(a) Notice of Review and supporting documents (Pages 7-142)
Perth and Kinross Council · 3 August 2026
Back to Local Review Body — 3 August 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
4(i)(a) LRB-2026-11 LRB-2026-11 - 26/00461/IPL - Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle), land 50 metres south east of Craigburn House, Flawcraig, Rait, Perth, PH2 7RY Papers Submitted by the Applicant
Page 2
No embedded text on this page.
Page 3
Page 1 of 5 Pullar House 35 Kinnoull Street Perth PH1 5GD Tel: 01738 475300 Email: onlineapps@pkc.gov.uk Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid. Thank you for completing this application form: ONLINE REFERENCE 100749913-002 The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application. Applicant or Agent Details Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application) Applicant Agent Agent Details Please enter Agent details Company/Organisation: Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * First Name: * Building Name: Last Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Telephone Number: * (Street): * Extension Number: Address 2: Mobile Number: Town/City: * Fax Number: Country: * Postcode: * Email Address: * Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? * Individual Organisation/Corporate entity Houghton Planning Ltd Paul Houghton MRTPI Whins Road Alloa Business Centre 07780117708 FK10 3RF Scotland Clacks Alloa paul@houghtonplanning.co.uk
Page 4
Page 2 of 5 Applicant Details Please enter Applicant details Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * Other Title: Building Name: First Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Last Name: * (Street): * Company/Organisation Address 2: Telephone Number: * Town/City: * Extension Number: Country: * Mobile Number: Postcode: * Fax Number: Email Address: * Site Address Details Planning Authority: Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available): Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Address 4: Address 5: Town/City/Settlement: Post Code: Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites Northing Easting Mr Stuart Perth and Kinross Council Heslop Rosebank Gardens 1 FK10 3RF Land 50 metres South East of Craigburn House, Flawcraig, Rait, Perth, PH2 7RY Scotland Falkirk Wallacestone paul@houghtonplanning.co.uk
Page 5
Page 3 of 5 Description of Proposal Please provide a description of your proposal to which your review relates. The description should be the same as given in the application form, or as amended with the agreement of the planning authority: * (Max 500 characters) Type of Application What type of application did you submit to the planning authority? * Application for planning permission (including householder application but excluding application to work minerals). Application for planning permission in principle. Further application. Application for approval of matters specified in conditions. What does your review relate to? * Refusal Notice. Grant of permission with Conditions imposed. No decision reached within the prescribed period (two months after validation date or any agreed extension) – deemed refusal. Statement of reasons for seeking review You must state in full, why you are a seeking a review of the planning authority’s decision (or failure to make a decision). Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. If necessary this can be provided as a separate document in the ‘Supporting Documents’ section: * (Max 500 characters) Note: you are unlikely to have a further opportunity to add to your statement of appeal at a later date, so it is essential that you produce all of the information you want the decision-maker to take into account. You should not however raise any new matter which was not before the planning authority at the time it decided your application (or at the time expiry of the period of determination), unless you can demonstrate that the new matter could not have been raised before that time or that it not being raised before that time is a consequence of exceptional circumstances. Have you raised any matters which were not before the appointed officer at the time the Yes No Determination on your application was made? * If yes, you should explain in the box below, why you are raising the new matter, why it was not raised with the appointed officer before your application was determined and why you consider it should be considered in your review: * (Max 500 characters) Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle) See Local Review Statement
Page 6
Page 4 of 5 Please provide a list of all supporting documents, materials and evidence which you wish to submit with your notice of review and intend to rely on in support of your review. You can attach these documents electronically later in the process: * (Max 500 characters) Application Details Please provide the application reference no. given to you by your planning authority for your previous application. What date was the application submitted to the planning authority? * What date was the decision issued by the planning authority? * Review Procedure The Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine your review and may at any time during the review process require that further information or representations be made to enable them to determine the review. Further information may be required by one or a combination of procedures, such as: written submissions; the holding of one or more hearing sessions and/or inspecting the land which is the subject of the review case. Can this review continue to a conclusion, in your opinion, based on a review of the relevant information provided by yourself and other parties only, without any further procedures? For example, written submission, hearing session, site inspection. * Yes No Please indicate what procedure (or combination of procedures) you think is most appropriate for the handling of your review. You may select more than one option if you wish the review to be a combination of procedures. Please select a further procedure * Please explain in detail in your own words why this further procedure is required and the matters set out in your statement of appeal it will deal with? (Max 500 characters) In the event that the Local Review Body appointed to consider your application decides to inspect the site, in your opinion: Can the site be clearly seen from a road or public land? * Yes No Is it possible for the site to be accessed safely and without barriers to entry? * Yes No If there are reasons why you think the local Review Body would be unable to undertake an unaccompanied site inspection, please explain here. (Max 500 characters) Application as submitted. Report of Handling. Decision Notice. Local Review Statement. 26/00461/IPL 12/05/2026 By means of inspection of the land to which the review relates Private land. 02/04/2026 To see the plot and the hedge surrounding it.
Page 7
Page 5 of 5 Checklist – Application for Notice of Review Please complete the following checklist to make sure you have provided all the necessary information in support of your appeal. Failure to submit all this information may result in your appeal being deemed invalid. Have you provided the name and address of the applicant?. * Yes No Have you provided the date and reference number of the application which is the subject of this Yes No review? * If you are the agent, acting on behalf of the applicant, have you provided details of your name Yes No N/A and address and indicated whether any notice or correspondence required in connection with the review should be sent to you or the applicant? * Have you provided a statement setting out your reasons for requiring a review and by what Yes No procedure (or combination of procedures) you wish the review to be conducted? * Note: You must state, in full, why you are seeking a review on your application. Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. You may not have a further opportunity to add to your statement of review at a later date. It is therefore essential that you submit with your notice of review, all necessary information and evidence that you rely on and wish the Local Review Body to consider as part of your review. Please attach a copy of all documents, material and evidence which you intend to rely on Yes No (e.g. plans and Drawings) which are now the subject of this review * Note: Where the review relates to a further application e.g. renewal of planning permission or modification, variation or removal of a planning condition or where it relates to an application for approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the application reference number, approved plans and decision notice (if any) from the earlier consent. Declare – Notice of Review I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is an application for review on the grounds stated. Declaration Name: Mr Paul Houghton MRTPI Declaration Date: 18/05/2026 Payment Details Pay Direct Created: 18/05/2026 10:18
Page 8
Local Review Statement INTRODUCTION This Local Review Statement has been prepared by Houghton Planning Ltd on behalf of Mr Stuart Heslop in relation to the recent refusal of planning permission for the “Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle)” at land 50 Metres South East of Craigburn House, Flawcraig, Rait, Perth, PH2 7RY (ref: 26/00461/IPL). The planning application was refused for a single reason as follows: “The proposal is contrary to Policy 19 Housing in the Countryside of the Perth and Kinross Council Local Development Plan 2 (2019) and the associated Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance 2020 (SG). Whilst the site is located adjacent to a building group it cannot be considered to extend the group into a definable site as the landscaping/hedging which has been planted along the south- western boundary of the site has been planted with the sole purpose of creating a development site. The SG explicitly states that "fencing or young trees or hedging planted with the specific intention of creating a site will not be accepted as existing landscape features for the purposes of this Supplementary Guidance". The proposal also fails to meet any of the other categories of development outlined in the SG. The proposal is also contrary to Policy 9(b) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as the proposal is on a greenfield site and is not explicitly supported by policies of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). The proposal also fails to meet any of the categories of development allowed by Policy 17: Rural Homes of NPF4”. This Statement is set out in the same way as the Report of Handling, and responds to that only as necessary to make the applicant’s case as to why planning permission in principle should be granted, particularly at a time where there is a housing emergency in Perth and Kinross, and more widely across Scotland. It should be noted that this application has been submitted by someone wishing to live on the site with his family and contribute to the local community and economy. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The planning appeal was 17 years ago, and relates to a site whose boundaries were less well defined, and a time when the housing emergency was less acute. It is respectfully contended that the planning history whilst a material consideration should carry no weight whatsoever in the determination of this application. SITE HISTORY No comment.
Page 9
DEVELOPMENT PLAN No comment. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Scottish Government - Tackling Scotland's Housing Emergency (September 2025) https://www.gov.scot/publications/tackling-scotlands-housing-emergency/ Scottish Government - Letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Minister for Public Finance sent to planning authorities (October 2025) https://www.gov.scot/publications/housing-sme-homebuilders-ministerial-letter-october- 2025/ CONSULTATION RESPONSES No comment. REPRESENTATIONS No comment. APPRAISAL Principle The proposal complies with the Council’s housing in the countryside guidance by being a site that will be part of an existing Building Group. It has a well-established existing landscape feature being a hedge. It is appreciated that this feature was not so established back in 2006 and 2009 when development on the plot was last considered. However, that has changed markedly in the intervening 17 years, and the plot is now considered compliant with guidance being surrounded by a mature hedge that is the best part of 20 years old from when it was first planted. Visual Impact and Layout No comment. Drainage No comment.
