房屋改造:比较视角下的英国许可发展权

IF 5 1区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Progress in Planning Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.progress.2022.100730
Manuela Madeddu , Ben Clifford
{"title":"房屋改造:比较视角下的英国许可发展权","authors":"Manuela Madeddu ,&nbsp;Ben Clifford","doi":"10.1016/j.progress.2022.100730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Faced with acute housing crises, some governments are inclined to strip away the ‘bureaucracy’ of planning, relaxing rules on the scrutiny of planning applications and seeking to accelerate the building of new homes. The planning that remains becomes a ‘client service’ for the development industry – a system of housing licensing that follows on from a basic consideration of legal compliance. Such a system has been introduced in England, rooted in the extension of permitted development rights (PDR) for office-to-residential conversions. This article examines the determinants of housing quality through the conversion process, comparing the deregulated approach to conversion in England with Italy’s regulated approach, set within its zonal planning system. The conclusion drawn, after the examination of case studies, is that good quality housing cannot be delivered from the conversion of buildings without either the retention of strong case-by-case planning control or a much more detailed prescriptive approach to housing standards, which would have halted the majority of recent office-to-residential conversions in England.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47399,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Planning","volume":"171 ","pages":"Article 100730"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The conversion of buildings to housing use: England’s permitted development rights in comparative perspective\",\"authors\":\"Manuela Madeddu ,&nbsp;Ben Clifford\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.progress.2022.100730\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Faced with acute housing crises, some governments are inclined to strip away the ‘bureaucracy’ of planning, relaxing rules on the scrutiny of planning applications and seeking to accelerate the building of new homes. The planning that remains becomes a ‘client service’ for the development industry – a system of housing licensing that follows on from a basic consideration of legal compliance. Such a system has been introduced in England, rooted in the extension of permitted development rights (PDR) for office-to-residential conversions. This article examines the determinants of housing quality through the conversion process, comparing the deregulated approach to conversion in England with Italy’s regulated approach, set within its zonal planning system. The conclusion drawn, after the examination of case studies, is that good quality housing cannot be delivered from the conversion of buildings without either the retention of strong case-by-case planning control or a much more detailed prescriptive approach to housing standards, which would have halted the majority of recent office-to-residential conversions in England.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Planning\",\"volume\":\"171 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100730\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900622000848\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Planning","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900622000848","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

面对严重的住房危机,一些政府倾向于取消规划的“官僚作风”,放松对规划申请审查的规定,并寻求加快新房建设。剩下的规划变成了开发行业的“客户服务”——一个从法律合规的基本考虑出发的住房许可证制度。英国引入了这样一种制度,其根源是将办公室改造为住宅的许可开发权(PDR)扩大。本文通过转换过程考察了住房质量的决定因素,将英国放松管制的转换方法与意大利在其区域规划系统内制定的管制方法进行了比较。在对案例研究进行审查后得出的结论是,如果不保留强有力的逐案规划控制或对住房标准采取更详细的规定性方法,就无法从建筑物的改造中提供高质量的住房,这将阻止英格兰最近的大多数办公室到住宅的改造。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The conversion of buildings to housing use: England’s permitted development rights in comparative perspective

Faced with acute housing crises, some governments are inclined to strip away the ‘bureaucracy’ of planning, relaxing rules on the scrutiny of planning applications and seeking to accelerate the building of new homes. The planning that remains becomes a ‘client service’ for the development industry – a system of housing licensing that follows on from a basic consideration of legal compliance. Such a system has been introduced in England, rooted in the extension of permitted development rights (PDR) for office-to-residential conversions. This article examines the determinants of housing quality through the conversion process, comparing the deregulated approach to conversion in England with Italy’s regulated approach, set within its zonal planning system. The conclusion drawn, after the examination of case studies, is that good quality housing cannot be delivered from the conversion of buildings without either the retention of strong case-by-case planning control or a much more detailed prescriptive approach to housing standards, which would have halted the majority of recent office-to-residential conversions in England.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
1.60%
发文量
26
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Progress in Planning is a multidisciplinary journal of research monographs offering a convenient and rapid outlet for extended papers in the field of spatial and environmental planning. Each issue comprises a single monograph of between 25,000 and 35,000 words. The journal is fully peer reviewed, has a global readership, and has been in publication since 1972.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board Immigrants, slums, and housing policy: The spatial dispersal of the Ethiopian population in Israel Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1