guidance
note 15
Design of Converted Agricultural Outbuildings |
Back to Index |
INTRODUCTION
1. An increasing number of proposals
are coming forward for the redevelopment and conversion of agricultural
buildings to other uses, principally housing. This can be acceptable in terms
of policy GB 2F i.e. where the building is of architectural merit, makes a
positive visual contribution to its locality, is of stone or brick construction
and is in a sound and reasonably wind and water tight condition.
2. Conversions can be challenging and
raise difficult design issues. Pre-application discussions with the Planning
Service are therefore considered to be essential in order to achieve high
quality developments.
The guiding principles
3. In terms of policy GB 2F for
conversion to permitted, the building must be of architectural merit and be
making a positive visual contribution to its locality. The converted building should respect that
contribution and should therefore have strong regard to:
a.
the landscape setting of the area, and
b.
and character and design of the original building and
agricultural steading.
The number of residential units within a
conversion
4. There may be a temptation on behalf
of applicants to achieve a high number of residential units within converted
buildings. This can have a significant impact on the design of the conversion,
because as more units are accommodated, more alterations to the external
appearance of the building generally have to be accommodated. For example, more
units will mean more door and window openings in the walls, more roof space
accommodation and dormers being added and more parking being required. These
alterations may significantly adversely affect the character of the building.
For this reason, it may be that development proposals are considered to be
‘over-development’, and whilst conversion in principle may be acceptable, the
detailed design may not. This may
require planning applicants to reduce the number of residential units being
accommodated in order to lower its impact and achieve a satisfactory design.
The guidance
5. In general, the new use should adapt
to the building rather than vice-versa, and attention to detail is paramount –
simplicity, authenticity and robustness should prevail over ostentation and
inappropriate ‘quick fix’ solutions. Traditional vernacular designs should
generally be employed and ‘suburbanisation’ avoided. Some modest extensions to
buildings may be permitted, but only where these reflect the character
of the area - which is especially important in traditional and distinctive farm
steading patterns.
6. Planning applicants should have
regard to the following design code:
7. The finished development should:
a) respect the
vernacular style of the building/farm steading and the area in terms of
building detailing and proportions,
b) retain
original roof details i.e. pitch, height and materials (normally slate, with
diminishing sizes),
c) minimise the
number of dormer windows, particularly in outward facing roof slopes. Dormers
should where possible reflect the fenestration (window and door opening)
pattern in the walls below,
d) not
significantly raise wall heads or significantly change roof heights/pitches or
the proportion of wall to roof,
e) minimise new
fenestration, particularly on outward facing walls,
f)
retain traditional wall openings for windows and
doors,
g) retain
important features and finishes in the original buildings e.g. stepped gables,
exposed stonework, gates, paved yards etc..
h) use materials
and designs appropriate to the vernacular style of the original building and
the area e.g. sash and case pattern of windows,
i)
minimise significant departure from the traditional
building pattern e.g. where a steading has a traditional courtyard, this
vernacular style should be reflected in the design,
j)
minimise the effect of parking, particularly from
outward views to the building, e.g. parking may be better accommodated within a
relatively secluded courtyard rather than along outward facing elevations,
k) reflect
traditional wall finishes e.g. avoid use of flat/even rendered finishes by
using rough rendering, showing the pattern of random stonework or retention of
exposed stone,
l)
be sensitive in their treatment of open space, which
should be designed as an entity and with simplicity e.g. communal garden ground
and courtyards may be more appropriate than individual/compartmentalised
‘suburban’ garden patterns; and similarly, high garden fencing may not be
appropriate,
m) reflect the
local countryside in any landscaping and planting,
n) have regard
to any ecological and wildlife interests at the site e.g. bat or bird habitats
in building roof spaces, particularly European and nationally protected
species. Where appropriate, an independent survey at the appropriate time of
year may be required to establish whether such habitats exist and the best
means of protection or mitigation.
8. The development should generally
not give the visual appearance of a new modern building, or include
predominantly modern features such as french windows and large dormer or
picture windows.