Page 10
Flood Risk The Flood Risk Assessment clearly shows that the site can be developed. Access No comment. Ecology No comment. Developer Contributions A developer contribution is acceptable. Prime Agricultural Land No comment. Economic Impact The economic impact of the proposal has significance as a material consideration in that it is highly likely that construction will be a by a local company employing local people. At a time when construction jobs are being lost, particularly by smaller companies, and some smaller construction companies are going out of business, it is important to allow for a steady stream of these smaller sites that are the lifeblood of this part of the housebuilding industry. The Scottish Government recognises the importance of SME housebuilders and councillors are requested to consider the letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Minister for Public Finance sent to planning authorities in October 2025 https://www.gov.scot/publications/housing-sme-homebuilders-ministerial-letter-october- 2025/ CONCLUSION The proposal complies with the Development Plan. This is a plot within a Building Group that has a well-established, and defined, landscape boundary. However, if there is any doubt around that, for example councillors are persuaded by the argument relating to the planning history, then material considerations justify overriding the Development Plan as follows. • The planning history is 17 years old. That should carry no weight whatsoever. • The hedge is now 17 years older.
Page 11
• There is a housing emergency Scotland-wide that should carry significant weight in any decision on new housing, even just one house in the countryside, as required by the Scottish Government. • The economic benefit is more than the case officer implies given the need to support local construction companies, and to support SME housebuilders as requested by the Scottish Government. It is, therefore, respectfully requested that councillors allow this local review.
Page 12
Mr Stuart Heslop c/o Houghton Planning Ltd Paul Houghton MRTPI Alloa Business Centre Whins Road Alloa Clacks FK10 3RF 2 High Street Perth PH1 5PH Date of Notice :12th May 2026 Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act (as amended) Planning, etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 (as amended) Application Reference: 26/00461/IPL I am directed by the Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Acts currently in force, to refuse your application registered on 14th April 2026 for permission for Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle) Land 50 Metres South East Of Craigburn House Flawcraig Rait Perth PH2 7RY for the reasons undernoted. Kristian Smith Development Management & Building Standards Service Manager Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposal is contrary to Policy 19 Housing in the Countryside of the Perth and Kinross Council Local Development Plan 2 (2019) and the associated Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance 2020 (SG). Whilst the site is located adjacent to a building group it cannot be considered to extend the group into a definable site as the landscaping/hedging which has been planted along the south-western boundary of the site has been planted with the sole purpose of creating a development site. The SG explicitly states that "fencing or young trees or hedging planted with the specific intention of creating a site will not be accepted as existing landscape features for the purposes of this Supplementary Guidance". The proposal also fails to meet any of the other categories of development outlined in the SG. The proposal is also contrary to Policy 9(b) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as the proposal is on a greenfield site and is not explicitly supported by policies of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). The proposal also fails to meet any of the categories of development allowed by Policy 17: Rural Homes of NPF4.
Page 13
2 Justification 1. The proposal is not in accordance with the Development Plan and there are no material reasons which justify departing from the Development Plan. Notes The plans and documents which form part of this decision are listed below and are displayed as ‘refused’ on Perth and Kinross Council’s website at www.pkc.gov.uk “Online Planning Applications” page Plan Reference 01 02 03 04 05 Should you require further information regarding the decision please contact either developmentmanagement@pkc.gov.uk or call 01738 475300, quoting the above planning reference number, and you’ll be directed to the most appropriate person.
Page 14
REPORT OF HANDLING DELEGATED REPORT Ref No 26/00461/IPL Ward No P1- Carse Of Gowrie Due Determination Date 13th June 2026 Draft Report Date 12th May 2026 Report Issued by John Williamson Date 12 May 2026 PROPOSAL: Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle) LOCATION: Land 50 Metres South East Of Craigburn House Flawcraig Rait Perth PH2 7RY SUMMARY: This report recommends refusal of the application as the development is considered to be contrary to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and there are no material considerations apparent which justify setting aside the Development Plan. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Planning permission in principle is sought for the erection of a single dwellinghouse on land located to the south‑east of Craigburn House and to the north‑east of the settlement of Rait, as identified on the attached Location Plan and Proposed Indicative Site Plan. The site is bounded by an existing access track along its south‑east and north‑east boundaries, with the Craig Burn located on the far side of the access track to the north‑east. A leylandii hedge forms the boundary to the south‑west, with Craigburn House situated immediately to the north‑west. The application seeks to establish the acceptability of the principle of residential development on this plot, with all detailed matters reserved for future consideration. The proposal is assessed against the Development Plan, comprising National Planning Framework 4 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan (2019), together with other relevant material considerations, including site context, constraints and planning history. The site has a relevant planning history, having previously been the subject of two applications for residential development (06/00793/FUL and 09/00634/FUL), both of which were refused by the Planning Authority and subsequently dismissed on appeal by the Scottish Government. These decisions are material considerations in the assessment of the current proposal. The site lies within the Sidlaw Hills Local
Page 15
Landscape Area and is located close to, though outwith, the Fingask Castle Historic Garden and Designed Landscape, which is situated approximately 100 metres to the north‑west. SITE HISTORY 06/00793/FUL - Erection of 2 dwellinghouses – Refused August 2006 and Appeal Dismissed by Scottish Government 09/00634/FUL – Erection of 2 dwellinghouses with integral garages – Refused July 2009 and Appeal Dismissed by Scottish Government PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION Pre application Reference: 25/00061/PREAPL DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Development Plan for the area comprises National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) (LDP2). National Planning Framework 4 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is the Scottish Government’s long-term spatial strategy with a comprehensive set of national planning policies. This strategy sets out how to improve people’s lives by making sustainable, liveable and productive spaces. NPF4 was adopted on 13 February 2023. NPF4 has an increased status over previous NPFs and comprises part of the statutory development plan. The Council’s assessment of this application has considered the following policies of NPF4: Policy 3: Biodiversity Policy 4: Natural Places Policy 6: Forestry, Woodland and Trees Policy 13: Sustainable Transport Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place
Page 16
Policy 16: Quality Homes Policy 17: Rural Homes Policy 18: Infrastructure First Policy 22: Flood Risk and Water Management Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 – Adopted November 2019 The Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) is the most recent statement of Council policy and is augmented by Supplementary Guidance. The principal policies are: Policy 1A: Placemaking Policy 1B: Placemaking Policy 5: Infrastructure Contributions Policy 19: Housing in the Countryside Policy 39: Landscape Policy 40B: Forestry, Woodland and Trees: Trees, Woodland and Development Policy 41: Biodiversity Policy 52: New Development and Flooding Policy 53B: Water Environment and Drainage: Foul Drainage Policy 53C: Water Environment and Drainage: Surface Water Drainage Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development Proposals Statutory Supplementary Guidance Supplementary Guidance - Airfield Safeguarding (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Delivering Zero Waste (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Developer Contributions & Affordable Housing (adopted in 2020)
Page 17
Supplementary Guidance - Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments (adopted in 2021) Supplementary Guidance - Forest & Woodland Strategy (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Green & Blue Infrastructure (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Housing in the Countryside (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Landscape (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Placemaking (adopted in 2020) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Non-Statutory Guidance Planning Guidance - Planning & Biodiversity Supplementary Guidance - Renewable & Low Carbon Energy (draft) National Guidance The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through, Planning Advice Notes, Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and a series of Circulars. National Roads Development Guide 2014 This document supports Designing Streets and expands on its principles and is considered to be the technical advice that should be followed in designing and approving of all streets including parking provision. Local Place Plans Local Place Plans are community-led plans setting out proposals for the development and use of land and set out a community’s aspirations for its future development. There is no Local Place Plan for this site. CONSULTATION RESPONSES EXTERNAL Scottish Water – no objection Perth And Kinross Heritage Trust – no objection INTERNAL
Page 18
Transportation And Development – no objection subject to conditions Development Contributions Officer – condition recommended to require compliance with infrastructure contributions policy Structures And Flooding – no comments REPRESENTATIONS Number of representations received: 2 The letters of representation both object to the application and the comments may be summarised as follows: Contrary to Development Plan Planning history of refusal and appeal dismissal Prime agricultural land Manipulated and engineered site due to hedge planting Setting of precedent Traffic and access safety The comments above are addressed within the appraisal section below. Additional Statements Received: Screening Opinion Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not applicable Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations Habitats Regulations AA Not Required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Not Required Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Submitted APPRAISAL Sections 25 and 37 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that planning decisions be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises NPF4
