Scottish government changes to Scottish planning policy quashed
Hannah Belford, Savills, said: “The Court’s decision reflects concerns held by many that ministers had underestimated the implication of the changes, particularly the impact on housing delivery.
“This reinstates the presumption in favour of sustainable development until any further policy changes come forward. Therefore, where developers can demonstrate there is a clear shortfall in the housing supply, their proposal will have a greater chance of approval at appeal.
What is the ‘Tilted Balance’?
“The ‘tilted balance’ principle makes a presumption towards planning permission being granted unless there are “adverse impacts which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh its benefits”. In other words, once a shortfall in the 5-year effective housing land supply is identified, the adverse impacts would need to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits to justify not supporting the proposal.
“The Gladman Development Ltd case, which resulted in a successful appeal, argued that the Reporter failed to apply the ‘tilted balance’ principle. Even though the Reporter found a probable shortfall in the 5-year housing supply, they refused permission because the development did not constitute sustainable development.
What does this the decision to quash the amendments made to SPP mean for developers?
“The decision reverts planning policy to its previous position. This may mean that Local Authorities that don’t have an effective 5-year housing supply may find it difficult to refuse speculative housing applications from housebuilders/developers making use of the ‘tilted balance’ principle in favour of sustainable residential development where there is an identified housing shortfall.
What next?
“We are keeping our eyes peeled for the publication of the draft National Planning Framework 4 (NFP 4) due to be published in September this year, which may provide further insight into the Scottish Government’s position on housing land supply”.
r