9. For more detailed information,
reference should be made to the Scottish Executive Central Resource Unit
publication ‘The conversion of redundant farm steadings to other uses’.
10. Should you require any further
information please do not hesitate to contact:
The
Planning Office, Development Quality Section,
The Triangle,
Bishopbriggs
G64 2TR
Tel: 0141 578
guidance note 16
Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance |
Back to Index |
INTRODUCTION
The Council
will seek to be flexible, and work closely with developers, Registered Social
Landlords (RSLs) and others to maximise the number and quality of affordable
homes provided.
The Council in
partnership with Communities Scotland, and in consultation with housing
providers, will discuss and seek agreement on the programming of grant
expenditure to assist in the delivery of affordable housing.
1. Interpretation of
the Local Plan targets
In accordance
with the Local Plan policy HMU 1, the provision of affordable housing in new
development sites of 15 or more units is based on the target of 40% (or 20% in
Lennoxtown, Milton of Campsie and Twechar) of the number of houses being affordable rented. This target will be
negotiable, taking into account other exceptional development costs and
planning gain being sought.
2. Partnerships and
mechanisms for delivery of affordable housing
Applications are likely to progress most smoothly where developers
establish early the delivery mechanism for the affordable element. The best approach will usually be for
developers to enter into early discussions/partnerships with the Council and/or
an RSL to agree an approach to the affordable housing element before planning
applications are submitted. In this way
applications are most likely to progress smoothly. The most appropriate
detailed mechanisms to deliver the affordable housing will vary depending on
the nature of the partnership between developer and RSL, the nature of the site
and the nature of the project.
The requirement for a proportion of a site to be set aside for
non-market housing will affect the economics of the site development.
Developers should therefore take the requirement for affordable housing into
account in negotiating land values with site owners. Planning applications are
likely to proceed most smoothly if proposals for the affordable component and
the mechanisms for its delivery are set out as part of the initial planning
application.
The Council
will apply a sequential approach to delivery options, based firstly on
integrated development within the development site; secondly by the transfer of
land to a RSL; and thirdly by the transfer of a commuted sum of money to a RSL.
The preference will always be for the first of these options, and only if that
is unequivocally demonstrated to be impractical or unreasonable will the
second, or failing that, the third preference be considered. These preferences
are considered in more detail below.
PREFERENCE
Integrated development where developers build units of
affordable housing themselves in conjunction with, or in partnership with a
RSL, as an integral part of the development. These units would then be
transferred (either as shells or as fully fitted units) to a RSL for onward
management and maintenance. The value of the affordable housing units will require
to be negotiated, but will normally assume a nominal land value. This approach
has the advantage of achieving the most successful integration of different
tenures, both socially and in terms of architectural appearance, and will
normally be most cost efficient in procurement.
The objective should be for it to be impossible to tell the tenure of a
particular property from its external appearance. If this delivery mechanism is
agreed not to be practical or reasonable then the Council will consider the
Second Preference below.
SECOND PREFERENCE
Transfer of Land to a RSL in order for them to carry out the
development of the affordable units themselves, to an equivalent value to
on-site provision. Site servicing and infrastructure works and associated costs
should be agreed with the RSL. Special care must be taken to ensure that the
different parts of the overall development are successfully integrated and that
the area earmarked for the affordable element is not subject to any
disproportionate or unreasonable development constraints. The price of the land
will require to be negotiated, but unless justified otherwise, will generally
be expected to be transferred at nominal value. The Council will require to be
confident that the affordable element can be delivered with resources which are
either available, or are anticipated to become available within the foreseeable
future. If this delivery mechanism is agreed not to be practical or reasonable
then the Council will consider the Third Preference below.