Page 19
and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019. The relevant policy considerations are outlined in the policy section above and are considered in more detail below. In terms of other material considerations, involving considerations of the Council’s other approved policies and supplementary guidance, these are discussed below only where relevant. The determining issues in this case are whether; the proposal complies with development plan policy; or if there are any other material considerations which justify a departure from policy. Principle The principle of development on this site was addressed in detail within the Council’s pre‑application response (ref. 25/00061/PREAPL) dated 12 May 2025, and the assessment below is consistent with that advice. The proposal has been considered against the Development Plan, comprising National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 (LDP2), together with the associated Supplementary Guidance. Policy 19 of the LDP2 (Housing in the Countryside) acknowledges that opportunities exist for new housing in rural areas where this supports the viability of communities, meets identified development needs in appropriate locations and safeguards the character of the countryside through a high standard of siting and design. The policy supports the development of single houses or groups of houses where proposals fall within one of six defined categories. This approach is reflected in NPF4, where Policy 9 supports development on greenfield land only where this is explicitly supported by policies in the Local Development Plan. NPF4 Policy 17 is also relevant and seeks to support rural housing where it is appropriately located and meets specified criteria. In this instance, the only category within Policy 19 which may be applicable is Category 1 – Building Groups. The proposal does not represent an infill site, does not fall within the defined site categories set out in the Supplementary Guidance, does not involve the renovation or replacement of an existing building or the conversion of a redundant non‑domestic building, and the site does not meet the definition of rural brownfield land. The Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance (adopted 2020) clarifies that a building group is defined as three or more existing buildings of a size at least equivalent to a traditional cottage which appear as a group within their landscape setting, with the majority of buildings being residential or capable of conversion to residential use. The guidance allows for development which extends a building group into a readily definable adjacent site, formed by existing topography, roads or well‑established landscape features such as a watercourse or mature tree belt. It also requires that new housing respects the character, scale and form of the existing group and is integrated into the existing layout and building pattern. While the buildings adjacent to the site are considered, in isolation, to meet the
Page 20
definition of a building group, the critical issue is whether the application site itself constitutes a readily definable site for the purposes of the Supplementary Guidance. This matter has been examined previously through two planning applications on the site (06/00793/FUL and 09/00634/FUL), both of which were refused and subsequently dismissed on appeal by the Scottish Government. The appeal decision for application 06/00793/FUL concluded that, although the site was bounded by a driveway and woodland to the east, there were no established landscape features along the south‑west boundary to define the site. The subsequent application in 2009 (09/00634/FUL) was refused on similar grounds, with the Reporter concluding that the site did not represent an identifiable site formed by landscape features and that the Housing in the Countryside policy does not support sites created through artificial boundaries. It is noted that the Council’s updated Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance (2025) retains the same core principles, including the requirement that sites extending building groups must be defined by landscape features or topography and must not be artificially created. The current guidance explicitly states: “Fencing or young trees or hedging planted with the specific intention of creating a site will not be accepted as existing landscape features for the purposes of this Supplementary Guidance”. Review of historic and more recent imagery indicates that the hedge along the south‑west boundary of the site was planted shortly before the determination of the 2009 application. In the view of the Planning Authority, and consistent with the previous appeal decisions, this hedge was planted with the intention of creating a development plot artificially and cannot be relied upon as a defining landscape feature. The passage of time does not alter its artificial origin for the purposes of policy assessment. Accordingly, as advised in the pre‑application response dated 12 May 2025, the site is not considered to comprise a definable site for the extension of a building group under Policy 19 and its associated Supplementary Guidance as it has been created artificially. The proposal therefore fails to meet the requirements of the Local Development Plan. As NPF4 supports greenfield development only where it accords with relevant LDP policies, the proposal is also contrary to national policy. The previous appeal decisions represent a material consideration, and no substantive change in policy or site circumstances has been identified which would justify a different conclusion in this case. Visual Impact and Layout Generally, the design and scale of development should respect its surroundings and adhere to Policies 1A and B of LDP2 which relate to placemaking and Policy 14 of NPF4 which seeks to deliver well designed development. Further guidance is also provided within the associated Placemaking Supplementary Guidance. The proposal also requires the landscape character of Local Landscape Area and meet the
Page 21
requirements of Policy 39 of the LDP2. Policy 4(a) of NPF4 is also applicable and seeks to ensure that the development does not have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment. As this is an application in principle this detail cannot be assessed at this stage. Drainage The application form indicates that the site is to connect to a private drainage system with surface water system catered for through a SUDS system. This is in accordance with Policy 53B and C of the LDP2 and Policy 22 of NPF4. The proposed introduction of a sustainable urban drainage system is considered to be sufficient to cater for surface water drainage at the site. The proposed development is supported by a Drainage Impact Assessment which confirms that surface water will be managed on site in accordance with Policy 53C of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan (2019) and Policy 22 of National Planning Framework 4, through the use of an infiltration‑based Sustainable Drainage System. Surface water runoff from roof areas is to be directed to a soakaway designed to accommodate a 1 in 200 year rainfall event with an allowance for climate change. In accordance with Policy 53B, foul drainage is to be addressed by a private secondary treatment system, with treated effluent discharged to ground via a soakaway, reflecting the absence of a public sewer connection. Subject to final detailed design and regulatory approvals, the proposed drainage arrangements are considered acceptable in principle. Flood Risk The application site is identified on SEPA’s indicative Flood Maps as being subject to medium to high likelihood fluvial flooding from the Craig Burn. This mapping therefore indicates the site to be potentially at risk of flooding for the purposes of Policy 22 of National Planning Framework 4. However, the applicant has submitted a site‑specific Flood Risk Assessment (dated 30 March 2026) which undertakes a detailed technical evaluation of flood risk, including a screening assessment, peak flow calculations incorporating climate change allowances, bridge capacity analysis and channel capacity assessment of the Craig Burn. The Flood Risk Assessment concludes that the Craig Burn has sufficient capacity to convey the design flood event (200‑year plus climate change) and that no flooding within the site boundary is predicted. On this basis, the residual flood risk to the site is assessed as low, and the development is not considered to be located within a “flood risk area” as defined by NPF4 Policy 22. While SEPA’s flood mapping represents a precautionary, strategic‑level assessment, the site‑specific technical evidence is considered to provide a more accurate representation of flood risk at this location. Subject to the conclusions of this assessment being accepted, and the implementation of recommended freeboard levels, it is therefore considered that the
Page 22
proposal could comply with national and local flood risk policy requirements. Access The site is served by an existing private access lane. In accordance with Policy 60B of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan (2019), Policy 13 of National Planning Framework 4 and the National Roads Development Guide, development is required to demonstrate that safe and suitable access arrangements can be achieved. Transport Planning has confirmed that, in principle, the use of the existing private lane to serve the proposed single dwelling is acceptable and no objection has been raised to the proposal at this stage. The detailed design of the access, including any requirements relating to visibility, surface treatment and turning provision, would be secured by planning condition and would require to be submitted for approval as part of any subsequent detailed application. Ecology The application site currently comprises managed grassland with no evidence of priority habitats, mature trees or features of ecological significance, and is therefore considered to be of limited ecological value. Having regard to Policy 41 of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan (2019) and Policy 3 of National Planning Framework 4, which seek to safeguard and enhance biodiversity, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in any significant adverse impacts on habitats or protected species. On this basis, and given the nature and condition of the site, an ecological assessment is not required to support the application. Developer Contributions The Council Developer Contributions Supplementary Guidance requires a financial contribution towards increased primary school capacity in areas where a primary school capacity constraint has been identified. A capacity constraint is defined as where a primary school is operating at over 80% and is likely to be operating following completion of the proposed development, extant planning permissions and Local Development Plan allocations, at or above 100% of total capacity. This proposal is within the catchment of Abernyte Primary School and the requirement for a developer contribution can be secured by condition and considered further at the detailed application stage. Prime Agricultural Land
