Item 6 - Appendix 1
West Dunbartonshire Council · 5 November 2025
Back to Planning Committee — 5 November 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Permitted development rights to support the provision of new homes Respondent Information Form Please Note this form must be completed and returned with your response. To find out how we handle your personal data, please see our privacy policy: https://www.gov.scot/privacy/ Are you responding as an individual or an organisation? Individual X Organisation Full name or organisation’s name Phone number Address Postcode Email Address The Scottish Government would like your permission to publish your consultation response. Please indicate your publishing preference: x Publish response with name Publish response only (without name) Do not publish response We will share your response internally with other Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for Scottish Government to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise? x Yes No West Dunbartonshire Council 16 Church Street, Dumbarton G82 1QL Development.management@west- dunbarton.gov.uk Information for organisations: The option 'Publish response only (without name)’ is available for individual respondents only. If this option is selected, the organisation name will still be published. If you choose the option 'Do not publish response', your organisation name may still be listed as having responded to the consultation in, for example, the analysis report. ITEM 6 - APPENDIX 1
Page 2
Questionnaire Question 1 Do you consider that the maximum limit in Classes 18B and 22A of five residential units per agricultural unit or forestry building should be changed? Yes No X Unsure Please explain your answer including (if appropriate) how you consider the limit should change. Question 2 Do you believe the current floor space maximum of 150 square metres in Classes 18B and 22A should be removed or increased? Yes No X Unsure Please explain how and why West Dunbartonshire is a small, urban planning authority and we have little practical experience in applying Classes 18B and 22A. In general, however, we have concerns that expansion beyond the current permitted five residential units would, in certain circumstances, result in small residential clusters being located in unsustainable locations, i.e. remote from local services. It is also likely to have implications for existing infrastructure provision, including roads, drainage and waste provision, due to the increased requirements of a residential use. As West Dunbartonshire has little practical experience in applying Classes 18B and 22A, we are content with the current limit and would express concern if it was to be increased and resulting implications on creation of larger units in unsustainable locations.
Page 3
Question 3 Do you believe that small extensions and/or separate buildings should be allowed as part of the conversion of an agricultural or forestry building to residential use under PDR? X Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer. Question 4 Do you consider that any of the current location-based restrictions in relation to Classes 18B and 22A should be removed and if so, which? Yes x No Unsure Please explain your answer. We would have no objection to allowing small scale extensions to buildings, subject to appropriate controls on size, However, it is considered unlikely that this would result in any significant uptake in the use of these PDRs due to the limited number of such buildings within West Dunbartonshire. The works permitted under Class 18B, including partial demolition of buildings, installation of utility infrastructure, changes to the external appearance of buildings and the provision of new vehicle access, have the potential to adversely affect the curtilage of a listed building, a site of archaeological interest and safety hazard areas. To ensure that these impacts are adequately assessed and mitigated through the planning application process, these location-based restrictions should be retained. As West Dumbartonshire does not include croft land or military explosives areas, we cannot comment on the appropriateness of these restrictions.
Page 4
Question 5 Do you consider the prior notification and approval mechanism (including the relevant matters and fee) associated with Classes 18B and 22A should be changed? x Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer. Question 6 Do you consider that PDR should allow the change of use of any other buildings on agricultural/forestry land to residential? If so, to which type(s) of building should the PDR be extended, and why? Yes No X Unsure Generally, the prior notification / prior approval processes are not favoured by Planning Authorities. This is a position we share and it is considered that the prior notification / prior approval process simply adds confusion for applicants, neighbours and planning officers. It is considered that for clarity for all stakeholders a development should either be permitted development (subject to appropriate constraints/restrictions) or require planning permission. If the prior notification / prior approval mechanism continues to be used, the timescale for considering such applications should be aligned with planning applications (i.e. 2 months). Fees will also require to reflect the staff time associated with such submissions, which can be similar to that associated with planning applications. A situation of a prior notification becoming a prior approval should allow further time for consideration and should not result in a situation where the prior approval essentially results in a defacto planning application, potentially for less fee but with the same work. and effort. If the considerations for a prior approval end up being similar to a planning application, no benefits arise and a planning application should simply be required.