THIRD PREFERENCE
Payment of a commuted sum to a RSL in lieu of on-site
provision. The sum to be paid should be equivalent to the on-site housing
target provision being sought. This preference will generally only be
acceptable where the first two above are agreed not to be practical or
reasonable by the Council - there may for example be exceptional reasons why
on-site provision is problematic or where there are opportunities to achieve
economies of scale by pooling the affordable contributions from several small
schemes on one site. The Council must be
confident that the commuted payments can be spent on providing affordable units
within the area in the foreseeable future i.e. a suitable site, which complies
with planning policy, is available and is within the control of the Council,
RSL or the provider. A standard formula, to be regularly updated, will be
devised by the Council for calculating the level of payment of commuted sums in
order to assist with the smooth delivery of this guidance. The Council will
accept the payment of commuted sums in instalments linked to the phasing of
large housing development. The trigger points for commuted payments will be
negotiated on a site by site basis. Any financial contributions may be ‘banked’
until sites are available and will be ‘ring fenced’ for affordable housing
purposes. Such ‘banked’ contributions will only be used for the provision of
affordable housing or for upgrading substandard properties where a need has
been identified by the Council. The Council will keep an open account of its
use of such payments.
Both the
second and the third preference will only be considered where there are good
prospects of affordable housing being constructed. Developers who seek a
relaxation from the preferred option above, or in their affordable housing
provision obligations, may be required to submit detailed project cost and
revenue information for consideration by the Council.
Should land or
finances which are transferred to the Council not be used or be programmed for
affordable housing purposes within a reasonable period of time, normally around
5 years, then these assets will be returned with appropriate interest to the
provider.
3. The Availability of
Subsidy
Communities
Scotland along with the Council will work in partnership to programme the best
distribution of grant subsidy. However, developers should note that the
provision of public sector subsidy is not guaranteed, and where subsidy is not
available, the policy’s requirement to deliver affordable housing remains.
Communities Scotland are willing to discuss the availability of subsidy with
RSLs and developers, and will endeavour to give an early view on this aspect.
Clearly the earlier in the process that Communities Scotland and the Council
are consulted by developers, then the easier it will be to programme grant
spending to tie in with site development, as there is likely to be some lead-in
time between grant applications and grant awards. Communities Scotland will
appraise projects to ensure value for money for public subsidy.
4. Priority Client
Groups and management of the affordable housing stock
The tenancy should be allocated according to a needs-based allocation
system administered by the Council or the RSL. It should generally give
priority to households who are current tenants, or are on the housing waiting
list of either the Council or an RSL within
In all cases the upkeep, management, day-to-day running and occupancy
conditions of the units will be as set by the RSL. The units should be available at a recognised
level of affordable rent.
5. Securing the
Affordable Housing Contribution
The affordable
housing contribution will be secured by means of a legal agreement (usually
under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997) with the applicant/landowner, which
will require to be concluded prior to the issuing of planning consent:
a)
At
the ‘outline’ stage it will require that a specified percentage of the
residential units will be affordable in terms of the Council’s definition, and
will be made available in line with the policy and guidance of the Council.
b)
At
the ‘detailed’ stage it will require that the land/units specified in the
submitted plans and documents be secured as affordable housing in terms of the
Council’s definition, and will be made available in line with the policy and
guidance of the Council. In addition to the criteria above, the following will
apply:
i)
The
mechanism and timescale for the delivery of the affordable houses should be
agreed between the developer/landowner and the Council/RSL,
ii)
A
restriction which prevents more than an agreed number of private/market units
to be constructed and/or occupied before the affordable component is completed
and transferred to the RSL,
iii)
An
allowance of further private units to be occupied may be permitted if evidence
is submitted and it is agreed that reasonable endeavours have not secured the
affordable housing after an agreed period,
iv)
An
allowance for the land or buildings earmarked as the affordable element to
revert to use for market housing, or for commuted sums to be returned to the
provider, if after an agreed number of years reasonable endeavours to secure or programme the affordable
housing have been agreed to have proved fruitless.
Should you require any further information please do not hesitate to
contact :
The Planning Office, Development Quality Section,
The Triangle,
Bishopbriggs G64 2TR
Tel: 0141 578 8000