Survey of design guidance issued by local planning authorities in
Scotland which may inhibit appropriate sustainable design solutions
Report
Michael Jones
Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research
Department of Land Economy
University of Cambridge
email: fmj22@cam.ac.uk
Introduction
This Report has been produced in response to a commission issued by the
Architecture Place and Design (APD) division of the Scottish Government
under its existing ‘call off’ contract with the Cambridge Centre for Housing and
Planning Research (CCHPR).
The aim of the commission was to provide a simple mapping framework of the
range of design guidance currently enforced or promoted by Scottish Planning
Authorities and statutory consultees and to provide a high level analysis of the
extent of ‘rules’ and their impact.
In a situation in which many Local Planning Authorities and/or statutory
consultees issue guidance to the development industry around design of
building and places, APD were concerned that this process may result in the
specification of simple ‘rules’ which may then be applied in assessing
planning applications or in specifying development briefs which ultimately
inhibit or prevent suitable design situations because they failed to take
adequate account of specific circumstances or failed to take account of the
drive for more sustainable development.
Spreadsheet templates were supplied by APD for the identification of relevant
documentation produced by local authorities and a range of statutory bodies.
In addition to the templates, CCHPR were asked to identify any specific
design rules which might be considered to inhibit or prevent sustainable
design. ‘Sustainability’ was to be interpreted in the broadest sense, and this
has been taken to include both environmental sustainability and community or
neighbourhood sustainability.
In view of the short timescale for this project (10 days), a sample of ten local
authorities was agreed with APD for detailed investigation. These were:










Argyle and Bute
Dundee
Edinburgh
Fife
Glasgow
Highland
North Lanarkshire
Shetland
Stirling
South Lanarkshire
In viewing the documentation available on the sample local authority websites
it became apparent that design ‘guidance’ or ‘rules’ were scattered across a
wide variety of documents, ranging from Structure Plans, through Local Plans
and draft Local Development Plans, to more specialised documents,
1
sometimes issued as Supplementary Planning Guidance, but often issued
simply as advice to the development industry or to individual householders.
It also became apparent that were significant ambiguities and difficulties in
identifying whether a ‘rule’ was a ‘rule’, or whether it was ‘guidance’ or merely
‘advice’. Five problems could be identified.
The first was that the status of many documents was unclear - some local
authorities clearly stated that a particular document constituted
Supplementary Planning Guidance and that the advice was a material
consideration in planning applications. Others did not define the status of
documents (for example, it was not clear in several cases whether documents
with names such as 'Design Advice Notes' were SPGs or not) while in other
cases it appeared that a document was purely giving advice on good practice.
Therefore, it was not possible to classify which advice constitutes a 'rule',
which advice might be open to negotiation, and which advice could effectively
be ignored.
The second problem was that although the 'rules' must exist somewhere, they
were not available on the web. The obvious case was vision splays: in some
cases, these were integrated into the planning documentation, in some cases
there were cross references to Highways documents, but in others there was
no reference to any highways requirements, even though they must exist.
A third problem was where 'rules' were actually, or potentially, contradictory.
An obvious case was the problem of refuse bins, where the requirement for
back alleys to all terraced housing would be unlikely to be approved if
'Secured by Design' recommendations were to be applied.
A fourth problem was whether 'rules' that appear in planning documents were
actually being enforced literally. An example was the minimum standards for
gardens laid down in the Appendix to the Glasgow City Plan. This was written
in a degree of detail uncharacteristic of the Plan as a whole, and did not
appear to be co-ordinated with the Plan's general guidance on urban
regeneration. It was unclear whether such guidance constituted a 'rule' or not.
A fifth problem was the ambiguous status of much of the 'guidance' or 'advice'
that was offered. For example, does advice that thermal insulation should be
maximised constitute a 'rule' or not? Applicant behaviour is probably directly
affected by such statements, in the belief that a planning application which
attempts to respond to the advice will receive more favourable treatment than
one which does not.
The variety of advice which might inhibit the achievement of sustainable
design solutions was such that a listing of written ‘rules’ would not capture the
potential extent of the available guidance and advice.
This report is therefore arranged by theme, in order to draw out some of the
potential implications of guidance and advice.
2
The six themes are:






Access: carparking, private access driveways and roads
The location of new development and densification
Environmental design
Minimum garden requirements
Domestic waste bins
Daylight, sunlight and overlooking
3
Access: carparking, private access driveways and roads
The number of carparking spaces required in housing developments, the size
of access roads and the geometry of road junctions can all have a dominant
influence on the ‘feel’ of an area. In rural areas, the use of standard road
geometries can lead to a ‘suburban’ atmosphere, while in urban areas the
application of the same geometry can inhibit higher density and more ‘urban’
developments.
The extent of guidance and advice on these topics varied widely between
local authorities. In some, virtually no advice appears to be available on the
web, while in others extensive and detailed guidance, often accompanied by
road engineers’ standard plans, is available.
In some cases, local authorities merely referred the topic to national or UK
guidance, while in others an attempt was made to produce guidance relevant
to the local situation.
Argyle and Bute Council
The guidance produced by Argyle and Bute Council, in Small scale housing
development: individual new houses and up to five homes in the countryside
(September 2006) is exemplary in attempting to set out general principles,
illustrated by examples of good practice, avoiding an over prescriptive or over
specified approach.
The guidance sets out the general principle that:
‘Access roads to smaller developments are designated by the Planning
Department as private roads and do not, therefore, need to be built to the
specifications needed for the Council’s own adopted roads. They should be
informal and rural in nature with, wherever possible, footpaths remote from
the road.’
