The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

ANNEX C Draft Regulatory Impact Assessment

PARTIAL REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1. Title of proposal: The Town and Country Planning (Householder Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 2008.

2. Purpose and intended effect

Objective

2.1 To significantly reduce the number of applications for planning permission for minor householder developments - e.g. small house extensions, dormer windows, sheds - while retaining an appropriate element of planning control. This will:

• allow householders to carry out more development to their home without having to apply for planning permission; and
• allow planning authorities to devote more of their resources to more significant issues such as development planning and processing applications for major developments.

In addition we aim to make the regulations which control householder developments more user friendly, but also intend to provide guidance so that developers and planning authorities do not have to go directly to the legislation to try to interpret what is allowable without applying for planning permission.

Background

2.2 The annual rate of approval of householder consents has remained constant at around 97% ⁷. In 2006/2007, the number of householder planning applications determined consents comprised 47% of a total of 54,597 applications determined.

2.3 Householder developments which proceed on the basis of being permitted development are generally small-scale and uncontentious, but can on occasion give rise to complaints from neighbours.

2.4 In addition, the planning system has come under increasing criticism that it is too slow in processing applications and is in many instances regarded as a barrier to development and hence to economic growth.

2.5 The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, as amended, (the GPDO) currently grants a Scotland wide planning permission for a range of specified developments removing the need to apply for planning permission to the planning authority where proposals can comply with the requirements of the GPDO. The developments covered by the GPDO range from minor householder developments to development at existing industrial sites and airports. This nation wide planning permission for certain developments is often referred to as Permitted Development Rights ( PDR).

Rationale for government intervention

2.6 Some of the developments that require an application for planning permission currently may have no significant impacts. Despite this a considerable amount of time and resource is required by the applicant and by planning authority officials to, respectively, prepare and process such applications. We propose to reduce the overall number of developments that require consent by removing those that have no or minimal impact from the system. This will reduce the costs in dealing with householder developments and ensure planning officers can focus on more strategic planning tasks with a wider public benefit.

2.7 In addition, the current difficulty in interpreting the GPDO takes up householders' and planning officers' time, as well as giving rise to avoidable enforcement action to remediate householder developments which have been carried out but do not comply with the legislation. We will clarify through new legislation and proposed accompanying guidance the circumstances in which planning permission is required.

3. Consultation

3.1 A review of the GPDO was carried in 2006 for the then Scottish Executive Development Department by Heriot-Watt University's School of the Built Environment, Brodies LL, and Scott Wilson Scotland Ltd. They set out their research findings in their report 'Review of the General Permitted Development Order 1992: Householder Development'. As part of this review they conducted a survey of planning officers, community councillors, professional bodies and others on a range of reform options. They concluded the most effective way to address the above objectives would be to expand the existing householder permitted development rights.

http://openscotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/10/09103423/0

4. Options

Option 1: Do nothing

4.1 The current provisions for householder development set out in the GPDO would apply.

Option 2: Extend existing Householder PDR

4.2 Broadly extend householder PDR thereby removing the need for householders to apply for planning permission for certain minor developments.

4.3 To help prevent any undesirable developments there will be limits on the extent of the curtilage of a dwelling which can be developed under these new PDR and developments should be subservient in size and scale to the existing dwelling. This will help prevent significant impacts on others.

4.4 As part of this process we intend to provide more helpful guidance to accompany the changes in legislation to explain the system and provide examples of how the legislation should be applied.

5. Costs and benefits

Sectors and groups affected

• Householder applicants (including developers and homeowners)
• Public sector (planning authorities)
• Businesses involved in the preparation and submission of householder planning applications and carrying out householder developments

Economic Impacts

Option 1 - Do nothing

5.1 There are no direct additional economic benefits or costs, although planning authority resource would continue to be spent processing applications that have low impacts. If such applications continue to increase, this will further affect planning authorities' ability to process efficiently applications for more significant developments.

Option 2 - Revision of GPDO

Savings for householder applicants

5.2 Potentially cost savings to applicants accrue through removing the need for planning applications in a significant number of cases.

5.3 The planning performance data for 2004-2007 gathered by the Scottish Government indicate that a total of 25,707 householder applications were decided by all Scottish planning authorities in 2006/2007. The researchers led by Heriot Watt University indicate that their recommended changes to PDR could potentially take up to 38% of such applications out of the planning system.

