Formal Representation to the Secretary of State

Regarding Proposed Article 4 Direction
(Houses in Multiple Occupation – North East Lincolnshire / Grimsby)**

Date: [12/01/2026]
To:
The  Current Secretary of State
Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities
c/o Planning Casework Unit
Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities
Email: pculegacy@levellingup.gov.uk

From:
Andreas Russo
6 Colwick Rd NG2 4BU Nottingham
info@areton-ltd.com

1. Introduction and Purpose

This representation is submitted under the Town and Country Planning Act and associated planning regulations, in response to the proposed Article 4 Direction by North East Lincolnshire Council (NELC) to withdraw permitted development rights for the change of use from dwellinghouses (Use Class C3) to small Houses in Multiple Occupation (Use Class C4) across Grimsby and other areas of the borough.

My submission requests that the **Secretary of State carefully review the legal and policy basis of the proposed Article 4 Direction, and, where appropriate, modify, suspend, or repeal the direction on the grounds that it fails the statutory and policy tests required for Article 4 Directions, and lacks sufficient evidence of demonstrable harm as required under national planning policy. This request is strongly supported by relevant legislation, national planning policy, and the absence of adequate and proportionate evidence presented by the local planning authority.
(See national guidance on Article 4 Directions and permitted development rights, including the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 and associated government policy)

2. Relevant Legislative and Policy Framework

2.1. Article 4 Directions and Permitted Development Rights

Under Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (GPDO 2015), a local planning authority may withdraw specified permitted development rights in defined areas. Article 4 Directions do not in themselves prohibit development, but require planning permission for development that would otherwise be permitted by the GPDO.
(Permitted development rights otherwise allow changes of use, such as from C3 to C4 (small HMO), without a full planning application)

Importantly, Article 4 Directions must be justified, proportionate, and based on robust evidence demonstrating that the exercise of permitted development rights leads to unacceptable adverse impacts that cannot be addressed by any other means — including existing planning controls, enforcement powers, or targeted policy tools. National planning guidance emphasises that Article 4 Directions should be used sparingly, proportionately and only where justified.
(See general Article 4 guidance on planningdirect.co.uk and other government guidance)

3. Failures in Evidence and Policy Justification

3.1. Lack of Demonstrable Evidence – Proportionality and Harm

The proposed Article 4 Direction affecting HMOs in Grimsby appears to be broadly drawn without providing robust, targeted evidence that the permitted development right for small HMOs has caused specific, demonstrable harm to amenity, housing supply balance, neighbourhood character, or infrastructure. This absence of evidence is contrary to national planning policy tests for Article 4 Directions, which require that the restriction of permitted development rights must be necessary and justified.

There is no clear demonstration of:

  • Actual adverse impacts directly attributable to conversions under permitted development rights.

  • Quantitative or qualitative analysis showing unacceptable harm to local amenity, neighbouring occupiers, or community wellbeing sufficient to justify borough-wide restrictions.

  • Evidence that alternative planning tools (e.g., targeted policies, HMO licensing, enforcement of existing conditions) have been exhausted or are inadequate.

Without such evidence, the Direction is disproportionate, overly broad, and inconsistent with the intent of Article 4 legislation and the Government’s own planning guidance. This position is supported by planning commentary on Article 4 Direction requirements and limitations.
(See planningdirect.co.uk and related technical guidance)

4. Legal and Policy Tests Not Satisfied

4.1. Article 4 Direction Criteria and National Policy

National planning policy requires that any Article 4 Direction must be based on clear, credible, up-to-date evidence which demonstrates that the direction is justified by reference to a particular circumstance in the area, especially where rights are withdrawn borough-wide. The decision to impose such a direction must reflect local circumstances justifying the withdrawal of permitted development rights and not simply a preference for greater planning control.

The Council’s case, as far as has been made available, does not meet statutory tests:

  • No competent evidence has been provided linking permitted development conversions to demonstrable harmful impacts.

  • The Direction is not narrowly targeted; it is borough-wide rather than focused where issues are proven.

  • The Direction could inadvertently restrict legitimate development and housing supply without proportional planning benefit.

5. Request for Secretary of State Intervention

In light of the above, and in accordance with planning legislation and guidance:

5.1. I request that the Secretary of State:

  1. Review the evidence base provided by NELC for the Article 4 Direction and assess whether it meets the statutory and national policy tests for proportionality and justification.

  2. Suspend, modify, or revoke the Article 4 Direction where it fails to meet these tests — particularly for areas where there is no compelling evidence of unacceptable local harm.

  3. Where necessary, call in the matter for determination if substantial public interest or legal deficiencies in the process are identified.

6. Supporting Material

In support of this representation, I attach:

  • A copy of this letter.

  • Links to national guidance on Article 4 Directions.

  • A request for all relevant evidence and technical reports used by the Council (already submitted separately under Freedom of Information Act).

7. Conclusion

The proposed Article 4 Direction for HMOs in Grimsby and wider North East Lincolnshire, in its current form, has insufficient justification and does not satisfy the legislative and policy requirements for restricting permitted development rights. It is likely to be disproportionate, unsupported by robust evidence, and therefore open to challenge.

I urge the Secretary of State to exercise powers of review and intervention to ensure that planning controls are applied lawfully, proportionately, and in accordance with national policy objectives.

Yours faithfully,
Andreas Russo

Support Material — National Guidance on Article 4 Directions

1. Article 4 Directions — PlanningDirect guidance (overview of Article 4)
https://www.planningdirect.co.uk/find-out-about/permitted-development/article-4-directions

2. Gov.uk — Article 4 Directions: Secretary of State Modification Letters
(Official record of cases where the Secretary of State has modified Article 4 Directions)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/article-4-directions-secretary-of-state-modification-letters 3. Gov.uk — When Is Permission Required? (Explains Permitted Development Rights & Article 4)
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required

4. Planning Portal — Article 4 Directions and Permitted Development Rights Overview
https://www.planningportal.co.uk/permission/responsibilities/planning-permission/permitted-development-rights

5. Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 — Article 4 Procedure
(Primary legislation establishing Article 4 Directions)
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/596/schedule/3 6. Commons Library Parliament Guidance — Restrictions on Permitted Development Rights & Article 4
(Includes phrasing that Article 4 Directions must be used in a measured and targeted way)
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/when-is-planning-permission-not-needed-permitted-development-in-england/