The guidance gives illustrations of developments that are seen as
representing good practice, such as:
4
Isle of Gigha: simple entrance
Argyle and Bute, Small scale housing development: individual new houses
and up to five homes in the countryside, September 2006, P31
Highlands Council
The approach taken in Argyle and Bute is in sharp contrast to that adopted by
the Highlands Council in its draft guidance Access to Single Houses and
Small Housing Developments (January 2011). For a private access to a rural
road, the guidance requires:
 A combined service bay and access
 A bituminous facing to both, extending at least 6 metres up the access
road
 A ‘gentle’ slope to the access road for the first 5 metres, and normally
no more than 1 in 10 thereafter
 Gates should be positioned at least 8 metres from the public road edge
 Access roads should be a minimum of 3 metres wide and 3.3 metres if
the house is more than 45 metres from the public road
 A minimum of two parking spaces must be provided, together with a
turning head
 A vision splay, at least 2.4 metres deep, and extending 90 metres in
both directions for roads with a 30mph limit or 215 metres for roads
with a 60 mph limit.
Some of these requirements are illustrated in the guidance:
5
but the illustration omits the parking spaces, the turning head, and the visibility
splays.
Shetland Islands Council
Guidance in Shetland is similar, if slightly less prescriptive. The requirements
for access roads for up to 4 dwellings are:
 2 parking spaces for 2 or 3 bedroom properties: ‘it would not normally
be acceptable to count any parking spaces within a garage’
 A turning head of at least 7.6m by 7.6 m.
 Metalled tracks are acceptable, but must be surfaced with hot bitmac
for the first 6m at the point of access with the public road
 The gradient of the access shall not exceed 5% (slope of 1 in 20) for
the first six metres from the road edge
 ‘The Roads Service will determine the exact area of the visibility splay’
while for developments of between 4 and 8 dwellings, the requirement is for a:
‘Single track, 3.5m in width, with adequate provision for passing and turning,
and kerbed with one 1.5m wide footway (1.8 metres where street lighting is to
be provided).’
6
Fife Council
Guidance in Fife requires 1 allocated (i.e. usually within the curtilage)
carparking space for 1 bedroom dwellings, 2 spaces for 2 and 3 bedroom
dwellings, and 3 spaces for 4+ bedroom dwellings, plus 0.25 unallocated (i.e.
in lay bys or off street carparking) spaces per dwelling for visitors.
Turning space within the curtilage is only required on distributor roads, with
reversing permitted onto minor residential roads.
The layout of within-curtilage parking spaces is required to be in accordance
with Fig 7.12 (unreproducible) of Chapter 7, Parking Design Standards, in
Transportation Development Guidelines: designing the layout of roads,
parking and servicing (July 2006). The requirement for 1 to 3 bedroom
dwellings with on site parking is for a 6 metre building line setback, for a 2 or 3
bedroom house, a driveway at least 4.5 metres in width, and for 4+ bedroom
dwellings a 10.5m minimum building line with a 4.8m minimum driveway
width.
These requirements, if followed literally, would impose suburban densities on
all housing developments and result in an urban landscape dominated by
front garden carparking.
North Lanarkshire Council
In the case of North Lanarkshire, there do not appear to be any documents
available on the website which set out either policy or detail on the standards
or design of carparking or roads.
South Lanarkshire Council
In South Lanarkshire, advice on carparking and road access appears to be
limited to a paragraph on garages in the South Lanarkshire Local Plan
Volume ll, Development Policies: Guidance and Appendices (March 2009), in
the section on Development Management Policies, which requires that
garages should be set back 6m from the road (and preferably behind the main
building line), and should be at least 6m deep by 3m wide.
Stirling Council
General advice is given in a Development Advice Note, The Layout and
Design of New Housing Development (no date – probably 2002), which sets
out broad principles of design, such as:
‘In the making of places it is not the road layout that is paramount but the
relationships of buildings to one another.
 Traffic management and subtle changes in street materials should
7
complement the use of layout to reduce vehicle speeds.’
Dundee Council
The Local Plan Review (2005) comments that:
‘On-street car parking is the primary form of car parking provision for housing
in Dundee. However, this can lead to congestion and access difficulties. With
levels of car ownership increasing, the problem will continue to develop and
could give rise to safety concerns…...High quality provision of off-street
parking will be expected to be included at design stage.’ (P149)
and Policy 88: Residential Parking requires that:
‘New residential developments will be required to provide parking in
accordance with the revised Roads and Parking Standards Document to be
updated, which will form supplementary guidance and Appendix 1 of this
Local Plan.’ (P149)
Appendix 1: Design of New Housing in the Local Plan Review (2005) requires
high levels of car parking provision in virtually all locations:




In the city centre, one space per flat
In the inner city, one space house plus 40% of houses to have
garages; flats to have 130% parking provision
In suburban areas, one space per dwelling up to 2 bedrooms, 2 spaces
for 3+ bedrooms, 50% of houses to have additional garages, flats to
have 150% provision
In villages, all houses to have a garage and at least 2 parking spaces
within the curtilage, 50% of houses to have a double garage
These standards are directly related to the Council’s policy to shift
development away from small flats and towards the provision of larger family
houses (discussed further in the section on Densification)
The standard required for existing houses is set out in the Householder
Design Guides: Extensions and Garages (2002):
‘A garage should be in a position where it can be accessed safely. In general
it should be set a minimum of 6 metres back from the rear edge of the
pavement, so that a car can be parked in the driveway without jutting on to the
pavement.’ (P3)
Glasgow Council
Standards of carparking and road access are set out in the City Plan 2 Part 3:
Development Policies and Design Guidance.
8
Policy RES 7 – Car Free Housing (P152) permits car free development within
Controlled Parking Zones, but otherwise the standards prescribed in Policy
RES 2 – Residential Layouts (P142) apply.
For houses, the Policy states, in Additional Standards for Dwelling Houses,
that:
‘Houses should provide:
• garages and/or driveways sufficient for household needs
- Garage sizes should allow for storage of garden equipment and bicycles, as
well as a car.