Page 23
The Land Capability for Agriculture mapping identifies the site as Class 3.1 agricultural land. Policy 5 of National Planning Framework 4 seeks to protect prime agricultural land, which includes Classes 1, 2 and 3.1; however, particular emphasis is placed on safeguarding Class 1 and Class 2 land, which represent the best and most versatile agricultural resources capable of producing a wide range of crops. While Class 3.1 land is technically classified as prime agricultural land, it is of a lower quality than Classes 1 and 2 and is afforded a lesser degree of protection in planning terms. In this case, the proposal affects only a small area of Class 3.1 land when considered in the context of the extensive agricultural landholding and wider farmland resource in the surrounding area, and does not involve the loss of the highest quality agricultural land. On this basis, the impact on agricultural land is not considered to present a determining constraint in the assessment of the proposal against NPF4 Policy 5. Economic Impact The economic impact of the proposal is likely to be minimal and limited to the construction phase of the development. PLANNING OBLIGATIONS AND LEGAL AGREEMENTS None required. DIRECTION BY SCOTTISH MINISTERS None applicable to this proposal. CONCLUSION AND REASONS FOR DECISION To conclude, the application must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this respect, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the Development Plan. Account has been taken of the relevant material considerations and none has been found that would justify overriding the Development Plan. Accordingly, the proposal is refused on the grounds identified below. Reason for Refusal 1 The proposal is contrary to Policy 19 Housing in the Countryside of the Perth and Kinross Council Local Development Plan 2 (2019) and the associated Housing in the
Page 24
Countryside Supplementary Guidance 2020 (SG). Whilst the site is located adjacent to a building group it cannot be considered to extend the group into a definable site as the landscaping/hedging which has been planted along the south-western boundary of the site has been planted with the sole purpose of creating a development site. The SG explicitly states that "fencing or young trees or hedging planted with the specific intention of creating a site will not be accepted as existing landscape features for the purposes of this Supplementary Guidance". The proposal also fails to meet any of the other categories of development outlined in the SG. The proposal is also contrary to Policy 9(b) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as the proposal is on a greenfield site and is not explicitly supported by policies of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). The proposal also fails to meet any of the categories of development allowed by Policy 17: Rural Homes of NPF4. Justification The proposal is not in accordance with the Development Plan and there are no material reasons which justify departing from the Development Plan. Informatives None Procedural Notes Not Applicable. PLANS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THIS DECISION 01 02 03 04 05
Page 25
Page 1 of 9 Pullar House 35 Kinnoull Street Perth PH1 5GD Tel: 01738 475300 Email: onlineapps@pkc.gov.uk Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid. Thank you for completing this application form: ONLINE REFERENCE 100749913-001 The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application. Type of Application What is this application for? Please select one of the following: * Application for planning permission (including changes of use and surface mineral working). Application for planning permission in principle. Further application, (including renewal of planning permission, modification, variation or removal of a planning condition etc) Application for Approval of Matters specified in conditions. Description of Proposal Please describe the proposal including any change of use: * (Max 500 characters) Is this a temporary permission? * Yes No If a change of use is to be included in the proposal has it already taken place? Yes No (Answer ‘No’ if there is no change of use.) * Has the work already been started and/or completed? * No Yes – Started Yes - Completed Applicant or Agent Details Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application) Applicant Agent Dwellinghouse
Page 26
Page 2 of 9 Agent Details Please enter Agent details Company/Organisation: Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * First Name: * Building Name: Last Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Telephone Number: * (Street): * Extension Number: Address 2: Mobile Number: Town/City: * Fax Number: Country: * Postcode: * Email Address: * Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? * Individual Organisation/Corporate entity Applicant Details Please enter Applicant details Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * Other Title: Building Name: First Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Last Name: * (Street): * Company/Organisation Address 2: Telephone Number: * Town/City: * Extension Number: Country: * Mobile Number: Postcode: * Fax Number: Email Address: * Houghton Planning Ltd Mr Paul Stuart Houghton MRTPI Heslop Whins Road Alloa Business Centre FK10 3RF Scotland Clacks Alloa
Page 27
Page 3 of 9 Site Address Details Planning Authority: Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available): Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Address 4: Address 5: Town/City/Settlement: Post Code: Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites Northing Easting Pre-Application Discussion Have you discussed your proposal with the planning authority? * Yes No Pre-Application Discussion Details Cont. In what format was the feedback given? * Meeting Telephone Letter Email Please provide a description of the feedback you were given and the name of the officer who provided this feedback. If a processing agreement [note 1] is currently in place or if you are currently discussing a processing agreement with the planning authority, please provide details of this. (This will help the authority to deal with this application more efficiently.) * (max 500 characters) Title: Other title: First Name: Last Name: Correspondence Reference Date (dd/mm/yyyy): Number: Note 1. A Processing agreement involves setting out the key stages involved in determining a planning application, identifying what information is required and from whom and setting timescales for the delivery of various stages of the process. . Mr Perth and Kinross Council John 25/00061/PREAPL Williamson 12/05/2025 Land 50 metres South East of Craigburn House, Flawcraig, Rait, Perth, PH2 7RY
Page 28
Page 4 of 9 Site Area Please state the site area: Please state the measurement type used: Hectares (ha) Square Metres (sq.m) Existing Use Please describe the current or most recent use: * (Max 500 characters) Access and Parking Are you proposing a new altered vehicle access to or from a public road? * Yes No If Yes please describe and show on your drawings the position of any existing. Altered or new access points, highlighting the changes you propose to make. You should also show existing footpaths and note if there will be any impact on these. Are you proposing any change to public paths, public rights of way or affecting any public right of access? * Yes No If Yes please show on your drawings the position of any affected areas highlighting the changes you propose to make, including arrangements for continuing or alternative public access. Water Supply and Drainage Arrangements Will your proposal require new or altered water supply or drainage arrangements? * Yes No Are you proposing to connect to the public drainage network (eg. to an existing sewer)? * Yes – connecting to public drainage network No – proposing to make private drainage arrangements Not Applicable – only arrangements for water supply required As you have indicated that you are proposing to make private drainage arrangements, please provide further details. What private arrangements are you proposing? * New/Altered septic tank. Treatment/Additional treatment (relates to package sewage treatment plants, or passive sewage treatment such as a reed bed). Other private drainage arrangement (such as chemical toilets or composting toilets). Please explain your private drainage arrangements briefly here and show more details on your plans and supporting information: * 0.20 Vacant ground. See Drainage Impact Assessment
Page 29
Page 5 of 9 Do your proposals make provision for sustainable drainage of surface water?? * Yes No (e.g. SUDS arrangements) * Note:- Please include details of SUDS arrangements on your plans Selecting ‘No’ to the above question means that you could be in breach of Environmental legislation. Are you proposing to connect to the public water supply network? * Yes No, using a private water supply No connection required If No, using a private water supply, please show on plans the supply and all works needed to provide it (on or off site). Assessment of Flood Risk Is the site within an area of known risk of flooding? * Yes No Don’t Know If the site is within an area of known risk of flooding you may need to submit a Flood Risk Assessment before your application can be determined. You may wish to contact your Planning Authority or SEPA for advice on what information may be required. Do you think your proposal may increase the flood risk elsewhere? * Yes No Don’t Know Trees Are there any trees on or adjacent to the application site? * Yes No If Yes, please mark on your drawings any trees, known protected trees and their canopy spread close to the proposal site and indicate if any are to be cut back or felled. All Types of Non Housing Development – Proposed New Floorspace Does your proposal alter or create non-residential floorspace? * Yes No Schedule 3 Development Does the proposal involve a form of development listed in Schedule 3 of the Town and Country Yes No Don’t Know Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013 * If yes, your proposal will additionally have to be advertised in a newspaper circulating in the area of the development. Your planning authority will do this on your behalf but will charge you a fee. Please check the planning authority’s website for advice on the additional fee and add this to your planning fee. If you are unsure whether your proposal involves a form of development listed in Schedule 3, please check the Help Text and Guidance notes before contacting your planning authority. Planning Service Employee/Elected Member Interest Is the applicant, or the applicant’s spouse/partner, either a member of staff within the planning service or an Yes No elected member of the planning authority? *
Page 30
