The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents |

Listen

Householder Permitted Development: User/Design Code Scoping Study

Dundas and Wilson in conjunction with Michael Laird Architects were commissioned by the Scottish Government to investigate the scope for a statutory User/Design Code to accompany the householder permitted development rights which will be set out in a new statutory instrument. This paper highlights the findings from research and consultation, and summarises the recommendations for addressing these when the code is devised.

Main Findings

• The recommendations of earlier proposals to extend the limits of Householder permitted development (PD) are generally endorsed, including the extension of PD rights to flats. However, some refinements to the detailed provisions have been suggested, and it is recommended that Listed Buildings and buildings in Conservation Areas should not enjoy PD rights.
• There is support in principle for a document which will describe the PD provisions contained in the statutory instrument along with graphics to explain PD envelopes and constraints. Such a document must be focused on defining "Permitted Development" limits and must not imply that development over and above these limits, which would require a planning application, may necessarily be problematic.
• Only a limited role can be played by a statutory PD code in promoting good design. Examples of other codes which seek to achieve good design are linked to some form of consent procedure. In seeking to devise a statutory stand-alone Householder PD Code, Scottish Government will be breaking new ground. It is recommended that such a code should be termed a "Householder Development Code" and should be integrated with discretionary advice on design guidance and procedures to maximise its user-friendliness.
• The Householder Development Code must be capable of use by planning professionals, architects, householders and neighbours. It should be a comprehensive yet concise document, accessible to householders and those coming to the planning system for the first time. This will be a challenge for the next stage of work. The text should avoid obscure legal language and planning jargon; graphics and visual descriptions must not be overly complicated.
• The statutory code has been described in detail (Chapter 7 of the Study) as "Part 2" of a three-part Householder Development Code. A framework is recommended. This should contain a clearly expressed "Vision" and "Purpose" and the detailed scope of the code should cover 7 different "Code Elements" - extensions to dwellings and flats, outbuildings, dormers and roof alterations, general alterations to dwellings and flats, decking and hard surfaces, means of access to houses and flats, and boundary walls and fences.
• This statutory code should be set within an explanation of planning procedures and some discretionary advice about good design. These are described as Part 1 (the explanatory part) and Part 3 (the discretionary part) of the Householder Development Code. Unlike Part 2, these parts should not be mandatory, and could give examples of good and bad practice, with cross references to local design guidance prepared by planning authorities.
• Because of the universality of the proposed document, it will be important to test out as fully as possible the draft Householder Development Code as it emerges. Legal testing, and testing by all potential users - householders, developers, architects, designers, planning officers, and enforcement officers - are recommended to ensure the Code will work in practice. Views of members of the public and community groups should also be sought. This will be vital given that this document will be the first of its kind.

Background

The Scottish Government Planning Directorate (SGPD) intends to extend the general planning permission for certain householder developments contained in the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 (the GPDO). The GPDO grants a general planning permission (commonly known as Permitted Development Rights) for specified developments, and therefore removes the need for a planning application for these. The extension of householder Permitted Development Rights will give householders greater freedom to carry out extensions and alterations to their homes.

In addition, the SGPD is to commission work on a user/ design code to explain the new Permitted Development provisions in an accessible way and also to set some design requirements with which developers must comply in order to benefit from Permitted Development Rights. The code will be primarily for householders, but should also be of assistance to planning authorities and others. While such a document will act as a guide, compliance with it will be mandatory, hence it is described as a "code".

Before work can be commissioned on the preparation of the code, a scoping study is needed to ascertain the issues which the code could and should cover. This report highlights the findings from the scoping study.

Methodology

The methodology included a mixture of research and consultation, factoring in the experience, technical and practical skills of the Study Team. The key stages were as follows.

• Research structured to address various themes of particular relevance.
• Identification of issues to be explored and addressed in the development of a code.
• Consultation with various expert advisors and planning authorities, including a workshop session.
• Consideration of the architectural and visual implications of minor householder development for a Code to address.
• Exploration of the design implications of new PD provisions through production of sketches and visual representation of issues.
• Drafting and testing a sample code type to identify further issues to be addressed at the next stage.

Findings

Changes to PD Rules

The starting points for the Study were the GPDO and a Research Study carried out for the then Scottish Executive in 2006 - The "Review of the General Permitted Development Order 1992: Householder Development" (the 2006 Study). The 2006 Study contained recommendations for extending PD rights and these were explored and tested in greater depth. Visualisations were devised to demonstrate the implications and these drew out useful discussions at the workshop sessions, suggesting good reason for refining these recommendations.