- If no garage is provided, then space should ideally be available on one side
of the house for the development of a garage (or modest extension); and
• privacy for their residents
- The distance between habitable rooms (see Definition and Note 3) and
public/common footpaths should be such as to ensure privacy and allow for
off-street parking in front of garage.’ (P142)
Interpreted literally, this would require a minimum building line setback of at
least 4.8 metres, and either the provision of a garage within the building shell
(for example in a mid-terrace house) or a space on one side of any other
property at least 2.4 metres wide. However, only one carparking space per
dwelling is required (plus 0.25 visitor spaces per dwelling), in Policy TRANS 4
Vehicle Parking Standards (P216).
Edinburgh Council
Parking standards are set out in Parking Standards for Development Control
(2009).
The policy divides the city into a number of zones, generally depending upon
the availability of public transport, with different maximum and minimum
standards applicable in each zone. The policy also allows for lower than
minimum standards:
‘Car parking provision below normal minima may be permitted for sites where:
• minimum parking provision is physically impossible but the development is
desirable for other reasons; OR
• Lower parking provision is deemed essential for reasons of townscape, air
quality or transport impact; OR
• the developer can justify lower provision to help manage travel in a manner
consistent with other Council Policies while not causing unacceptable onstreet overspill; AND
• the development includes suitable provision of high quality cycle parking at
ground or basement level.’ (P10)
In Zones 1 and 2, the minimum requirement for market housing is 0 and the
maximum 2, while in Zones 4, 5b/c and 6, the minimum is 2 spaces with no
maximum. For social housing, the minimum in Zones 1 and 2 is 0 and the
9
maximum 1, in Zones 4 and 5b/c the minimum is 0.5 with no maximum, and in
Zone 6 the minimum is 0.67, again with no maximum.
In Zones 1 to 3, or in other locations with controlled parking, the required
standard of carparking provision can be met by space inside a garage. In all
other zones, curtilage garage parking is excluded from the parking provision
calculation. Driveways used for carparking space must be at least 6m in
length.
Broadly, the policies adopted in Edinburgh would allow a more ‘urban’ feel in
denser areas, while continuing to impose standard suburban conditions in
lower density areas.
The design of road layouts is specified in the Council’s City Development
Transport Development Quality Handbook: Movement and Development,
Traffic and Transport Design Guide for Developments in the City of Edinburgh
(2000).
This allows for a range of more urban style access roads, including Minor
Access Links (P29) and Culs de Sac (P32): both can be provided as shared
surfaces (P35) up to a maximum length of 50 metres.
The guidance notes that:
‘The City of Edinburgh Council wishes to promote the ‘Home Zone’ concept,
but detailed design guidance is not yet available. Developers are advised
informally to discuss Home Zone proposals with the Department of City
Development at an early stage.’ (P35)
10
The location of new development and densification
In a number of local authorities, planning guidance was directed towards the
creation of sustainable neighbourhoods and communities, although there
were widely differing requirements, depending upon the local circumstances
and the approach taken to tackling unsustainable communities.
There appears to be a broad distinction between rural and urban authorities.
Rural authorities, including those with significant rural hinterlands, were
adopting markedly different approaches to the sustainability of new
development in the rural countryside.
Shetland Council appeared to have significantly altered it settlement policy
since the adoption of the Local Plan in 2004. This had allocated all land to one
of four zones
‘Exceptions to the policy (LP NE 14 Agricultural Land) are designed to
conform with the Local Plan’s housing policies, which seek to encourage
development in Zone 1 and favourably consider it in Zone 2. Although
development is positively encouraged in these zones, it is preferable that,
where possible, in housing zones 2, 3 and 4 land of low quality is developed.’
(P17)
The four zones are shown on the map below:
11
Source: LDP Consultation Main Issues Report (P53)
The Shetland Local Development Plan Main Issues Report notes that
‘development that has taken place over the past few years has been thinly
spread, especially in Zone Two areas, rather than focused on sustaining and
strengthening existing settlements’ (P9)
and comments that:
‘We need to ensure that the housing market is free to grow in Shetland and
meet our housing need whilst ensuring that this new development does not
make undue demands on the public purse. We must also ensure that
communities have vibrant centres and that local business, schools and
community facilities can thrive.’ (P9)
The Report proposes a shift in strategy, retaining the zoning system only for
smaller developments and seeking to identify and allocate sufficient sites over
0.5ha. in size to meet future housing land supply requirements (Issue A: A
Spatial Strategy for Shetland’s housing in the short to medium term). The
Report also proposes that new development should be primarily concentrated
in the Central Mainland area, with supporting development centred around
Sandwick and Sullom Voe/Brae.
The Highland Council faces similar tensions between the desire to support
existing communities, the cost of sustaining the basic ‘lifeline’ services in
remote scattered communities, and the possibility of increasing demand for
crofting following the reform of the crofting system.
The Council has set out development policies for each geographic area within
Highland, and the West Highland and Islands Local Plan (2010) is an
example, seeking to balance support for existing communities while
concentrating development in the larger settlements:
‘6.29 Encouraging the organic expansion of every settlement fits with
expressed local priorities. This means that new housing and employment land
will be allocated in proportion to existing settlement sizes. Balanced,
sustainable communities with a suitable mix of uses,services and
infrastructure are more selfsufficient and reduce the need for unnecessary
travel.
