Good Neighbour Agreement Scotland

2. This circular outlines the circumstances under which planning obligations and agreements of good neighbours can be used and how to conclude them effectively. Planning authorities should promote obligations in strict compliance with the tests in this circular. The development of planning commitments should take into account the economic viability of the proposals and other solutions should be considered, along with options for the introduction or gradual implementation of payments. The conclusion of planning commitments or agreements by good neighbours should not delay the benefits of a planned development accordingly, which is generally policy-compliant, and should not result in significant costs to developers and infrastructure providers. Planning requirements should be identified as soon as possible and stakeholders should be brought together to ensure that the process is proceeding as smoothly as possible. A “gutnachbar contract” is a contract between a person (such as a landowner or developer) and a community organization. 4. This circular sets out the Scottish Government`s policy on the use of planning obligations, including unilateral commitments, and agreements on good neighbours, in accordance with Sections 75 and 75D of the Town and Country Planning Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc.

(Scotland) Act 2006. The very name of “good neighbourly agreement” could prove to be the ultimate contradiction if the “neighbours” want to assert their respective rights under such an agreement. The recent Case of Neumann v. Hutchinson (2006 GWD 28-628) is just one example of how neighbourhood disputes can ultimately turn into a high-end property rights dispute. The GNA offers another way to do this. Maybe a more neutral name for a GNA would be a 75D agreement, but to avoid any confusion with the neighboring s 75 agreement, the legal terminology is followed here. There are a number of problems with AMGs identified as potential problem areas (see online consultation resource on On the one hand, it is not clear how planning obligations and planning obligations overlap, which may be particularly important to alleviate one of the two instruments, but on the other hand, it continues to refer to them (a concern identified by James Barr Ltd).

At a more fundamental level, a number of organisations such as SEPA, planning authorities, municipal councils, municipal councils and, in certain circumstances, Scottish ministers may see themselves as a role in the proposal for a new land use (see Lafarge Cement UK proposal).