For instance, the use of a proportion of curtilage as a foundation for PD limits - is considered to be impractical. Research confirmed that in legal terms "Curtilage" is not a good basis for taking matters forward, and would not in any case address the design objective of ensuring an extension or outbuilding does not over-dominate an original property in situations where there are smaller houses within larger curtilages. How an extension relates to the original house is considered to be more important. It is therefore recommended that the principal basis of the PD threshold for extensions should be the footprint measured in proportion to the original dwelling - an increase in footprint of up to 50%, subject to (a) Maximum of 60 sq m footprint; and (b) the retention of undeveloped rear garden space - at least 60% of the existing rear garden retained without buildings OR a minimum size or rear garden area to be retained. A new control should be introduced of no development within 1m of common boundary.

The other refinements recommended to the 2006 Study provisions are as follows:

• Houses and flats should both have similar PD rights, but with greater control for flats.
• Outbuildings should be a separate element, combined with fuel containers and controlled in a similar way to extensions.
• Minor changes to relate dormers more closely to the roof plane.
• Suggestion that (a) small front porches and (b) two storey extensions may be PD up to 1 metre of common boundary - in certain controlled circumstances.
• Delete the requirement for materials to match existing due to definition and enforcement difficulties.
• Raised terraces and balconies to be handled separately, and additional area and height controls to be incorporated to address concerns about overlooking implications.
• All development within the curtilage of Listed Buildings (and in Conservation Areas) should require planning permission
• Boundary walls and fences should be PD if behind the front building line
• Ramps and accesses to be PD.

Purpose of the New Code

There is wide support in principle for a document which will describe the PD provisions contained within a GPDO along with graphics to define PD envelopes and constraints. Such a document must be focused on "Permitted Development" and must not imply that development over and above these limits - which would require a planning application - may necessarily be problematic. The underlying aim of a statutory code is to define the PD thresholds on the basis that development up to these limits will not give rise to any adverse impact on residential or visual amenity of any significance, and explain the advantages for householders in terms of avoiding any requirement for a planning application.

The results of the research found that only a limited role can be played by a statutory PD code in promoting good design. The examination of other codes which seek to achieve good design found that to be effective, such codes need to be linked to some form of consent procedure. Design Codes which rely on self assessment are complex and deal with low level design issues only and are a rigid tool; they usually function within a zoning system such as in the United States or Australia. They would not therefore be appropriate for use within the UK planning system.

The key design issue for the code to address will be the impact on the public environment; the key issue in terms of development standards will be neighbour overshadowing/ overlooking. While privacy is ill-defined as a material planning issue, there is an underpinning in existing local design guidance that development should meet standards of good neighbourliness, avoiding overlooking and overshadowing. A new code should be in line with this.

If one of the priority aims in rolling out extended PD limits remains to achieve improved design quality, local design guidance will have to be brought into play to convey appropriate design objectives, fit for context. It will not be appropriate for a national code to differentiate between different building styles or urban typologies. This would make it overly complex, difficult to understand and impossible to enforce. The only appropriate differentiation will be for designated sensitive areas - conservation areas and listed buildings. As recommended above the simplest and most easily understood approach would be to rule out the application of PD and therefore the code in such circumstances. There was no support from the planning authorities' representatives involved in the Study for extending additional control within other areas, even within National Parks, and so the code should be expected to apply in all other instances.

A New Householder Development Code

In seeking to devise a statutory stand-alone PD Code for householders, the Scottish Government will be breaking new ground. Bearing in mind that a "User/Design Code" is sought, this should be linked to discretionary advice on design guidance and procedures to make it easier to understand. The "Householder Development Code" should be structured accordingly.

Many issues which cause concern to people outside the planning system relate to householder developments - neighbours' extensions, boundary walls, dormers, proximity to boundaries, overlooking, daylighting and overshadowing, and (increasingly) domestic renewable energy scenarios. Concerns often relate to the detailed impact on the environment and so the combination of a statutory code with aspirational ideals to encourage good design will be welcome.

The Householder Development Code must be capable of use by planning professionals, architects, householders and neighbours. It must be a single document which is accessible to householders and those coming to the planning system for the first time. This will be a challenge for the next stage of work. The text and graphics should avoid obscure legal language and planning jargon and the graphics and visual descriptions must not be overly complicated.

Nevertheless, one of the key user groups will be local authority planning staff. The Study allowed for widespread publicity about the forthcoming changes to the GPDO and some planning authority representatives expressed concerns and raised issues to be addressed going forward. While the workshop helped to engender a degree of ownership and acceptance of the changes, there is evidence that these may be difficult for some to accept because a perception remains that the loss of control over minor householder developments will have a cumulative effect of degrading the built environment. Continuing engagement with planning authorities during the work to take the code forward, is recommended to build on the dialogue which has already commenced.