6.30 Building a critical population mass for the main communities is vital
to make future service and infrastructure provision more viable and to
safeguard existing provision. Other things being equal, the larger settlements
are more likely to keep and attract investment: in adequate mains water and
sewerage; waste collection and recycling services; school, post office and
library provision; community renewable energy; broadband availability; and,
emergency service provision - than smaller dispersed communities. This is
particularly relevant in the Area’s most fragile and peripheral areas where
12
bolstering the larger settlements like Glenelg, Uig, Carbost, Dunvegan,
Inverarish is more likely to retain “lifeline” facilities.’ (P25)
Dundee Council, forecasting continued population decline and no growth in
household numbers, has adopted, in the Local Plan Review (2005), a policy
which seeks to shift new housing development away from small units and flats
towards larger family houses in primarily suburban and village locations,
arguing that:
‘Decline in the population of the City over the last 30 years has created
issues, stresses and substantive problems in the housing stock. Initially this
stress has been focused in the least attractive parts of the Council’s own
housing stock where a housing surplus has resulted in significant levels of
demolition in parts of the City. In turn this has brought significant benefit to the
City in terms of improving the quality and profile of its housing stock. In the
absence of any projected growth in the number of households in the City, new
development will continue to fuel this housing surplus across all tenures. To
address this surplus, as a last resort further demolitions of the least popular
house types in the least popular locations will be necessary. The type, size
and quality of new development needs to reflect more popular sections of the
housing market in order that continued demolition of the housing stock
remains justified. In particular, there is a need to address the mismatch
between the preponderance of flats in Dundee’s housing stock and the
increasing proportion of households that aspire to live in a house.’ (P7)
and therefore that:
‘Against a background of no projected household growth, new housing
development will lead to the least popular stock in the least popular locations
becoming surplus. This situation is only sustainable if the quality of new
housing provided significantly exceeds that which will become surplus.’ (P25)
Appendix 1: Design of New Housing in the Local Plan Review (2005) sets out
a range of minimum standards for new housing developments dependent
upon their location:




In the city centre, all flats to have at least 2 bedrooms
In the inner city, all houses to have a minimum of 2 bedrooms, 65% to
have a minimum of 3 bedrooms or a gross internal floor area of at least
100 metres2
In suburban areas, 75% of houses should have 3 or more bedrooms or
a gross internal floor area of at least 100 metres2
In villages, only houses permitted, to have an average gross internal
floor area of at least 150 metres2, and a minimum useable garden
ground of 180m2.These standards are illustrated by diagrams:
13
Diagram 1
Diagram 2
Diagram 3
The Local Plan Review (2005) has further emphasised the aspiration of
increasing the supply of larger and more up-market housing by providing
illustrative housing layouts for land allocations in villages in West Dundee.
A typical example is the layout proposed for Balgillo North:
‘Land at Balgillo North is allocated for the development of a village of up to
150 houses. Development should be set within a high quality landscape
framework to provide shelter, containment and an attractive setting. Low
density development is proposed to increase the choice of housing available
in this location and as such, development of this site should conform to the
village housing standards contained in Appendix 1 of this Local Plan.’ (P163)
14
Illustrative layout proposed for Balgillo North: Local Plan Review (2005)
(P164)
The Local Plan Review (2005) also adopted related policies to control the
spread of HMOs, to restrict the sub-division of houses, to control alterations
and extensions, and to restrict development in garden ground. Policy 12: Subdivision of houses states:
‘The sub-division of houses will only be permitted if all of the following criteria
are met:
a. each unit has a minimum of 5 habitable rooms, 2 parking spaces within the
curtilage and useable garden ground of 120 square metres or 50 square
metres if within the inner city; and
b. the proposal does not involve an extension, through either conversion of
non-residential accommodation or new build, of more than 30% of the existing
floorspace; and
c. all units should have a pleasant aspect and surrounding residential
environment with main living areas being located to the front of the house’
(P37)
while Policy 15: Development in garden ground states, among other criteria:
b. the total footprint of new buildings does not exceed one and a half times the
footprint of the original main house unless there has already been
development within the garden ground exceeding this limit and where further
development would not detrimentally affect the appearance and character as
now exists; and
c notwithstanding the above, the final proportion of ground covered by
buildings, hard-standings, garages etc. must not amount to more than 40% of
the original house and garden (*) with at least 60% cultivatable garden
ground;’ (P40)
15
Highland Council, in Draft Supplementary Guidance: Housing in the
Countryside (2010), has revised its policy to allow limited development to take
place within existing housing ‘groups’ in the countryside, but stipulates that:
‘no housing group will be allowed to expand, through development of single
house applications, by more than 100% of the number of houses existing in
that group.’
Dundee Council, in the Local Plan Review (2005), Policy 74: New
Development in the Open Countryside, sets out a restrictive policy towards
new development outside the City boundary or specifically allocated
greenfield sites:
‘Within the areas designated as Open Countryside on the Proposals Map
there will be a presumption against all new development unless:
a. the proposed development is located within an existing building group
b. the proposed development involves the restoration of an existing
building worthy of retention (see definition 2); or
c. the proposed development is supported by an agricultural justification.
(Definition) 1 Building Group:
A Building Group should form a compact unit and have a visually
cohesive appearance. It should consist of either a minimum of 3
houses or one house with a further 2 buildings of an equivalent scale
and form.
Over the Local Plan period permission will be granted for infill
development enlarging the building group by one in groupings of up to
7 buildings or by two in the case of larger groups’ (P121)
In contrast, North Lanarkshire Council has amended its policies in order to
promote development within the Rural Investment Area (approximately half of
the countryside area of the Council), while maintaining restrictive policies in
the other half of the countryside area, which is designated Green Belt.
The Council’s Supplementary Planning guidance Development in the Rural
Investment Area (2009) sets out the policy:
‘E.1 Unlike the Green Belt there is no presumption against the granting of
planning permission for new dwellings in the Rural Investment Area. However,
this is qualified by the requirement for new dwellings to be located within an
existing built cluster or farm steading group (see section H below). Isolated
dwellings in the open countryside are not acceptable under Policy NBE
3B.