Page 5
Please explain your answer Question 7 Do you consider that the PDR under Classes 18B or 22A should be expanded or revised in any other way? Yes x No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 8 Do you believe that there should be new PDR for the replacement of agricultural and forestry buildings with new-build homes in particular circumstances? If so, in what circumstances? Yes x No West Dunbartonshire Council do not have a view on this matter. No.
Page 6
Unsure Question 9 Do you believe that there should be new PDR for new-build homes in any particular types of rural areas in particular circumstances? If so, in what types of rural areas in what circumstances? Yes x No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 10 Do you consider that proposals to convert the ground floor or entirety of buildings in town and city centres to residential use should benefit from PDR? Yes x No Unsure We would not be supportive of allowing demolition and replacement of an existing agricultural or forestry building as permitted development as new build homes have the potential to significantly change the landscape and undermine the purpose of the Green Belt. The appropriateness of new build homes requires an assessment of the site context and the proposal, in terms of siting, design, layout, access and drainage etc. Given the numerous permutations of these elements, it would not be appropriate to apply a catch all approach like Permitted Development Rights to new build homes in these locations. The appropriateness of new build homes in any rural area requires an assessment of the site context, e.g. access, visual prominence and flood risk, and the proposal in terms of siting, design, layout, access and drainage etc. Given the numerous permutations of site context and design solutions, it would not be appropriate to apply a catch all approach like Permitted Development Rights to new build homes in any rural area. If such an approach was adopted, the prior notification/approval process would likely need to be extensive, which would negate the purpose of Permitted Development Rights. The provision of new homes via PDR would also make it difficult to plan infrastructure delivery.
Page 7
Please explain your answer Question 11 Do you consider that there should be PDR for the change of use of properties above Use Class 1A premises to residential use? x Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 12 Do you have any comments about the prospect that the PDR would allow a change of use to residential from any existing use? The conversion of Class 1A uses at the ground floor level raises numerous concerns. It is acknowledged that with the change to shopping habits, town centres no longer have a monofunctional sole retail offering, and with the associated reduction in demand for traditional town centre retail (Class 1A) premises, the evolving nature of town centres will require to be carefully managed. However, permitted development rights (PDRs) allowing the conversion of ground floor premises into residential would raise significant concern in terms of the loss of active frontages, loss of vitality and also potential amenity issues which would undermine town centre placemaking. In particular, such conversions may result in residential properties fronting directly onto busy locations with no defendable space to the front of windows. Such an approach could also be contrary to established development plan policies which seek to safeguard the retail frontage within town centres. In locations outwith town centres, to which this proposed PDR would also apply, this may be acceptable on a case by case basis. As such, we do not feel it could be appropriately controlled by PDR and would require individual assessment. Upper floors which are redundant or disused currently offer no contribution to the wider town centre. While conversion to a residential use under PDR could, potentially, be supported, any PDR would require to consider how a range of issues are to be addressed. These include the impacts from existing established uses within the town centre on the residential amenity of new dwellings. For example, hot food takeaways within adjacent premises which predate any conversion to residential conversion and do not take account of residential property in their established operation, such as the mechanism for discharging cooking odours. Such conflict could adversely impact upon the operation of such established uses which in turn could have a negative effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre and amenity of its residents. We would further note the supportive policy position of NPF4 in relation to town centre living and consideration would need to be given in an PDR to those policy criteria. Should there be separate classes of PDR for class 1A premises themselves and for upper storeys above such premises? This is something that should be considered given the variety of different circumstances that may occur. For example, the conversion of premises within covered Malls should not be included within any PDRs, nor should any upper floor premises within such settings. Access to premises would also require to be considered. Upper premises would require a separate and self-contained access and it would not be desirable or appropriate to allow a situation where an upper floor being converted was accessed via a ground floor retail unit for example
Page 8
X Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 13 Do you think PDR for the change of use of properties above Use Class 1A premises to residential use should include any limits on the minimum or maximum floorspace, size and/or number of residential units that can be formed? X Yes No Unsure While we would support the principle of allowing the conversion of any existing upper floor uses to residential, consideration should be given to the percentage of upper units that could be converted, in order to ensure an adequate supply for Class 1A uses. Consideration should also be given to what, if any, impacts the conversion of upper floor units may have on the operation of linked ground floor units. The concerns raised in relation to Q11 would also apply. Whilst it is not proposed that the increase in PDR in Scotland would be as extensive as in England, we would draw the Scottish Governments attention to research regarding the impact of extensive residential conversion PDR’s in England, such as https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/planning/sites/bartlett/files/tcpa_room_the_breathe_examples_ -_clifford_et_al.pdf , the Clifford_Post-retail high street - Submission draft for Built Environment Special Issue v3 clean.pdf,and the review of PDR to residential commissioned by MHCLG on the quality housing provided through permitted development and full planning permission.
