Democracy Spraffa

Appendix 5 - Prioritisation Framework

Perth and Kinross Council · 1 October 2025
Back to Housing and Social Wellbeing Committee — 1 October 2025 and its agenda

Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.

Original council PDF · Download plain text

Page 1

Appendix 5
Prioritisation Framework
Introduction 
Our Prioritisation Framework provides a tool to prioritise investment, it balances the
Scottish Government’s ambitions contained in Housing to 2040, and Perth and
Kinross Council’s Local Housing Strategy (LHS) outcomes. 
Partner Housing Associations that operate in the area have been asked to submit
proposals, in an agreed format, for any sites that are not currently in the SHIP that
they wish to be considered for funding. 
The framework does not provide the only assessment of priority and the Council will
continue to balance its investment decisions to ensure housing need across the
Housing Market Areas is met, and that there is an appropriate split between
rural/urban and greenfield/brownfield delivery, as per LHS outcomes. 
As achieving strategic objectives is crucial, it is essential that we ensure only those
projects that can be delivered are included. For this reason, the framework operates
a 2-step process, whereby a pre-screening exercise is undertaken initially, before
proposals are then scored against our matrix. 
Pre-Screening 
Any sites proposed that are outwith development boundaries, as per LDP, will
automatically be screened out unless they have planning consent, either outline, or
detailed, or can be justified through NPF4. Any allocated housing sites in LDP will
automatically be progressed to site scoring. 
All other sites will be considered as part of the pre-screening process, whereby a
review of the site will be considered by Perth and Kinross Council’s Housing Strategy
Team. This review will include a check on the sites planning history, potential site
constraints, and may include discussions with Planning about the proposal. These
sites will then be reviewed against the detail and scale of the project. 
There are 3 potential outcomes of pre-screening: 
1 Progress to site scoring.
2 Refusal to score until planning consent given.
3 Agree to score though only on a reduced number of units. 
Agreement to proceed to site scoring is not an assurance that the site will ultimately
be delivered as per the proposal, only that initial checks have been carried out to
ensure that the Council have satisfied itself, based on current knowledge that there
are no obvious impediments to its delivery. 
Proposals that do not provide a contribution to the LHS target to deliver 10% of new
supply affordable housing that is wheelchair or adaptable standard, will be screened
out, unless there are exceptional circumstances related to the site that make this
prohibitive, and/or through agreement with Housing Strategy. This standard includes

Page 2

both Wheelchair User and Older / Ambulant Disabled User standard contained in
Housing for Varying Needs document. 
Site Scoring 
To ensure fairness and transparency, each proposal, unless screened out, will be
scored against set criteria listed below. As noted above, whilst this is the basis for
investment decisions, it cannot be the only tool that is used, as the sites selected for
inclusion need to assist in achieving the LHS outcomes, and so this needs to be
considered alongside site scoring. 
Priority 1 considers whether the proposal meets housing need.  This will be
assessed using different data sets, including applicant wating lists, scale of existing
stock and current turnover, Housing Need and Demand Assessment (HNDA), and
future supply. 
Priority 2 considers whether the proposal reflects a ‘brownfield first’ approach and
helps bring back into use sites that would benefit the community.
Priority 3 considers where the sites are on their development journey, prioritising
those that are more progressed.
Priority 4 considers whether the proposal will provide fully wheelchair adapted
properties
Priority 5 considers whether project can be cross funded and bring in alternative
funding streams. 
Priority 6 considers how deliverable the proposals are. This is to ensure that priority
is not given to sites that are unlikely to be brought forward. 
Priority 7 considers whether the proposal meets wider strategic priorities. Examples
include provision of supported housing, regeneration projects, substantial over
provision of wheelchair or adapted housing, achieving other LHS outcomes. 
Some elements of scoring will be a matter of fact, some will be down to professional
judgment. 
Scoring Criteria
1. Meets Housing Need 
• High (3)
• Medium (2)
• Low (1) 
2. Site attributes
• Listed Building (1)
• Vacant and Derelict Land Register (1)
• Long term empty building (1)
• Brownfield (1)
• Buildings at Risk (1)

Page 3

3. Development status 
• Detailed planning consent (2)
• Planning in principle (1)
• Land acquired (1)
• Allocated LDP housing site (1) 
4. Includes fully wheelchair adapted housing 
• 10% delivery (3) 
• 5% delivery (2)
• Less than 5% (1) 
5. Can harness other funding streams e.g Rural Housing Fund (2) 
6. Deliverability 
• High (3)
• Medium (2)
• Low (1) 
7. Meets Wider Strategic Priorities (3)
Low (1-4) Medium (5-9) High (10+)