written by Deb Roberts
Source Estates IT Ltd

Read more
Tributes to the lost boys

A Tragic Reminder Regarding Smoke Alarms

Since October 2015, it has been a legal requirement for landlords to ensure that working smoke detectors are fitted on each floor of a rented property and a carbon monoxide alarm fitted in any room where solid fuel is used.

Deb Roberts


Written by Deb Roberts
Source Estates IT Ltd

Read more
Rob Kahl

Three Cheers For The Honest Agent

Rob Kahl is the branch manager of the Leigh-on-Sea, in Essex agency Scott & Stapleton and when he was asked to place a rather neglected property on his books, he took one look at it and decided on a radical marketing strategy.

Deb Roberts


Written by Deb Roberts
Source Estates IT Ltd

Read more
SwiftKey-Microsoft

A Cautionary Tale For Our Times

When SwiftKey was founded there were three founding members, Chris was a friend of Jon’s from school and Ben was a friend from his university in Cambridge. Two months after forming the company Chris decided to leave; Jon and Ben bought his shares. What happened next?

Deb Roberts


Written by Deb Roberts
Source Estates IT Ltd

Read more