« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
ANNEX A List of Questions
Q1. Do you agree with this change from floor area to development footprint/ ground area?
Q2. Do you agree with the new approach to principal, side and rear elevations?
Q3. Do you believe that issues regarding road safety are sufficiently addressed by the restrictions on PDR set out in Article 3 of the draft Householder Permitted Development Order and the height limit of 1 metre within 5 metres of a road?
Q4. Do you agree with the overall limit on development of the curtilage (excluding the original dwelling) of 40%?
Q5. Do you agree with the additional limit on the development of rear curtilage of 40%?
Q6. Do you agree with an absolute limit of 60 square metres?
Q7. Do you agree with the additional conditions and restrictions on householder PDR in conservation areas contained in the draft Householder Permitted Development Order?
Q8. Do you agree with the additional conditions and restrictions on householder PDR within the curtilage of listed buildings as set out in the draft householder permitted development order?
Q9. Should there simply be no permitted development in relation to conservation areas or the curtilage of listed buildings?
Q10. Should additional statutory restrictions be placed on householder PDR within World Heritage Sites?
Q11. If so, what level of control should be applied (e.g. similar to that for conservation areas or a total restriction)?
Q12. Do you have any comments on the extent of designated areas where restrictions will apply?
Q13. In your experience, do planning authorities treat the addition of ramps and handrails to the exterior of houses to assist the elderly or disabled people as requiring an application for planning permission?
Q14. Do respondents believe that replacement and alteration of existing windows in flats, without altering the overall size of the window opening should be permitted development?
Q15. Do respondents believe there should be specific PDR to allow flagpoles to be erected within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse?
Q16. If so, what controls should there be on the height of flagpoles and on their location, with particular regard to designated areas?
Questions on Classes - Q17 (Classes 1-12)
- Are the grant of permission and the restrictions and conditions clear?
- Will these controls release a significant number of proposals (see paragraph 1.3) from the planning application process?
- Will these PDR provide adequate controls on amenity?
- Are there any changes to the controls which might mean significant further reduction in planning applications without undermining amenity?
Q18. Do respondents agree with the addition of requirements on drainage to PDR for new and replacement hard surfaces over an area of 5 square metres between the principal elevation and the road?
Q19. Do respondents think the changes to permitted development rights as drafted will achieve the Scottish Government's aim of removing a significant amount of householder development from the planning application process?
Q20. If not, what particular alterations to the draft Householder Permitted Development Order might significantly reduce the number of householder planning applications?
Q21. What effects might any suggested changes have on amenity issues?
Q22. Do respondents believe that the provisions of the draft Householder Permitted Development Order pay sufficient regard to the impact on local amenity?
Q23. If not, what particular alterations to the draft Householder Permitted Development Order might address some or all of these issues?
Q24. What particular issues would you like to see addressed in the guidance accompanying the changes to householder permitted development rights?
Q25. Are there any costs or benefits not identified in the draft RIA?
Q26. If so, do you have any information or can you suggest sources of relevant information on these costs and/ or benefits?
Q27. Are there any potential impacts on particular societal groups that we should be aware of in finalising the order?
« Previous | Contents | Next »