Page 6 of 9 Certificates and Notices CERTIFICATE AND NOTICE UNDER REGULATION 15 – TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATION 2013 One Certificate must be completed and submitted along with the application form. This is most usually Certificate A, Form 1, Certificate B, Certificate C or Certificate E. Are you/the applicant the sole owner of ALL the land? * Yes No Is any of the land part of an agricultural holding? * Yes No Are you able to identify and give appropriate notice to ALL the other owners? * Yes No Certificate Required The following Land Ownership Certificate is required to complete this section of the proposal: Certificate B Land Ownership Certificate Certificate and Notice under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 I hereby certify that (1) - No person other than myself/the applicant was an owner [Note 4] of any part of the land to which the application relates at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application; or – (1) - I have/The Applicant has served notice on every person other than myself/the applicant who, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application was owner [Note 4] of any part of the land to which the application relates. Name: Address: Date of Service of Notice: * Morris Leslie PartnershipFirst Floor, South Inch Business Park, Shore Road, Perth, Scotland, PH2 8BW 02/04/2026
Page 31
Page 7 of 9 (2) - None of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding; or – (2) - The land or part of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding and I have/the applicant has served notice on every person other than myself/himself who, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application was an agricultural tenant. These persons are: Name: Address: Date of Service of Notice: * Signed: Paul Houghton MRTPI On behalf of: Mr Stuart Heslop Date: 02/04/2026 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. * Checklist – Application for Planning Permission Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 Please take a few moments to complete the following checklist in order to ensure that you have provided all the necessary information in support of your application. Failure to submit sufficient information with your application may result in your application being deemed invalid. The planning authority will not start processing your application until it is valid. a) If this is a further application where there is a variation of conditions attached to a previous consent, have you provided a statement to that effect? * Yes No Not applicable to this application b) If this is an application for planning permission or planning permission in principal where there is a crown interest in the land, have you provided a statement to that effect? * Yes No Not applicable to this application c) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle or a further application and the application is for development belonging to the categories of national or major development (other than one under Section 42 of the planning Act), have you provided a Pre-Application Consultation Report? * Yes No Not applicable to this application
Page 32
Page 8 of 9 Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 d) If this is an application for planning permission and the application relates to development belonging to the categories of national or major developments and you do not benefit from exemption under Regulation 13 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, have you provided a Design and Access Statement? * Yes No Not applicable to this application e) If this is an application for planning permission and relates to development belonging to the category of local developments (subject to regulation 13. (2) and (3) of the Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013) have you provided a Design Statement? * Yes No Not applicable to this application f) If your application relates to installation of an antenna to be employed in an electronic communication network, have you provided an ICNIRP Declaration? * Yes No Not applicable to this application g) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle, an application for approval of matters specified in conditions or an application for mineral development, have you provided any other plans or drawings as necessary: Site Layout Plan or Block plan. Elevations. Floor plans. Cross sections. Roof plan. Master Plan/Framework Plan. Landscape plan. Photographs and/or photomontages. Other. If Other, please specify: * (Max 500 characters) Provide copies of the following documents if applicable: A copy of an Environmental Statement. * Yes N/A A Design Statement or Design and Access Statement. * Yes N/A A Flood Risk Assessment. * Yes N/A A Drainage Impact Assessment (including proposals for Sustainable Drainage Systems). * Yes N/A Drainage/SUDS layout. * Yes N/A A Transport Assessment or Travel Plan Yes N/A Contaminated Land Assessment. * Yes N/A Habitat Survey. * Yes N/A A Processing Agreement. * Yes N/A Other Statements (please specify). (Max 500 characters)
Page 33
Page 9 of 9 Declare – For Application to Planning Authority I, the applicant/agent certify that this is an application to the planning authority as described in this form. The accompanying Plans/drawings and additional information are provided as a part of this application. Declaration Name: Mr Paul Houghton MRTPI Declaration Date: 02/04/2026 Payment Details Pay Direct Created: 02/04/2026 10:02
Page 34
Location of application site
Page 35
Land 50 metres South East of Craigburn House, Flawcraig, Rait, PH2 7RY © Crown copyright and database rights 2026 OS 100054135. Map area bounded by: 323143,727035 323543,727435. Produced on 01 April 2026 from the OS National Geographic Database. Supplied by UKPlanningMaps.com. Unique plan reference: p16g/uk/1400496/1875765
Page 36
Legend SiteBoundary Proposedsingledwellinghouse Proposeddrivewayand2no. parkingspaces Craigburn House North Lodge Springside Cottage FB Witches Knowe Scale: 1:500@A1/1:1,000@A3 DrawingNo: CRA-HP-SP-01 Drawnby: LHoughton Date: 28/03/2026 Status: Planning Checkedby: PHoughton DrawingTitle: SitePlan Project:LandSEofCraigburnHouse, Flawcraig,Rait,Perth,PH27RY Client: StuartHeslop t:07780117708 e:houghtonplanning.co.uk 0 10 20 30 40 50m
Page 37
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 1 Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development Flood Risk Assessment Client: Stuart Heslop Project/Proposal No: GON.694.0406 Version: 2 Date: 30/03/2026
Page 38
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 2 Document Information Project Name: Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development Document Title: Flood Risk Assessment Client Name: Stuart Heslop Document Status: Final for Issue Author: Duncan Bowie Reviewed: Zak Ritchie Approved: Zak Ritchie Approver Qualifications: BEng(hons), MSc, C.WEM, C.Eng, MCIWEM Date: 30/03/2026 Version: 2 Project/Proposal Number: GON.694.0406 Revision History Version Date Authored Reviewed Approved Notes 1 22/04/2025 Duncan Bowie Zak Ritchie Zak Ritchie For Issue 2 30/03/2026 Duncan Bowie Zak Ritchie Zak Ritchie Revised Issue The contents of this document are confidential to the addressed recipient and may not be revealed. This document may contain confidential information. If received in error, please delete it without making or distributing copies. Opinions and information that do not relate to the official business of Gondolin Land and Water Ltd, registered at 35/1 Balfour Street, EH6 5DL, are not endorsed by the company. Limitation: This document has been prepared exclusively for the use of the Client and any party with whom a warranty agreement has been executed, or an assignment has been agreed. No other parties may rely on the contents of this document without written approval from Gondolin Land and Water Ltd for which a payment may be applicable. Gondolin Land and Water Ltd accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of use of this document for any purpose other than that for which it was authorised, nor the use of this document by any third party with whom an agreement has not been reached. © Copyright 2026 Gondolin Land and Water Ltd. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of the company. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Gondolin Land and Water Ltd constitutes an infringement of copyright unless otherwise explicitly agreed by contract.
Page 39
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 3 Contents Document Information 2 Contents 3 1. Introduction 5 1.1 Preamble 5 1.2 Site Context and Proposed Development 5 1.3 Topography 5 1.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 5 1.5 Local Hydrology 6 2. Planning & Policy Context 6 2.1 Overview 6 2.2 National Planning Policy 7 2.3 SEPA Flood Risk and Land Use Vulnerability Guidance 8 2.4 SEPA Flood Risk Classifications 8 2.5 Proposed Development Suitability 8 3. Flood Risk Assessment 9 3.1 Screening Assessment of Potential Source of Flood Risk 9 3.2 Climate Change 11 4. Technical Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment 12 4.1 Context 12 4.2 Craig Burn Peak Flow Assessment 12 4.3 Bridge Capacity Assessment 13 4.4 Channel Capacity Assessment 14 4.5 Fluvial Flood Risk Summary 14 4.6 Recommendations 15 5. Closure 15
Page 40
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 4 Document References Tables Table 1 Catchment Hydrological Summary ................................................................................................ 6 Table 2 Flood Risk Screening Assessment ................................................................................................... 11 Table 3 Craig Burn Peak Flow Summary ..................................................................................................... 12 Table 4 Bridge Capacity Assessment .......................................................................................................... 13 Table 5 Manning’s Equation Channel Capacity Summary ...................................................................... 14 Appendices Appendix A – PKC Certification and SEPA Checklist Appendix B – Peak Flow Analysis Appendix C – Scottish Water Asset Plans Appendix D – Site Photography Drawings Drawing FRA-001 – Site Location Plan Drawing FRA-002 – Flood Risk Summary
Page 41