E.2 Occupancy conditions will not be applied in the Rural Investment Area in
an effort to arrest the decline in the rural population through household
growth. This is a step change from the previous policy which required all new
developments to be justified on the basis of a specific locational need tied to a
16
limited set of acceptable uses in the countryside. In effect new development
can be sold on the open market thereby increasing the opportunity to increase
inward migration to the RIA and help to stabalise rural populations and secure
the thresholds required to maintain rural services.’ (P4)
while Section H of the SPG defines a ‘building cluster’:
‘H. What is a Building Cluster ?
H.1 The National Planning Guidance upon which this guidance is based (PAN
72) advocates the siting of new development in the RIA within or adjacent to
an existing building cluster. However, the national guidance does not define a
building cluster and leaves each Planning Authority free to provide its own
definition. In an effort to define what constitutes a building cluster officers of
the Council assessed every building and building group in the RIA to arrive at
a defintion as to what constitutes a building cluster in North Lanarkshire.
H.2 Having examined over 100 existing farm steadings and building groups
within the RIA the average number of buildings within a building
cluster is 5. A building cluster in North Lanarkshire comprises a residential
property and associated agricultural outbuildings (see exemplar photos and
figureground plans opposite). The buildings are closely grouped together
within an average building footprint diameter of some 50 metres.
Buildings are traditionally grouped at right angles to each other to form a U
or C block which creates a courtyard providing shelter from the prevailing
wind and allowed supervision of the buildings from the principle dwelling. The
ratio of built to unbuilt land within the average building cluster footprint should
not exceed 40 % (NB this % figure is subject to further discussion and
alteration following consultation).
H.3 The analysis of the spread of built development within the RIA also
indicated that each recognized building cluster or farm steading group also
has an average separation distance from the next building
cluster….In seeking to promote new development in the RIA the Council
wishes to maintain the open character of the landscape and as such this
guidance seeks to maintain the existing pattern of development within the RIA
by requiring any proposals for new building clusters to have a minimum
separation distance of 1000 metres from an existing building cluster.’ (P6)
and gives a number of illustrations of how such a cluster could be developed
acceptably. For example:
Duntillad Farm Steading
Figure/ground
Development Options
17
Environmental design
Most local authorities have produced some guidance on issues of
environmental design, most particularly in relation to energy saving and
carbon reduction, the promotion of renewable energy, and water conservation
and treatment.
The nature of this guidance again varies widely from one local authority to
another. One of the local authorities in the sample, Dundee Council, took a
minimalist view of the role of planning in this area, commenting in the Dundee
Local Plan Review (2005) that:
‘Energy efficiency is a further consideration in good design. Whilst the
influence of land use planning does not extend to matters such as insulation,
better siting and orientation, these can bring significant benefit to the energy
efficiency of new homes.’ (P26)
In other cases, local authorities have produced guidance which largely
reiterates other national or UK material, while other local authorities have
produced detailed documents which outline the range of renewable
technologies available, combined with specific advice on solar gain, wind
sheltering, environmentally friendly materials and other similar considerations.
Environmental design is a field which has developed rapidly in the last ten
years, with the relative prices of different technologies changing and with
recent research (such as the field tests undertaken by the Energy Saving
Trust) demonstrating the limitations of certain technologies (such as domestic
scale wind turbines).
In these circumstances, it is unsurprising that some of the advice given by
local authorities already looks dated and inaccurate.
Advice can also vary in accuracy: Shetland Council asserts (in Renewable
Energy Technologies: Guidance for Householders (2008) that:
‘In Shetland, and the Northern Hemisphere in general, the summer sun
passes almost directly overhead.’ (P22)
In other cases, the purpose of the guidance is unclear. For example, South
Lanarkshire Council’s Residential Design Guide Draft (March 2011) contains
a section on ‘Energy efficiency’ which contains a range of advice on design
principles which are intended to promote energy efficiency.
Some of these appear merely to restate existing requirements of the Building
Regulations, such as:
‘Achieve airtight construction and design provision for ventilation’
18
while others are so ill defined as to be merely exhortatory:
‘Maximise thermal insulation in building construction.’
It is unclear whether this constitutes a requirement to exceed the standards of
current Building Regulations, to anticipate already announced future
improvements, or to aspire to a yet higher standard.
Some of the advice given by local authorities however is internally
contradictory, and clearly requires a degree of flexibility in its interpretation.
Too rigid an interpretation in one requirement could conflict with another
requirement, negating any gains to be made.
For example, South Lanarkshire Council, in Supplementary Planning
Guidance: Residential Design Guide (2011), recommends:

‘Orientate buildings to maximise the use of natural energy sources to
provide light and heat. Orientate housing layouts within 30 degrees of due
south to optimise solar gain and to benefit from natural daylight.
but also recommends:

Orientate housing to minimise wind chill by presenting narrow ends to the
prevailing wind.’ (P20)
Since the prevailing wind in most of Scotland is from the south west, and the
prevailing wind chill is often from the north east, compliance with this
recommendation would orient the long side of a house to face south east, or
45 degrees from south, thereby failing to comply with the guidance on
orientation within 30 degrees of south.
In considering wind chill, Highland Council recommends that:
‘The narrow end of buildings should face the prevailing wind to reduce wind
chill.’
However, it could equally be argued that orienting a building so that the
narrow end faces the prevailing wind will not create any sheltered or calm
outdoor space, which might be seen as incompatible with the Council’s
Sustainable Design Checklist point 19: Private amenity space, requiring
outdoor space of a size and type which would allow all occupants to sit
outside at once.
None of the guidance viewed advocated using the house itself as a barrier to
wind, in order to create sheltered outdoor space, whether for sitting out or to
assist plant growth.
