The Scottish Government’s recent consultation on proposals to change the Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) which closed earlier this autumn are interim changes ahead of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) which will replace SPP, probably in 2022.
One planning lawyer has observed that the branding of these proposals as simply a ‘technical amendment’ is ‘enough to make the most ardent spin doctor blush.’ Indeed, the changes will have deep reaching implications for where and when housing across the country might be delivered.
The purpose of the key changes proposed to housing are to deliver three outcomes: Firstly, addressing once and for all the thorny issue of ‘sustainable development’; next, clarifying how housing delivery rates should be calculated; and finally, eradicating subjective commercial considerations from the objective practice of planning.
On the face of it, what is there not to like? These seem laudable goals – but as ever the devil’s in the detail.
The proposals intend to achieve these outcomes by effectively closing the door on the capacity for house-builders to move to a ‘plan b’ if and when unfortunate contingencies arise.
The SPP currently supports ‘development that contributes to sustainable development’. Given housing in appropriate locations does contribute to sustainable development, or in the words of the new planning Act the ‘long-term public interest’, the SPP as currently drafted itemises situations where such development will be looked upon favourably – even if the land in question is not allocated for housing. This has meant that in recent years a number of un-allocated housing sites have been approved. Concerned that such trends might bring the concept of a ‘plan-led system’ into disrepute, the current proposals seek to sort this ‘anomaly’ out by simply removing references to sustainable development from the SPP.
Similarly, when it comes to calculating how much housing should be built in each Local Authority area per year, the current proposals seek to keep things very simple. Under the proposals, Local Authorities will calculate an annual delivery figure by taking the overall long-term housing delivery target, and dividing this by the number of years in a Local Development Plan. This annual figure will then be fixed. What the proposals don’t allow however is for any shortfall in housing delivery during ‘slow’ years, to be picked up later on in the plan period when conditions might be more conducive to development.
Finally, when calculating how many and which houses should be included in this housing delivery target, the proposals seek to radically dilute the ability of house builders to inform the process. Under the proposals market-facing issues such as marketability, or site programming are not to be considered as ‘constraints’.
Upholding the integrity of a plan-led system is important. Overall however, what these proposals consistently don’t seem to take into account is the essential role that private house builders play in Scotland in actually delivering the aspirations of the plan. If the system (for better or for worse) relies on the private sector to build almost all the houses, there needs to be contingencies built into the system that recognise the importance of investment decisions. There is no anomaly in the fact that some sites might simply always be unattractive to housebuilders, while new attractive sites might come to their attention out of leftfield.
It’s not by chance that the relationship between Planning Authorities and house builders has been characterised as a balance. In order to keep the balance about right, it’s considered that the system is largely helped and not hindered by ensuring there is some room for negotiation within a strong policy structure. While the current proposals might make the system clearer, what isn’t clear is whether it will actually deliver more houses faster, which at the end of the day is undeniably in the long-term public interest.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)