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 5 1. Introduction 1.1 Preamble Gondolin Land and Water Ltd (Gondolin) has been appointed by Mr Stuart Heslop (the Client) to prepare a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) report in support of a planning application for the development of a dwelling house and associated works on land at Craigburn House, Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU. This report addresses any potential flood risk to the proposed development from all possible sources in accordance with best practice and in accordance with policies presented by the National Planning Framework for Scotland 4 (NPF4)1 and Perth and Kinross Councill2. A signed compliance certificate is included in Appendix A, to certify that this assessment has been carried out in accordance with the relevant guidance and legislation. A completed SEPA FRA checklist is also included within Appendix A. The site was visited in January 2025 by a suitably qualified Hydrologist / Civil Engineer to inform the assessment and assessment overseen by a Chartered Hydrologist / Civil Engineer with >14 years experience of undertaking FRAs in Scotland. 1.2 Site Context and Proposed Development The development site is located to the south of the existing Craigburn properties at approximate National Grid Reference (NGR): NO 23331 27173. The proposals are for a single residential dwelling on a 0.13ha plot in the east of the site neighbouring the existing properties. This plot is part of the wider 0.97ha site. There are no current proposals for this area. However, it will be included in this FRA for completeness. The site is bounded by the existing Craigburn properties to the north, a minor road to the northwest and agricultural land on all other sides. Access is provided from the existing track bounding the site to the northeast or from the minor road in the west. The site currently consists of improved grassland surrounded by large hedges. A site location plan is included as Drawing FRA-001. 1.3 Topography An assessment of site topography has been undertaken using 1m resolution LiDAR data sourced from the Scottish Remote Sensing Portal in conjunction with on-site observations and measurements. The site slopes down to the south at an approximate gradient of 1 in 15. The maximum elevation of 20.5mAOD is located in the north next to the existing public road and the approximate minimum elevation of 14.8mAOD is found at the southern extent. 1.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 1.4.1 Geology 1.4.1.1 Superficial Review of the British Geological Survey3 (BGS) online geology maps indicates that superficial deposits at the proposed development site are Glaciofluvial Ice Contact Deposits of gravel, sand and silt. The area around the site takes the appearance of an Alluvial Fan, formed on the Carse of Gowrie around the apex of the constricted upstream channel of the Craig Burn. 1 The Scottish Government (2023) National Planning Framework 4, February 2023 2 Perth & Kinross Council (2021) Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments 3 British Geological Survey (2025) Natural Environment Research Council – GeoIndex Onshore Viewer, available at: https://www.bgs.ac.uk/map-viewers/geoindex-onshore/ (accessed on 20th February 2025)
Page 42
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 6 1.4.1.2 Bedrock Review of the BGS online geology maps shows that the bedrock geology at the development area is of the Glenvale Sandstone Formation. Brown, yellow, read, purple and cream feldspathic sandstones of the Devonian Epoch. Approximately 30m upgradient to the northwest, the bedrock transitions to andesite and pyroxene of the Ochil Volcanic Formation. 1.4.2 Hydrogeology Review of the BGS online hydrogeology maps indicates that the underlying bedrock at the development area is of the Stratheden Group and hence is a moderately productive aquifer with Sandstone, partly pebbly with subordinate siltstone and mudstone producing moderate amounts of groundwater through intergranular flow. 1.5 Local Hydrology Review of the Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) Web Service4 and other available mapping shows that the Craig Burn passes the site approximately 10m to the northeast of the development boundary. The FEH Web Service provides a catchment of 5.61km2 for the Craig Burn where it passes the development site. During the site hydrological survey, relevant site observations and measurements were taken of the Craig Burn, flood flow paths and other relevant information pertinent to this study. It was observed that the burn had been artificially straightened and deepened as is typical for ‘pow’ watercourses in the Gowrie region. No other open watercourses are recorded within the vicinity of the proposed development area. A hydrological summary and characteristics for the Craig Burn catchment at the development site are shown in Table 1 below. The data shown is taken from the FEH Web Service and the catchment characteristics of the site have been delineated from NGR: NO 23400 27200, a point in the watercourse immediately adjacent to the site. Table 1 Catchment Hydrological Summary Waterbody Catchment Area (km2) SAAR1 (mm) URBEXT2 (%) PROPWET3 SPRHOST4 (%) ALTBAR5 (m) Craig Burn 5.61 771 0 0.46 29.68 200 1SAAR = Standard Annual Average Rainfall between 1961-1990 2URBEXT = Extent of Urban and Suburban Land Cover (1990) 3PROPWET = Proportion of Time the Soil Moisture Deficit (SMD) was equal to, or below, 6mm during 1961-1990 4SPRHOST = Standard Percentage Runoff using UK Hydrology of Soil Types (HOST) Classification 5ALTBAR = Mean Catchment Altitude The FEH data indicates that the Craig Burn catchment experiences a moderate SAAR value for a Scottish catchment and that the catchment is essentially rural. An SPRHOST value of 29.68% indicates a low-moderate runoff potential. 2. Planning & Policy Context 2.1 Overview This assessment has been completed in accordance with guidance presented within the National Planning Framework for Scotland 4 (NPF4) and taking cognisance of the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. The assessment also references and takes due consideration (where appropriate) of the following principal guidance and policy documents: CIRIA (2004) Development and Flood Risk – Guidance for the Construction Industry, Report C624; 4 UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2025) Flood Estimation handbook Web Service, available at: https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/ (accessed on 27th February 2025)
Page 43
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 7 Perth & Kinross Council (2021) Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments, Adopted March 2021 Angus Council (2016) Tay Estuary and Montrose Basin Local Flood Risk Management Plan (2016 – 2022); Angus Council (2021) Tay Estuary and Montrose Basin Local Flood Risk Management Plan (2022 – 2028); Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2024) Flood Risk and Land Use Vulnerability Guidance, Version 5, July 2024; Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2018) SEPA Development Plan Guidance Note 2a: Development Management Guidance: Flood Risk (Reference: LUPS-DM-GU2a), Version 2, July 2018; Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2023) Climate Change Allowances for Flood Risk Assessment in Land Use Planning (Reference: LUPS-CC1), Version 5, July 2024; Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2024) Flood Risk Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, July 2024. Scottish Environment Protection Agency Flood Risk Management Plan Tay Estuary and Montrose Basin Local Plan District (LPD7) (2021); and Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2022) Technical Flood Risk Guidance for Stakeholders (Reference: SS-NFR-P-002) June 2022. It is noted that the recent release of NPF4 has resulted in potential incompatibility of some current SEPA and other stakeholder technical and policy guidance documents with regards to flood risk assessment in particular. SEPA have acknowledged that some of their current guidance documents are currently being reviewed / updated to align with NPF4 and information contained within their documents may no longer be valid. Therefore, it is unknown to what extent reliance can be placed on existing flood risk guidance / policy which has not been updated to reflect the principles of NPF4 Policy 22. These are matters entirely outwith Gondolin’s control and professional judgement has been applied accordingly. 2.2 National Planning Policy This report has been prepared in accordance with NPF4 Policy 22 relating to Flood Risk and Water Management, which states: “Policy Intent: To strengthen resilience to flood risk by promoting avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing and future development to flooding. Policy Outcomes: Places are resilient to current and future flood risk. Water resources are used efficiently and sustainably. Wider use of natural flood risk management benefits people and nature.” Furthermore, NPF4 states that development proposals at risk of flooding or in a flood risk area will only be supported if they are for: “Essential infrastructure where the location is required for operational reasons; Water compatible uses; Redevelopment of an existing building or site for an equal or less vulnerable use; or. Redevelopment of previously used sites in built up areas where the LDP has identified a need to bring these into positive use and where proposals demonstrate that long-term safety and resilience can be secured in accordance with relevant SEPA advice”. The definition of ‘flood risk area’ or ‘at risk of flooding’ in NPF4 is as follows:
Page 44
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 8 “For planning purposes, at risk of flooding or in a flood risk area means land or built form with an annual probability of being flooded of greater than 0.5% which must include an appropriate allowance for future climate change. This risk of flooding is indicated on SEPA’s future flood maps or may need to be assessed in a flood risk assessment. An appropriate allowance for climate change should be taken from the latest available guidance and evidence available for application in Scotland. The calculated risk of flooding can take account of any existing, formal flood protection schemes in determining the risk to the site. Where the risk of flooding is less than this threshold, areas will not be considered ‘at risk of flooding’ for planning purposes, but this does not mean there is no risk at all, just that the risk is sufficiently low to be acceptable for the purpose of planning. This includes areas where the risk of flooding is reduced below this threshold due to a formal flood protection scheme.” 2.3 SEPA Flood Risk and Land Use Vulnerability Guidance This guidance outlines how SEPA assess the vulnerability to flooding of different land use with the following categories: Most Vulnerable Uses; Highly Vulnerable Uses; Least Vulnerable Uses; Essential Infrastructure; and Water Compatible uses. The following excerpt from the guidance is provided for context: “This guidance supports Policy 22 of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) by explaining vulnerability in a flooding context, and the relative vulnerability of different land uses to flooding. Policy 22 sets out exceptions where development can be permitted in a flood risk area. This guidance aims to support application of the first three of those exceptions, specifically the emboldened terms: i. Essential infrastructure where the location is required for operational reasons. ii. Water compatible uses; and iii. Redevelopment of an existing building or site for an equal or less vulnerable use.” 2.4 SEPA Flood Risk Classifications SEPAs online indicative Flood Map is used to categorise fluvial, surface water and coastal flood risk and these are defined as follows: High Likelihood: A flood event is likely to occur in the defined area on average once in every ten years (1:10) or a 10% AEP chance of happening in any one year; Medium Likelihood: A flood event is likely to occur in the defined area on average once in every two hundred years (1:200) or a 0.5% AEP chance of happening in any one year; and Low likelihood: A flood event is likely to occur in the defined area on average once in every thousand years (1:1000) or a 0.1% AEP chance of happening in any one year. 2.5 Proposed Development Suitability With reference to SEPA Flood Risk and Land Use Vulnerability guidance the proposed development is considered to be in the Highly Vulnerable Uses category (i.e. residential dwellings) and will be suitable in flood risk planning terms if the site is not located within a ‘flood risk area’. It is not expected that any of the exceptions outlined in Section 2.3 will apply to this site.