The South Lanarkshire Council Supplementary Planning Guidance:
Residential Design Guide (2011) also recommends:
19

‘Provide shelter from wind chill through strategic shelter belt planting and
the use of buildings sheltering other buildings.’ (P20)
but an illustration of shelter belts on the same page notes that:
‘Wind exposure and heat loss can be reduced through shelter belt planting,
but a minimum of 25m is required.’ (in the depth of the shelter belt) (Figure 17,
P20 - unreproducible)
Evidence on the actual effect of shelter on wind chill is limited, but Prior and
Keeble (1991) found that a 7.5m high barrier sheltering a two storey building
had the greatest effect in reducing the number of hours of wind chill occurring
in the year if the barrier were placed to the west of the building: a barrier
150m away was calculated to reduce the hours of wind chill by 50% in the
Shetlands, while the same barrier 15m away would produce a 95%
reduction.1
Among more urban local authorities, advice is more limited: Glasgow Council,
for example, stipulates in the City Plan 2 Part 3: Development Policies and
Design Guidance that:
‘All homes should:
• have large areas of clear glazing and, wherever possible, orientate with
main rooms facing south/west, in order to minimise energy use.’ (Policy RES
2 – Residential Layouts, General Standards (P142)
It is unclear whether such a policy is intended to be achieved by requiring
unusually high levels of thermal insulation in order to comply with the overall
requirements of the Building Regulations, or whether in practice
conventionally sized windows would prove acceptable.
On the same theme of solar gain, Stirling Council advises:
‘If a house is orientated with 15° of due south then 30% energy savings can
be achieved, if the main living spaces are arranged with glazing to the south
to maximise the passive solar benefits of this orientation.’
While Shetland Council’s Renewable Energy Technologies: Guidance for
Householders advocates orienting the long side of houses towards the south
in order to maximise solar gain:
‘The south elevation of buildings should ideally be orientated within 30
degrees of due south to maximise solar gain. A building which faces this way
will receive approximately 90% of the optimal winter solar gain.’ (P22)
1
M. J. Prior & E. J. Keeble, Directional Wind-chill Data for Planning Sheltered
Microclimates around buildings, Energy and Buildings, Vols 15-16, 1990/91
887-893
20
However, guidance on orientation, whether to avoid wind chill or to maximize
solar gain, also needs to be balanced with other guidance which advocates
building with, rather than against, the run of the contours, in order to avoid
excessive underbuilding.
Similarly, the Highland Council guidance on orientation against wind chill
needs to be balanced with that Council’s design guidance such as Siting and
Design Guidance 2010, or the Draft Supplementary Guidance: Housing in the
Countryside (2010) both of which recommend that houses should not be sited
on over engineered platforms but rather follow or step down the contour:
‘Typically developers tend to ignore the surrounding physical landscape, using
modern building techniques to build houses on almost any site. One example
of this is a tendency to build on artificial mounds so that the contours of the
landscape are completely irrelevant to the construction of the building.’
A number of local authorities, including Shetland Council, also note in their
guidance that more compact built forms have lower heat losses than single
storey houses, but it is not clear how this is to be balanced with their
advocacy of single storey houses in the countryside as a built form in keeping
with traditional practice:
‘Compact housing plans, which minimise wall and roof areas, will reduce heat
losses e.g. the heat loss from a bungalow will be greater than from a twostorey house of the same total floor area.’
Traditional crofthouse…………………
……………to modern dwelling
from: The Shetland House (P14)
A number of local authorities give advice on appropriate roof pitches which
would be in keeping with traditional houses (usually given as between 35 and
45 degrees), but also advocate the use of turf roofs, which are only
practicable at much lower roof pitches, usually below 22 degrees.
The Shetland Council, in its Local Plan (2004) notes that:
‘traditionally roofs would be between 35 and 45 degrees’ (P119)
21
but in The Shetland House (2008) advocates the use of turf roofs:
‘A classic natural material is turf for roof-covering, which is common in
Scandinavia; it also has high insulation values.’ (P21)
However, turf roofs cannot be built at the steeper traditional roof pitch. (This
point is illustrated by the photograph which accompanies that paragraph, of
Norwegian practice in the Lofoten Islands, where the roof pitches are visibly
around 20-22.5 degrees.)
New and old turf roofs, Lofoten, Norway (P21)
22
Minimum garden requirements
A requirement for minimum garden sizes for different dwelling types and
different locations can also impose effective minimum housing densities.
In some cases, guidance on minimum garden standards appeared to be
unconnected to guidance on the general principles of good design.
An example of this is South Lanarkshire, where the Residential Design Guide
Draft (March 2011) contains an Appendix which sets out a series of Design
Standard Notes on a range of issues.
Some of these appear to be unconnected to the general principles of design
set out in the text of the Guide itself. For example, the section on Garden
provision requires:
‘4.27 Front Garden Depth - for semi-detached, detached and terraced
dwellings, a minimum front garden depth of six metres should generally be
provided from the front elevation of the dwelling to the heel of the footpath’
and for rear gardens,
‘4.21 Family sized semi-detached/detached houses – minimum rear garden
size of 70m² (excluding garage area), with minimum rear depth of 10m. This
allows for a drying area and play/amenity space.
4.22 Terraced properties – gardens may be proportionately smaller and with
a minimum rear depth of 8m, but only where minimum window-to window
distances of 20m can still be met).’
The text notes that:
‘4.20 As a general guide, the following figures may be considered as a
starting point for the assessment residential developments - unless the
surrounding character of the area or the individual circumstances of the site
justify a departure (for example, in areas of high density, where garden sizes
are traditionally smaller in the surrounding area; or in a locale where larger
sized houses are being provided and garden sizes should be proportionately
larger).’
Similarly, Glasgow Council, in its City Plan 2 has adopted a policy RES 2 –
Residential Layouts which states that:
Houses should provide:
• usable private garden space (see Definition) large enough to serve various
domestic functions (see Note 2) (P142)
while the accompanying Note states that:
23
‘Note 2 As a general indication, in relation to usable garden space, midterraced housing might be expected to deliver around 50 sqm; end-terraced or
semi-detached 80 sqm; and detached 120 sqm or 1.5 times the footprint area
(whichever is greater).’