Page 9
Please explain your answer and describe what you think the limits should be, if any Question 14 What other potential limits, restrictions and exclusions to such PDR should be considered? Question 15 Do you consider that a prior notification and approval mechanism should be required in respect of a PDR for ‘town centre living’ as discussed in the consultation? If yes, what matters do you consider should potentially be subject to prior approval? Yes X No Unsure There is a risk that PDRs could result in the creation of small, sub-standard flats and accordingly there would require to be a minimum floor space, or perhaps restrictions on the make-up of units to ensure that a situation of a high number of studio flats in a very dense arrangement is avoided as any balanced policy judgement would be removed from the decision making process. Limits on the number of units converted to residential may also be required to mitigate cumulative. Although it is acknowledged that a form of cumulative limit may be impossible to control when there are many different premises under different ownerships, we would encourage Scottish Government to investigate this matter. Concerns would arise in terms of parking, with potential pressure on infrastructure if there were suddenly a large number of residential properties created. This would be particularly acute if larger “family” sized flats were formed in a particular area together with a substantial loss of retail floorspace. The potential to use converted premises as short term lets would also require to be considered and this may be difficult to control without a STL control area. The potential interaction with HMO’s would also require to addressed and the use as HMOs would require to be restricted. Any PDRs should relate to mainstream houses and flats only. The conversion to residential would result in an increase in land use vulnerability in terms of flooding and PDRs could result in a significant increase in population at area at risk of flooding, thus potentially putting people at risk. Restrictions in this respect would be required. Additionally, restrictions on PDRs being available only within defined town and local centres as per Local Development Plans to ensure any new properties are within accessible areas and contribute to 20 minute neighbourhoods should be explored.
Page 10
Please explain your answer Generally, the prior notification / prior approval processes are not favoured by Planning Authorities. This is a position we share and it is considered that the prior notification / prior approval process simply adds confusion for applicants, neighbours and planning officers. It is considered that for clarity for all stakeholders a development should either be permitted development (subject to appropriate constraints/restrictions) or require planning permission. However, in order to negate many issues that could arise via the uncontrolled use of PDRs, it is accepted that some form of mechanism to control such changes may be required. This could ensure that the potentially significant impact upon town centres has an element of control, converted premises are in the correct location and no likely to be affected adversely be a variety of factors such as flooding, incompatibility with adjacent uses, incompatibility with 20 – minutes neighbourhoods etc. Such a process would allow the use of PDRs to be monitored and recorded and also to ensure that restrictions are being adhered to. If a prior notification / approval process was introduced, then given the potential complexities that could arise, the timescale for considering such applications should be aligned with planning applications (i.e. 2 months). Fees will require to reflect the staff time associated with such submissions which can be similar to that associated with planning applications. A situation of a prior notification becoming a prior approval should allow further time for consideration and should not result in a situation where the prior approval essentially results in a defacto planning application, potentially for less fee but with the same work and effort. If the considerations for a prior approval end up being similar to a planning application, no benefits arise and a planning application should simply be required. Question 16 Should any such PDR (permitting the change of use of floors above Use Class 1A premises) also permit certain external alterations of a building to facilitate the conversion to residential use, if so what alterations? X Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 17 We would support the principle of minor external alterations that do not significantly alter the external appearance of the building. For example, controls mirroring the current restrictions within Conservation Areas. However, in any event, we would note that such alterations should be clearly defined and not left to interpretation.