Page 45
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 9 3. Flood Risk Assessment 3.1 Screening Assessment of Potential Source of Flood Risk 3.1.1 Overview There are a number of potential sources of flooding which should be evaluated in accordance with best practice and NPF4 such as: Flooding from rivers or fluvial flooding; Flooding from the sea or tidal / coastal flooding; Flooding from land; Flooding from groundwater; Flooding from sewers; and Flooding from reservoirs, canals, and other artificial sources. The flood risk from each of these potential sources is discussed in the following sections and a ‘screening assessment’ is presented in Section 3.1.9 which summarises the potential flood risk sources and if applicable, those requiring a more detailed analysis and specification of bespoke mitigation measures. Flood ‘risk’ definitions within the screening exercise are based on a qualitative technical assessment and professional judgement taking into account the information reviewed, risk to site users and the proposed development itself. 3.1.2 Flood History Fingask, Craigburn and the surrounding area is not classed as a Potentially Vulnerable Area (PVA) under the Tay Estuary and Montrose Basin Local Flood Risk Management Plan (LFRMP)5 and as such there is limited information available in regards to the flood history. SEPA’s Flood Risk Management Maps do not identify any people or properties at risk of flooding and no record of historical flooding could be found elsewhere. 3.1.3 Fluvial Flooding Review of SEPA’s Fluvial Flood Map for the site indicates that a large area through the centre of the site is at ‘Medium’ to ‘High’ risk of fluvial flooding from the Craig Burn. The Craig Burn runs approximately 10 – 20m upgradient to the northeast in an artificially straightened channel. If the channel has inadequate capacity to convey the design flood, then it would overtop in a southerly direction towards the site as indicated on the maps. As such, there is sufficient evidence to consider a potential ‘High Risk’ of fluvial flooding at the site and therefore a further technical flood risk assessment will be conducted in a subsequent section. 3.1.4 Tidal/Coastal Flooding Review of SEPA’s Coastal Flooding Map for the site indicates that the site is located sufficiently inland and upgradient from tidally influenced waters and the coast, thus is not subject to any tidal or coastal flood risk. As such there is ‘No Risk’ of Flooding from this source and it is therefore not considered further in this assessment. 5 Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2021) Flood Risk Management Plan: Tay Estuary and Montrose Basin Local Plan District (LPD 7)
Page 46
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 10 3.1.5 Flooding from Land (Pluvial or Surface Water Flooding) Review of SEPA’s Surface Water Flood Map shows no flood risk from this source at the development site. The site has a natural slope to the south which would allow rainfall runoff generated to be readily shed overland in the form of sheet flow. Taking the above into account it is considered that there is ‘Low Risk’ of surface water flooding to the site and it is therefore not considered further. 3.1.6 Groundwater Flooding Review of SEPA’s Groundwater Flood Map indicates the site and the surrounding local area are not located within a groundwater flooding area. Review of the site geology confirms the bedrock is a Class 1B aquifer producing moderate amounts of groundwater through intergranular flow. Taking the above into account it is considered that there is a ‘Low Risk’ of groundwater flooding and therefore flooding from this source is not considered further. 3.1.7 Flooding from Sewers / Drainage Systems Scottish Water Asset Plans have been sourced for the area of the development and are appended to this document as Appendix C. These confirm there are no public sewers in the vicinity of the site. The three existing properties at Craigburn operate on small private wastewater treatment systems which do not present a material flood risk to the site. No other drainage features (road drainage, land drainage etc.) were observed during the site visit. Taking this into account, it is considered that there is ‘No Risk’ of flooding to the site from sewers and drainage systems and therefore this source is not considered further in the assessment. 3.1.8 Flooding from Infrastructure Failure / Blockage Review of SEPA’s Reservoir Flood Mapping indicates that there are no significant impoundments of water immediately upgradient and in hydraulic continuity with the site which would pose a flood risk to the site in the event of failure. However, further upstream the Craig Burn passes through Fingask Castle Gardens. This includes two decorative ponds created with small dam structures, the largest of which is situated approximately 200m upstream of the site. These structures were inspected during the site visit and appeared in good condition, with outflows controlled by weirs. The weir at the downstream pond may have limited capacity due to the footbridge spanning it at a low level. However, should any backing-up occur, the pond would overspill onto the road to the southwest before returning to the watercourse shortly downstream. As exceedance flows from the pond would take this route, there is no erosional risk to the structure during an overtopping scenario. A small historic reservoir known as the Mill Dam is also located approximately 1.1km upstream of the site to serve the now defunct Fingask Sawmill. However, due the limited size, distance upstream and number of structures impeding flow downstream, any failure at this point is not predicted to result in a significant rapid release of water capable of affecting the proposed development site. A small, covered (Scottish Water operated) reservoir dating from the 1950s is located upgradient at approximate NGR: NO 22684 27818 in the catchment of the Craig Burn. Historically failure of such structures has been an extreme low probability event and the water supply asset will be subject to rigorous monitoring and maintenance regime by Scottish Water. Therefore, the risk of failure is considered extremely low and the overall volume of water which could be released would be sufficient attenuated / spread upstream of the site that it would not overwhelm channel / bridge capacities downstream and thus impact the site. The covered reservoir is fed by a pumping station approximately 120m the west of the site boundary, to the north of the existing minor road. It the event of a failure or leak at this location, flows would follow the natural topography to the south and away from the site. Two Scottish Water distribution mains (200mm and 250mm Ductile Iron) run from the pumping station across the southern corner of the site from west to east. In the extremely unlikely event of a leak / failure of the mains, flows will follow the topography and rapidly shed offsite to the south.
Page 47
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 11 A curling pond is also marked on some maps; however, curling ponds are shallow temporary structures and as such are immaterial from a flood risk perspective. In the event of failure of the aforementioned upstream culverts / structures on the Craigburn – due to the channel geometry / local topography, upstream flows would readily re-join the downstream channel and the effects would be very time limited before remedial actions are taken. There are no other known water infrastructure features at / in proximity to the site which would pose a material flood risk in the event of failure. Considering all the points above, the development site is at ‘Low Risk’ of flooding from this source and therefore is not considered further in the assessment. 3.1.9 Flood Risk Screening Assessment Review A summary of the potential flood risk to the site from the sources reviewed is presented in Table 2 below. This ‘Screening Assessment’ is used to identify if any sources of flood risk are required to be investigated in more detail i.e. a ‘Technical’ more detailed assessment which would include consideration / specification of bespoke flood mitigation measures for the site development. Table 2 Flood Risk Screening Assessment Potential Flood Source Screening Assessment of Flood Risk at Site1 Requiring Further Consideration i.e. Technical Assessment? Fluvial flooding High Risk Yes Tidal flooding No Risk No Flooding from land / surface water Low Risk No Groundwater flooding Low Risk No Flooding from sewers / drainage systems No Risk No Flooding due to infrastructure failure / blockage Low Risk No Notes: 1only Flood Risks designated as being ‘medium’ or ‘high’ warrant further investigation The Screening Assessment above indicates that Fluvial Flooding requires further consideration in the context of the proposed development. This is discussed in detail in Section 4. All other sources of flooding have been identified as low risk or lower and therefore will not be considered further. 3.2 Climate Change 3.2.1 Context The most recent Climate Change (CC) projections published by The UK Climate Impacts Programme are presented in report ‘UKCP18’. Central estimates published in UKCP18 indicate marked increases in winter rainfall and decrease in summer rainfall but with more intense storms under all CO2 emissions scenarios across the majority of the country. SEPA’s most recent climate change allowances were published in April 20236 and are based on UKCP18 findings in conjunction with The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology’s (CEH) 2020 study7. A climate change allowance in drainage and flood risk assessment terms is a prediction of anticipated change in peak river flow, peak rainfall intensity and sea level rise caused by future climate change. 6 Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2023) Climate change allowances for flood risk assessment in land use planning 7 Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (2021) Climate change impacts on peak river flows: Combining national-scale hydrological modelling and probabilistic projections
Page 48
