Appendix 1 - Summary of consultation comments received
Perth and Kinross Council · 28 January 2026
Back to Economy and Infrastructure Committee — 28 January 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Appendix 1 Spittalfield Conservation Area Appraisal Consultation Report Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance In general, the plans are all very informative, user friendly and nicely laid out with great images. Minor change to wording required in Archaeology section PKHT Noted Text updated accordingly Photo archive requested for HER PKHT Noted – to be actioned N/A Appraisal is welcomed. Sections 1 and 11: Hyperlinks should be added to make the document more accessible and subsections should be reordered HES Noted Hyperlinks added and subsections reordered accordingly Section 4, 6 and 7: More pictures and maps would be helpful HES Noted Maps added Section 8: Additional information required on protections for unlisted buildings HES Noted Text added accordingly A “master map” should be provided as an appendix HES This has been discounted as the amount of information on the map affects legibility N/A A link should be provided to the photographic record HES This is not practicable due to file size. Photos to be made available in the HER N/A More information is required on materials and their uses HES Noted Table added Multiple concerns re lack of maintenance of trees on The Green and associated issues: loss of light, leaf fall causing mess and blocked gutters and drains Public Noted. Tree officer from Greenspace has been asked to survey the trees and make recommendations (survey subsequently carried out October 2025 with no concerns apparent re health and safety of trees) Text added to note residents’ concerns about the size and condition of the trees Multiple concerns re notification of tree works due to gardens being added to the CA Public This process does not incur any additional cost to residents as TW applications are free, but ensures that important amenity trees are protected N/A
Page 2
Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance Rented houses will fall into disrepair due to extra cost of designation Public Maintenance is the responsibility of the owner. Inclusion within the CA does not incur additional maintenance costs N/A The village hall is noted in the text as an unlisted building but is already within the CA Public These are separate designations N/A Solar panels, flues etc have been added in the CA as a result of government incentives Public Noted. Householders should ensure that contractors are aware of built heritage designations and appropriate consents have been sought prior to works being carried out N/A Multiple comments stating that the rear of properties shouldn’t be included Public The majority of properties in the CA are listed, which means that the rear elevation is included, irrespective of the conservation area designation. Conservation area designation focuses primarily on publicly visible elevations and amenity space. N/A The Muir Mackenzie Memorial is shown as a war memorial on the mapping Public This is OS data which we do not have the ability to edit N/A Typos and incorrect dates raised Public Noted Text updated accordingly Multiple comments providing background information on specific buildings and features in the village Public Noted Text updated accordingly The Green and other council-maintained public areas are unkempt Public Noted. This has been raised with the Greenspace Team N/A Multiple comments stating that the existing CA isn’t managed well Public Officers are aware of unauthorised works that have been carried out over time. The intention of the CAA is in part to raise awareness of the value of conservation area designation and the benefits to owners to ensure their properties are well maintained. N/A
Page 3
Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance Multiple comments providing background information on the conversion of Sawmill cottage etc Public Noted Text updated accordingly Multiple comments against boundary amendments as changes to property will require planning permission with associated costs Public Applications for planning permission do have a fee, but there is a reduction for development in conservation areas. CA designation is generally associated with higher property values (see LSE report) N/A The conservation area is not in keeping with modern living – houses are too small for families and bus travel is restricted Public These concerns are outwith the scope of the CAA N/A The CAA is biased Public Noted N/A There are better ways to spend taxpayer money Public The CAA is a legislative requirement which incurs minimal cost to the local authority N/A It is too late to reach the standards required Public While there have been some unauthorised works in the CA, the village retains its architectural and historic interest and still meets the criteria for designation. The CAA is intended in part to raise awareness of the importance of good repair and maintenance. N/A If all the changes were made it would result in rent rises Public This statement is unclear in terms of what changes are being referenced N/A Static caravans are in gardens without planning permission Public Unauthorised works or development should be reported to the planning enforcement team N/A The report is 10 years out of date and no one has visited recently Public Multiple site visits have been carried out by officers in 2025 N/A There is no benefit to designation. Properties would be harder to sell in future Public This is not supported by current research (see LSE , EH and IHBC reports) N/A It is pointless bureaucracy that will make it harder for residents to live their daily lives for next to no Public Extensive research over the past 20 years has recognised the value of the historic environment in N/A
Page 4
Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance reason. Many of the points set out in this appraisal false and aim to take away freedom from resident. The extension will have no positive effect and will only serve to make life more costly and difficult for the residents of Spittalfield terms of economic and environmental benefit and health outcomes (see LSE , EH and IHBC reports) Multiple comments raising concerns re thermal performance of buildings and energy efficiency including windows and doors, ASHP, solar panels etc Public The CAA includes specific advice on traditional buildings and climate change/ energy efficiency and links to sources of more detailed information. The embodied carbon in traditional historic buildings and the use of renewable, sustainable materials e.g. timber, stone and lime play a vital role in reaching Net Zero N/A Multiple comments in relation to the nature, timing and extent of consultation Public Noted. Lessons have been learned from this process on how best to engage in public consultation in future phases N/A The CAA is welcomed and extending the boundary to safeguard the setting and character of the village is supported Estate Noted N/A The sewerage system needs to be upgraded Public This is outwith the scope of the document N/A There is not enough explanation for including more garden ground in the CA Public Noted Text added accordingly Please provide an objective basis for what is a particularly sweeping, judgemental assertion that the playpark and bus stop are ill considered and out of character. What would an 18th century playpark or bus stop have looked like that it now seems we should try to emulate in the future? The impact of this statement alone is likely to have an adverse impact on our future. The local Public It is not suggested in the CAA that a playpark or bus stop should be either removed or 18th century in appearance. The design of the playpark is somewhat dated and this is noted so that, if and when the playpark is upgraded, a less incongruous design could be used (e.g. as at more recent playpark upgrades at the North and South Inches). A timber bus shelter, as installed in some other conservation areas, would also N/A
Page 5
Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance authority, constrained in the future by its own planning officers, will be forced to put in different play equipment. With limited funds, what is more likely to happen is their reduction or complete removal, therefore keeping in line with this design statement, but doing absolutely nothing for the future of the village and the many families who use the play area every day. I would be surprised if any resident of The Green has any complaint to be made about the character of the playpark. be less visually intrusive than the existing standard polycarbonate shelter. Listed building status is arbitrary with no overall planning Public This is administered by HES, not the local authority N/A Please provide a basis for the assertion that a dilapidated former telephone box adds to the character of the village, whilst the playpark does not. Is it simply age and that, if we were to return to this process at some point 50 years hence, the current playpark would also be lauded as of great value? Public The telephone box is an example of a specific 1935 design by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, and has been recognised by Historic Environment Scotland as a category B listed building N/A Please provide an objective basis for what makes a building “sympathetic to the character of the area” and what doesn’t… Who is to say what is and what is not “sympathetic” and how will this be enforced in future, and by whom? Will local residents of The Green be able to determine, or will it be someone with no actual investment in the village who will hold power? Public The CAA provides an explanation of the implications of CA designation and why Spittalfield meets the criteria for designation N/A
Page 6
Comment summary Received From PKC Officer Response Changes to be made to Guidance Another example of the partial and selective nature of this document, it should be noted that many of the chimney stacks have been altered, increased and rebuilt over time, and many with a variety of materials. Most are either completely of brick build or now have brick upper halves. For this document to have merit it should tell a complete picture, and not a partial one that paints a picture that is not true. Public This does not negate the importance of the remaining chimneystacks – these are often of brick construction due to brick having better heat regulation than stone N/A