24
Domestic waste bins
The standards required for the siting and moving of domestic waste bins can
also effectively dictate housing layout.
A number of local authorities require that bins should be located at the rear of
any new housing, effectively requiring terraced houses to be designed with
either back access lanes or pends, a form of development that might also be
regarded as providing insecure and unobserved access for criminal activity.
Glasgow Council, in its City Plan 2 has adopted a policy DES 12 – Provision
of Waste and Recycling Space which states that:
‘HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Housing developers should provide all refuse bins, of a design acceptable to
the Council, prior to the occupation of any dwelling, with recycling bins being
provided by the Council.
Dwellinghouses
• Hard surfaced bin stances should be built to the rear of all new dwellinghouses, sufficient to accommodate 3 x 240 litre bins, one for general waste
and 2 for recyclable waste.
• Access from the rear to the front of houses must be provided to allow
movement of the bins to the collection point on the street.
• Bin stances should be no more than 45m from the position on the road
where the collection vehicle will park and there should be a hard surfaced
path between the rear garden stances and the collection point, the path being
generally around 1m wide.
• In terraced or townhouse property, access could be by means of an integral
garage on the ground floor or a shared pend.
• Developers are also encouraged to provide home composting bins. These
should be located on bare soil and in part of the garden which receives
sunshine for part of the day.’ (P138)
Similarly, South Lanarkshire Council’s Design Standard Notes in the
Residential Design Guide Draft (March 2011) has a section on Bin storage,
which assumes that all bin storage is to be provided at the rear of properties,
with a consequential requirement to provide side or rear paths or pends in
terraces:
‘4.3 …..If bins cannot be taken from the rear, side access for detached and
semi-detached houses must be retained to enable the bins to be wheeled to
the front of the property. Terraced houses must provide rear access for bin
collection either through a rear footpath or a common pend through the
terrace.’
25
Daylight, sunlight and overlooking
Issues of daylight, sunlight and overlooking can be expressed as geometric
rules, and in general local authorities had adopted more or less detailed
policies with a view to maintaining adequate daylighting and sunlighting
standards and maintaining privacy.
The degree of prescription tended to vary according to whether the local
authority was essentially rural or urban, with Highland Council at one extreme
apparently having no specific guidance, to Edinburgh Council at the other with
three advice notes including a 28 page booklet on daylight and sunlight.
Argyle and Bute Council
Argyle and Bute Council offer guidance which emphasises the general
principle to be observed, rather than a prescriptive formula:
‘It is important to ensure that occupants of new developments do not overlook
their neighbours, so dwellings need to be designed to avoid clear views from
one property into neighbouring living rooms and bedrooms. This can be
achieved through careful siting, but where development needs to be more
compact (for example, if based around an existing farm steading) consider
planning building interiors so that living rooms and bedrooms do not face each
other and carefully position doors and windows.
It is worth making sure that a new development does not significantly reduce
the southerly aspect of existing homes, and thus their ability to make the most
of solar gain.’
Argyle and Bute, Small scale housing development: individual new houses
and up to five homes in the countryside, September 2006, P30
Dundee Council
Dundee Council requires an 18 metre separation between any facing windows
of habitable rooms, including development in the City Centre (Local Plan
Appendix 1: Design of New Housing, P153).
Advice is also given in an Advice Leaflet Extensions and garages:
‘Overlooking and Overshadowing
When considering an extension/alteration, care should be taken not to
overlook an adjoining neighbour’s house or garden as this may result in an
intrusion to their privacy. If a window is proposed overlooking a neighbouring
property, the use of opaque glass may reduce the potential for loss of privacy.
Neighbouring properties should not suffer significant loss of daylight to
habitable rooms or loss of sunlighting to garden areas from the construction of
26
extensions. To protect a neighbour’s daylight it is advisable to keep
extensions as far from the boundary with adjacent properties as possible.’
(P2)
accompanied by an illustrative diagram:
Edinburgh Council
Edinburgh has the most developed advice and guidance on this topic, in part
reflecting the pressure for development within the residential inner city.
Development Quality Handbook: Mews (1999)
‘c) All windows must meet the Council’s privacy standards (i.e. 18 metres to
facing properties and 9 metres to boundaries). This requirement will usually
preclude windows in rear elevations unless they are at ground level and are
screened by substantial walls. An exception may be made to this requirement,
at the discretion of the Committee, for windows in front elevations which face
windows of similar properties across a mews lane which is less than 18
metres wide.
d) Second floor accommodation, if permitted, should only be lit by rooflight or
cupola.
e) Dormers will only be permitted at first floor level.’ (P3)
Development Quality Handbook: Housing Development in Garden Grounds
(1999)
‘3. Amenity
a) New buildings should not result in an unreasonable loss of privacy or
natural light to neighbouring properties (including neighbouring back gardens)
and should not be detrimental to more general neighbourhood amenity and
character.
b) The existing building, and proposed dwelling, should meet the
requirements of the supplementary planning guideline on Daylighting, Privacy
and Sunlight. Where a minimum distance of 9 metres to boundaries from all
27
apartment windows, including kitchens, cannot be achieved, development will
not normally be supported. Where the traditional building pattern of the area
incorporates greater separation from boundaries the guidance of the Planning
Authority should be sought. The supplementary planning guideline on Villa
Areas and the Grounds of Villas requires greater separation distances.’ (P3)
Edinburgh Planning Guidance: Daylighting, Sunlighting and Privacy (2010)
This is a 28 page booklet containing a large number of diagrams illustrating
the 25 and 45 degree rules of thumb, together with the 43 degree rule of
thumb for assessing impact on adjoining undeveloped sites.
This is the only local authority guidance on this topic to mention (in passing)
that software now exists to carry out the necessary modeling.