This new code will sit alongside the GPDO and it will be important for its legal status to be made clear.

Recommended Framework of the Statutory Code

The statutory code itself is described as "Part 2" of the Householder Development Code in Chapter 7 of the Study. One of the key outputs from the Study is a recommended framework for this. It should contain a clearly expressed "Vision" and "Purpose" (recommendations for these are included). It is also recommended that the detailed scope of the code should cover 7 different "Code Elements" - extensions to dwellings and flats, outbuildings, dormers and roof alterations, general alterations to dwellings and flats, decking and hard surfaces, means of access to houses and flats, and boundary walls and fences.

For each Code Element the following should be included:

Description of the development type which is permitted;

• The broad justification for these controls or restrictions, expressed as code objectives;
• The parameters to be controlled and the terms of restrictions relating to height, footprint, relationship to roof, front wall, side wall, etc.;
• One or more diagrams or sketches to demonstrate the full extent of PD rights in different situations with reference to:
  • Envelope for extensions and outbuildings; and
  • Space to be retained - garden, front space (car), space for neighbours, space between windows.

In addition, there should be a general section which explains the ground rules and overall limitations or exemptions (including the re-statement of existing GPDO provisions, as appropriate). For example:

The permission granted shall not authorise the following:

• The creation of a separate new dwelling.
• Any development higher than the highest part of the original house or flat.
• The use of any building for purposes other than domestic use, incidental to the enjoyment of the particular residential unit.
• Any development which involves the formation or laying out or material widening of a means of access to a trunk road or classified road, or creates an obstruction to the view of people using any road used by vehicular traffic if this may cause danger to such persons.

The Other Two Parts to the Householder Development Code

Chapter 7 also recommends that the statutory code should be set within an explanation of planning procedures and some discretionary advice about good design. These are described as Part 1 (the explanatory part) and Part 3 (the discretionary part) of the Householder Development Code. These parts should not be mandatory, and Part 3 could give examples of good and bad design. In line with the "Vision" it should adopt the tone of a common approach, suggesting that as householders we all have a degree of responsibility to contribute to the quality of our environment, and that this is an implicit part of the Permitted Development rights. The main purpose would be to play an educational role, possibly explaining some of the commonly used terms and concepts and linking to documents such as "Designing Places". It is recommended that this section should be cross-referenced to regional and local design issues and planning authorities' design guidance. It could be in the form of a template for planning authorities to use in updating such guidance (and consideration should be given to resourcing such work).

Appropriate reference should also be made to the benefits of engaging a design professional, such as a chartered architect. However, it will be important that these two non-statutory parts should be concise and uncomplicated - very much a supporting part of the overall code.

Recommendations for taking matters forward

As outlined above, there are within the report a number of issues raised which have implications for the detailed design of the PD rules and the drafting of a new statutory instrument, a necessary precursor to the final drafting of the statutory Code. These include the avoidance of using curtilage as the basis for the size of a PD extension, and it is also suggested that window alterations should be included as permitted development (hence implying that they are development).

There are also challenges for those charged with developing the detail of the Householder Development Code to devise a document which is clear, unambiguous and embeds basic principles of neighbourliness and making a positive contribution to the public environment.

Because of the universality of the proposed document, it will be important to test out as fully as possible a draft Householder Development Code as it emerges. Legal testing, and testing by householders, developers, architects, planning officers and enforcement officers are recommended to ensure the code will work in practice. Views of members of the public and community groups should be sought. This will be vital given that this document will be a first of its kind. Once introduced, the code should then be monitored. Some freedom to review the code to address the findings of monitoring should be built in, if possible. This will help to ensure effectiveness.

It will be important to keep planning authorities engaged in the work going forward. They will be able to provide invaluable help, and their support for the final form of the document will be necessary to make the new system work. They also have a role to play in updating local design guidance, ideally to dovetail with the development of the new code.

If you have any enquiries about social research, please contact us at:

Tel: 0131 244-0874
Fax: 0131 244-7573
Email: socialresearch@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Website: www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

The report, "Householder Permitted Development: User/Design Code Scoping Study", which is summarised in this research findings is a web only document and is available on the publications pages of the Scottish Government website at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/Recent

This document (and other Research Findings and Reports) and information about social research in the Scottish Government may be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

The site carries up-to-date information about social and policy research commissioned and published on behalf of the Scottish Government. Subjects covered include transport, housing, social inclusion, rural affairs, children and young people, education, social work, community care, local government, civil justice, crime and criminal justice, regeneration, planning and womens issues. The site also allows access to information about the Scottish Household Survey.

« Previous | Contents |