Page 11
Please provide any other comments regarding the potential options to introduce PDR for ‘town centre living’ proposals as discussed in the consultation. Question 18 Do you consider that any expanded PDR for rural homes (described in chapter 2) should be subject to a condition prohibiting the use of the new units for short-term letting? X Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 19 Do you consider that any ‘town centre living’ PDR (described in chapter 3) should be subject to a condition prohibiting the use of the new units for short-term letting? x Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer None. As the clear intention of any expanded PDR for rural homes would be to deliver new ‘homes’, and in the context of the declared local and national housing emergencies, we would consider it appropriate to attach a condition prohibiting short term let use, until such time that the latter is approved through a change of use permission. As the clear intention of any expanded PDR for town centre living would be to deliver ‘homes’, we would consider it appropriate to attach a condition prohibiting short term let use, until such time that the latter is approved through a change of use permission. We would also seek to clarify that reference to condition in this sense means as part of the criteria for the PDR itself and not something that would be required to be attached as planning condition on individual applications.
Page 12
Question 20 Do you consider that it would be appropriate to amend PDR for existing dwellinghouses, to allow homeowners to make better use of their existing properties? x Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 21 Do you consider that the reference in the PDR for domestic air source heat pumps (ASHPs) should be revised to make it clear that the installation must comply with Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) 020 a)? x Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 22 Do you consider that air source heat pumps (ASHPs) installed on domestic properties under PDR should be permitted to be used for heating and cooling but not solely cooling? X Yes No Unsure The MCS includes noise thresholds for ASHPs which help safeguard residential amenity. Class 6H(3)(c) of the PDR, which currently requires ASHPs to comply with MCS Planning Standards for air source heat pumps or equivalent standards, should be revised to require compliance with the MCS only as it is widely accepted as being the industry standard and it is not clear what the equivalent standards are. West Dumbartonshire supports the principle of amending the PDR for existing dwellinghouses to allow homeowners to make better use of their existing properties.
Page 13
Please explain your answer Question 23 Do you consider that the PDR for domestic ASHPs in Scotland should be amended to allow for the installation of up to two ASHPs on a detached dwellinghouse? X Yes No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 24 Do you consider that proposals that would result in more than one ASHP being installed on flatted buildings or on terraced or semi-detached properties should continue to be assessed on a case-by-case basis by planning authorities? Yes No x Unsure Please explain your answer No objection. West Dunbartonshire Council would have no objection to this but advice should be taken to ensure that this does not give rise to amenity impacts from noise. There is insufficient information presented in the consultation paper to provide a firm view on this question. However, as distances between detached houses, semi- detached house and terraces can vary so a case by case basis would be appropriate.
Page 14
Question 25 Do you consider that any other changes should be made to the existing PDR for the installation of ASHPs in Scotland? Yes X No Unsure Please explain your answer Question 26 Do you consider that it would be appropriate to have PDR for the installation (and subsequent repair and maintenance) of connections from individual buildings to heat networks? Yes No X Unsure Please explain your answer Question 27 What are your views on the accuracy and scope of the environmental baseline set out in the environmental report? Whilst West Dunbartonshire Council can support this in principle, clearly defined parameters would need to be in place to ensure that Conservation Areas, sites or Archaeological interest etc would need to remain protected.
Page 15
Question 28 What are your views on the predicted environmental effects of the proposals as set out in the environmental report? Please give details of any additional relevant sources. Question 29 What are your views on the assessment of alternatives as set out in the environmental report? Question 30 What are your views on the proposals for mitigation, enhancement and monitoring of the environmental effects set out in the environmental report? Question 31 No Comment. No Comment. No Comment. No Comment.
Page 16
Please provide any comments on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) and information on the potential business or regulatory impacts of any of the options identified in this consultation. Question 32 Are you aware of any examples of how any of the options identified in this consultation may affect, either positively or negatively, those with protected characteristics? If yes, please provide further detail Question 33 Please provide any comments or information on the potential impacts on children’s rights and wellbeing of any of the options identified in this consultation Question 34 Do you have any information or comments on the potential impacts on island communities of any of the options identified in this consultation? No Comment. No Comment. No Comment.
Page 17
Question 35 Are you aware of any examples of potential impacts, either positive or negative, that the options identified in this consultation may have on groups or areas at socio-economic disadvantage (such as income, low wealth or area deprivation)? If yes, please provide further detail. Question 36 Do you agree that a Fairer Scotland Duty assessment is not required in relation to the options set out in this consultation? No Comment. No Comments. No Comments.