Fife Council
Fife Council publishes a 6 page leaflet, Daylight and Sunlight, based on
Building Research Establishment Report Site Layout for Daylight and
Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice by P J Littlefair
(1991). which outlines the 45 degree and 25 degree rules of thumb.
(http://admin.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Daylightandsunlight3.pd
f)
and provides general recommendations on daylight provision in its
Sustainability Checklist (P38).
Fife Council also produces a one page leaflet as Planning Policy Guidelines:
Minimum distances between window openings. This is the only local authority
guidance which offers a more sophisticated method of measuring overlooking:
28
Glasgow Council
Glasgow Council’s policy is set out in the City Plan 2 Part 3: Development
Policies and Design Guidance:
‘DES 1 - DEVELOPMENT DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Layout and materials
• ensure that there is no undue impact on the amenity or development
potential of adjacent land and that there is no adverse impact on existing or
proposed properties in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy, daylight or
sunlight (see Note 2), overshadowing, noise or disturbance; (P117)
Note 2: In order to ensure that a proposal does not reduce daylighting
excessively on an adjacent site, a daylighting assessment, where appropriate,
will be carried out in accordance with the British Research Establishment
29
publication – ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight, a guide to good
practice’ – P.J. Littlefair (BRE Bookshop, British Research Establishment,
Garston, Watford, WD25 9XX or www.BREBookshop.com).’ (P118)
Highland Council
There is no reference to these topics in the Council’s Draft Siting and Design
Guidance (2010), or elsewhere.
North Lanarkshire
No guidance appears to be available.
Shetland Council
Guidance is provided in the Shetland Local Plan, Appendix F: Siting and
Design Principles:
‘Overlooking
13.1 Privacy in the home is something that everyone has a right to expect,
and in order to protect this basic right, new development needs to be carefully
sited and designed. The use of windows that are taller than they are wide can
greatly reduce problems of overlooking, particularly in built-up areas or where
the road or footpath is close to the house.
13.2 The following standards have been successfully applied by the Council
for many years and it is intended that their use will continue.
13.3 No main window of a habitable room (i.e. all rooms except bathrooms
and hallways) within a dwelling shall overlook the main windows of habitable
rooms in neighbouring dwellings at a distance of less than 18 metres* in
urban areas and 25 metres in rural areas. *This may not be possible in
densely built areas such as The Lanes in Lerwick or ‘courtyard-type’
schemes. Plans submitted with planning applications will be required to show
the location of all adjoining properties and the exact position of their main
windows. These standards may be relaxed where the angle of view or the
design of the windows allows privacy to be maintained. In some cases a
condition may be attached to a planning consent withdrawing permitted
development rights to insert new window openings.
Developments Affecting Daylight and Sunlight to Neighbouring
Properties
14.1 Householders can legitimately expect a reasonable amount of direct
daylight and sunlight into all or at least some living room windows, and this is
a basic benefit that must be protected as far as possible in order to maintain
reasonable levels of household amenity.
14.2 When considering a site for a new house, or an extension to an existing
house, applicants should ensure that the house will not significantly affect
daylight and direct sunlight to existing neighbouring properties.
14.3 Where a proposed development adversely affects daylight and direct
30
sunlight to existing neighbouring properties planning permission will be
refused.’ (P122)
Stirling Council
Advice is given in a 6 page leaflet: Development Advice Note: Daylight,
Sunlight and Privacy (2004). This sets out in simplified diagrams the rules of
thumb contained in the BRE guide Site Layout Planning for Daylight and
Sunlight, a guide to good practice.
The guidance is aimed at non professional applicants, and contains very basic
advice, such as:
A few helpful pointers to remember:
● The sun rises in the East and sets in the West.
● The sun reaches its maximum height around Noon and will be due South at this time.
● The sun is a lot higher in the Summer than the Winter and days are longer.
● In Scotland, the sun elevation in mid-Winter does not generally rise above 10 degrees and
therefore casts long shadows.
South Lanarkshire Council
Guidance is given in the Residential Design Guide Appendix: Design
Standard Notes:
‘Window to window distances
4.8 New housing development should not result in privacy or overlooking
problems either within the site or to neighbouring properties adjoining the site.
To ensure that adequate levels of privacy and amenity for occupiers of new
and existing neighbouring properties are maintained, the following guidelines
will generally apply as a minimum.
4.9 The minimum distance between windows of directly facing habitable
rooms (i.e. living rooms, dining rooms and bedrooms) should be no less than
20m. Upper floor side windows which overlook adjacent houses will be
unacceptable unless they relate to bathrooms, stairways or other non
habitable rooms and are subject to a condition requiring the use and retention
of obscure glazing.
4.10 While these guideline figures should ensure a reasonable degree of
amenity and privacy, there may be instances where they may not be
achievable for townscape or street design reasons. For example, in higher
density, older, more compact areas, the 20m distance may produce a layout
which is out of character with the surrounding area. Due cognisance should
always be given to the context and the form of development in the
surrounding area.
4.11 Similarly, the guidelines may be relaxed where it is necessary in the
interests of creating a well designed street layout with a distinctive sense of
place. However, the layout of any new development should always seek to
ensure that the privacy of neighbouring properties is not compromised.
Sunlight and daylight
31
4.12 New residential development must allow for adequate sunlight and
daylight to reach adjoining properties in line with the Building Research
Establishment (BRE) Standards as set out in their publication entitled “Site
Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice”, BRE
1991
4.13 Applications will be assessed to ensure that the development does not
result in an unacceptable loss of daylight or sunlight to appropriate existing
windows. Where it appears that the loss may be significant, the guidance set
out in the BRE will be used to measure the impact.
4.14 It will be expected that new development will comply with the provisions
of the BRE standards both for the new buildings themselves and for any
existing neighbouring buildings upon which the development might have an
impact.’ (P48)
32