The temporary High Court injunction blocking asylum seekers from being housed in The Bell Hotel in Epping has received wide-ranging headlines, many of which have referenced planning policy, but what is the planning policy that impacts on the decision?
What will be its impact and, in light of this, does planning policy need to change?
The High Court injunction preventing asylum seekers from being housed in The Bell Hotel in Epping Forest has been framed as a local issue.
Yet its implications for planning reach far beyond Essex. At the heart of the case is a technical argument about change of use – but the judgement points to a much wider challenge for the government, local authorities and the planning system.
PLANNING TECHNICALITY WITH NATIONAL CONSEQUENCES
Hotels are categorised as C1 Use Class under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. They are designed for short term stays, typically booked nightly. Long term accommodation is outside this definition and would usually require a change of use to sui generis, with prior approval from the local authority.
In theory such change is possible. In practice, it is a lengthy and contentious process.
Applications can take months to progress and in cases involving asylum accommodation, public objection is virtually guaranteed.
That is why the ruling in Epping Forest cannot be seen in isolation.
Many other hotels are currently being used in similar ways, and now they too are likely to come under scrutiny. What was once a local dispute risks becoming a national planning flashpoint.
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
The controversy around hotels masks a difficult truth: they are often more suitable for temporary accommodation than the alternatives.
The risk of dispersing asylum seekers into houses in multiple occupation is that individuals end up spread through residential neighbourhoods, including properties rented room by room.
That can create more disruption, not less, and presents significant challenges for local authorities trying to manage both housing needs and community cohesion.
Another complication arises from the government’s Renters’ Rights Bill.
With many private landlords considering exiting the sector, the prospect of guaranteed long term tenancies funded by government could be attractive.
This creates the risk that the shortage of rental supply becomes entangled with the pressures of asylum accommodation, with planning law struggling to keep pace with social policy.
GOVERNMENT OPTIONS
If ministers wish to avoid a patchwork of injunctions, a change to planning law will be required.
The Secretary of State could move to amend the Use Class Order to allow hotels (C1) to be used for longer stays without requiring a change of use. That would provide clarity and consistency for local authorities and operators alike.
Yet Parliament is in recess and even if an urgent statement were made it will take time to legislate.
In the interim, councils across London and the south east are likely to pursue similar actions, forcing the dispersal of asylum seekers further afield.
BIGGER PICTURE
The leader of Epping Forest may feel vindicated by the High Court ruling but the case has exposed a far larger problem.
Without a coherent policy framework, the planning system is left to carry the burden of a much wider political debate.
The government urgently needs a Plan B – and at present, it does not appear to have one.