5.4 In developing our legislative proposals, we have had to refine the Heriot Watt recommendations and so our proposals differ from their recommendations. The Heriot Watt report indicates that a total of 24,424 householder applications were decided by all Scottish planning authorities in 2004/2005. Taking their estimated 38% reduction in the number of these applications as a target, they estimate there would a reduction in the total number of householder applications to around 15,000 in future years. On average this would be a reduction of around 290 householder applications per year for each Scottish planning authority. However, it is acknowledged in the research findings that there is likely to be wide variation between planning authorities around such reductions, depending on the characteristics of the housing stock in each Council area and pressures on the local housing market. If there was a 38% reduction in the number of householder applications for 2006/2007 the total number taken out of the planning system would have been 9,769, with a reduction in the total number of householder applications to around 16,000. On average this would be a reduction in the number of householder applications dealt with by each Scottish planning authority of around 300 for 2006/2007, subject to the abovementioned issue of the distribution of such reductions across authorities.

5.5 The following table estimates what the potential net saving to householder applicants would have been in 2006-2007 based on a 38% reduction in the total number of householder applications being considered:

Costs and savings for Scottish planning authorities

5.6 The fees charged by Scottish planning authorities to process householder applications and certificates of lawful use or development are intended to cover the costs of providing the service. Research published in 2005 concluded that the income from smaller applications did much to cross-subsidise larger more complex planning applications. A revision of the GPDO as suggested in the consultation is therefore likely to reduce planning authority fee income.

5.7 At the same time, the revision of the GPDO will benefit Scottish planning authorities to the extent that it results in the reduction of planning applications, planning appeals, development enquiries and enforcement activity. This overall decrease in workload will help free up staff resources for other planning matters and also help improve the efficiency in processing applications overall.

6. Small/Micro Firms Impact Test

6.1 Reform of the GPDO would remove a significant regulatory burden from the many small businesses - architects, architectural technicians, town planning consultants and builders - who are responsible for the design and building of domestic alterations. On the debit side is the fact that a simplification of the regulations could lead to a reduction in those seeking specialist help to interpret the regulations correctly and the loss of charges for making a planning application on the client's behalf; but this could be compensated for by an increase in householders carrying out development as a direct result of the regulations being simplified.

7. Legal Aid Impact Test

7.1 These proposals have no impact in relation to Legal Aid.

8. "Test Run" of business forms

8.1 The draft order does not contain business forms .

9. Competition assessment

9.1 The proposals are not expected to impact significantly more on some firms than others nor to restrict new entrants to the market. The freedom of firms to choose the price, quality, range or location of their products will be unaffected.

10. Enforcement, sanctions and monitoring

10.1 Householder PDR would be set nationally through an order replacing the householder PDR currently set out in the GPDO. Each Scottish planning authority would be responsible for enforcement in the same way as they do with existing PDR. The 2006 Act extended the enforcement powers available to planning authorities to include powers to require any developer (including householders where PDR does not apply) to submit a retrospective planning application for works which require planning permission. There are also enforcement powers available to planning authorities, where a development breaches planning control, to take action up to and including stopping construction work and require the demolition or rebuilding of works which constitute breaches of planning control.

10.2 Existing monitoring mechanisms will allow the operation of the proposals to be measured in terms of the volume of householder planning applications decided by each planning authority annually and therefore in terms of the consequent changes in Scottish planning authority income.

11. Implementation and delivery plan

11.1 It is anticipated that the revised GPDO will be implemented by early 2009. However this will to some extent be dependent on feedback received during the consultation period which is scheduled for late summer/early autumn 2008.

11.2 It is intended that a user guide on the new householder PDR will accompany the revised GPDO.

12. Post-implementation review

12.1 The Directorate for the Built Environment receives regular feedback from practitioners and professional bodies on all areas of planning, and householder applications are no different in this respect. The Directorate intends to review the effects of the changes proposed in this document within 3 years from their implementation.

13. Summary and recommendation

13.1 Based on the analysis presented above, the recommendation is to implement changes to the GPDO as outlined in Option 2.

Summary costs and benefits table

Declaration and publication

I have read the Regulatory Impact Assessment and I am satisfied that the benefits justify the costs.

Signed

Date

Contact point for enquiries and comments:

Luke McGarty

Tel: 0131 244 7806

« Previous | Contents | Next »