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 12 The allowances applied for sea level rise, peak river flow and peak rainfall intensity are determined by river basin regions across Scotland. SEPA have developed a web map8 to allow any location in Scotland to be identified for its applicable river basin region and respective climate change uplift allowances. 3.2.2 Peak River flow With reference to SEPA’s online climate change map service, the site is located within the Tay River Basin Region. The peak river flow allowance until 2100 for this region is a 53% uplift. The Technical Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment has been carried out using the Peak Rainfall Intensity Allowance as SEPA guidance9 indicates this is more appropriate for small catchments. 3.2.3 Peak rainfall intensity The peak rainfall intensity allowance until 2100 for the Tay River Basin Region is 39%. A Technical Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment has been carried out with the above climate change allowance incorporated into the assessment. Therefore, the increase in peak river flow due to climate change has been accounted for. Further detail is available in Section 4.2. 3.2.4 Sea Level Rise The cumulative sea level rise allowance until 2100 for the Tay River Basin Region is a 0.85m uplift. This increase in predicted Sea Level rise will not increase the coastal flood risk to the site due to the distance from the site to the closest tidally influenced waters and elevation differential. 4. Technical Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment 4.1 Context The screening assessment outlined above considers a potential ‘High’ risk of flooding from fluvial sources attributed to the Craig Burn. SEPA’s flood maps are not produced at a suitably accurate local scale to be relied upon for site specific assessments (as caveated by SEPA themselves) and thus a more detailed quantitative assessment has been undertaken to better understand the site-specific risk. As such, a technical assessment of fluvial flooding at the site has been undertaken. The following sections provide an overview of the approach undertaken to more accurately determine the potential flood risk at the site. The approach included the estimation of peak flow within the Craig Burn using industry standard software and estimating the channel capacity at specific cross-sections upstream and adjacent to the development site. 4.2 Craig Burn Peak Flow Assessment To inform the channel capacity assessment, an estimate of the peak flow has been undertaken using catchment characteristics obtained from the FEH Web Service in combination with the industry standard Revitalised Flood Hydrograph V.2 (ReFH2) software. Table 3 below presents the peak flow estimates for a range of return periods. The full ReFH2 analysis is included as Appendix B. Table 3 Craig Burn Peak Flow Summary Return Period (years) AEP (%) ReFH2 Peak Flow (m3/s) 2 50 1.54 10 10 2.49 30 3.3 3.23 8 SEPA Climate Change Allowances for Flood Risk Assessment in Land Use Planning: https://scottishepa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2ddf84e295334f6b93bd0dbbb9ad7417 9 Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Flood Modelling Guidance for Responsible Authorities, Version 1.1
Page 49
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 13 Return Period (years) AEP (%) ReFH2 Peak Flow (m3/s) 100 1 4.28 200 0.5 5.03 200 +39% CC1 0.5 +39% CC 7.33 1,000 0.1 7.05 Notes: 1 Climate change uplift of 39% applied to peak river flow estimates As per SEPA guidance the flood design criteria for the site will be taken as the 200yr plus climate change uplift estimate of 7.33m3/s as this yields the highest peak flow estimate (when compared with the 1,000yr estimate). It is noted that the flood hydrograph at the site is likely to be heavily attenuated due to the presence of multiple bridges, culverts, ponds and weirs in the upstream catchment. The catchment descriptors and ReFH2 modelling methodology are unlikely to have fully accounted for this and therefore it is likely that above estimate of design flow is more conservative than that produced by other industry standard flow methods. 4.3 Bridge Capacity Assessment 4.3.1 Overview Immediately upstream of the site, the Craig Burn passes beneath two arch bridges, which in the event of surcharging or blockage may back up to inundate areas outwith the natural floodplain of the watercourse. Therefore, a capacity assessment of the structures has been undertaken to determine their capability to convey the peak flow in the river. 4.3.2 Assessment The capacity of the Bridge S-01 (upstream) has been assessed using the application of the Colebrook- White equation for calculating flow within a pipe. A summary of the calculations conducted is provided in Table 4 below. Table 4 Bridge Capacity Assessment Parameter Units Value Notes Cross-sectional Area m2 2.014 Based on site specific measurements Slope - 0.025 Measured from LiDAR data Roughness Coefficient - 15 Conservative assumption for old brickwork Estimated Capacity m3/s 9.25 Estimated from published hydraulic tables Design Peak Flow m3/s 7.33 As per Section 4.2. The above assessment indicates the bridge has sufficient capacity to convey the design peak and as such would not materially restrict the peak flow and create a material backing up effect and / or overtopping of the structure. It is likely there would be some localised ‘afflux’ and throttling of flow through the structure due to the geometry of the bridge and channel. Bridge S-02 (downstream) has approximately double the cross-sectional area of Bridge S-01 and as such will also have adequate capacity to accommodate the peak flow. 4.3.3 Blockage Scenarios & Exceedance Routes If a blockage / overtopping scenario were to occur upstream of the site, it would occur at Bridge S- 01 as this is upstream and has a significantly more limited cross section than Bridge S-02. Water would back-up along the river channel to an elevation of approximately 22.0mAOD before overtopping the road and immediately returning to channel on the downstream side. There are no walls or parapets on the road to inhibit exceedance flows at this location.
Page 50
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 14 4.4 Channel Capacity Assessment 4.4.1 Overview An assessment of channel capacity within the Craig Burn at the site location has been undertaken downstream of the road bridge (S-02) to determine if the channel can convey the expected peak flow as estimated above. 4no. cross-sections have been assessed at positions upstream and adjacent to the site which were considered to have the highest risk of flooding out of bank (e.g. least capacity). The channel capacity has been estimated using the open channel Manning’s Equation, information obtained from site observations / measurements and LiDAR data sourced from the Scottish Remote Sensing Portal. Table 5 below provides an overview of the measured parameters and estimated capacity for the respective cross sections. The location of each cross section is provided on Drawing FRA-002. Table 5 Manning’s Equation Channel Capacity Summary Parameter Units CS-01 CS-02 CS-03 CS-04 Notes Area (A) m2 6.42 6.94 9.13 7.63 Based on site specific measurements Wetted Perimeter (P) m 7.66 7.59 10.30 8.74 Based on site specific measurements Hydraulic Radius (R) m 0.838 0.914 0.886 0.873 𝑅 = 𝐴 𝑃 Slope (S) - 0.0182 0.0182 0.0182 0.0182 Measured using LiDAR data (slope estimation of watercourse between cross-sections) and adopting a conservative approach by using the lowest slope value Manning’s Coefficient (n) - 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 Conservative published value for channel roughness based on site observations Velocity (V) m/s 2.665 2.823 2.766 2.739 𝑉 = 𝑅.𝑥 𝑆.ହ 𝑛 Channel Capacity (Q) m3/s 17.12 19.57 25.27 20.91 𝑄 = 𝑉𝐴 The assessment has provided channel capacities ranging from 17.12m3/s to 25.27m3/s upstream to downstream. This will provide adequate capacity to contain the design peak estimate of 7.33m3/s. 4.4.2 Outcomes The channel capacity assessment shown above clearly indicates that during the design flood event (200yr + 39%), flows would be retained within the channel of the Craig Burn. It is clear that SEPA’s Fluvial Flood Maps do not accurately represent fluvial flood risk from the Craig Burn. It is highly likely that the indicative modelling methodology adopted by the SEPA Flood Maps (which are not to be relied upon for site specific assessments) use at best a 5m DTM at the site / surrounding area and this resolution is not sufficient to capture the channel with sufficient detail. Site observations and more detailed LiDAR data sourced from the Scottish Remote Sensing Portal clearly support this. 4.5 Fluvial Flood Risk Summary The Bridge Capacity Assessment has shown that both bridges have more than sufficient capacity for the design peak flow on the Craig Burn (200 yr + 39%). In the case of an exceedance flood flow considerably greater than this, or a major blockage scenario at the structure, flows would overtop the bridge and return to channel immediately downstream. The Channel Capacity Assessment confirms that under the most conservative assumptions the channel would contain the peak flow with ample freeboard. As such no fluvial flooding within the site boundary is predicted.
Page 51
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – FRA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 15 Taking into account the points above, it is considered that the residual flood risk from fluvial sources is considered to be ‘Low’. Therefore, the development is not located in a ‘Flood Risk Area’ as defined by NPF4 Policy 22 and the development proposals are compliant with current policy regarding flood risk. 4.6 Recommendations Due to the Low Risk of flooding assessed, no formal flood risk mitigation measures are proposed for the site based on the FRA undertaken. However, in accordance with current best practice and guidance provided by CIRIA, it is recommended that a minimum freeboard of 600mm is provided between the finished ground floor level of the development and existing surrounding ground levels. 5. Closure Gondolin Land and Water Ltd (Gondolin) has been appointed by Mr Stuart Heslop (the Client) to prepare a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) report in support of a planning application for the development of a residential dwelling and associated works on land at Craigburn, Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU. In accordance with national planning policy and guidance, all potential sources of flooding to the site have been considered. The Flood Risk Screening Assessment confirms that the site is overall of ‘Low Risk’ or lower from flooding from all sources with the exception of fluvial flooding. A further Technical Assessment for fluvial flood risk was conducted, incorporating a Bridge Capacity Assessment and a Channel Capacity Assessment for the Craig Burn. The results confirmed the design flood on the watercourse would be contained by the channel and therefore there is a ‘Low Risk’ of fluvial flooding within the site boundary. As per NPF4 Policy 22, the proposed development is considered not to be located in a ‘Flood Risk Area’ and therefore the proposals are compliant in flood risk planning policy terms. Taking all of the above into account it is considered there is no impediment to the proposed development being granted planning permission in principle on the grounds of flood risk.
Page 52
APPENDICES
Page 53
Appendix A PKC Certification and SEPA Checklist
Page 54
45 Appendix B - Assessment Compliance Certification and Insurance Assessment Compliance Certification I certify that all reasonable skill, care and attention has been exercised in undertaking the attached Flood Risk Assessment/ Drainage Impact Assessment/Surface Water Drainage Design* (delete as appropriate). The documentation has been prepared for the below noted development in accordance with the PKC Developers’ Guidance Note on Flooding and Drainage. Planning Application Number Name and Address of Organisation Preparing this Assessment Signed Name Name of Development Craigburn House - Proposed Residential Development Address of Development Craigburn Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU N/A Edinburgh, EH6 5AA 26 Leith Walk Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Zak Ritchie Stuart HeslopStuart Heslop Name of Developer Managing Director Position Held
Page 55
46 Engineering Qualification(1) (1) Chartered Engineer or equivalent from an appropriate Engineering Institution. Insurance Please attach a copy of your professional indemnity insurance policy to this document. C.Eng, C.WEM, MCIWEM Date 30/03/2026
Page 56
Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Checklist (SS-NFR-F-001 - Version 16 - Last updated 27/08/2019 Development Proposal Summary Site Name: Grid Reference: Easting: 323333 Northing: 727179 Local Authority: Planning Reference number (if known): Nature of the development: Residential If residential, state type: Size of the development site: 0.97 Ha Identified Flood Risk: Source: Fluvial Source name: Land Use Planning Is any of the site within the functional floodplain? (refer to SPP para 255) No If yes, what is the net loss of storage? m3 Local Development Plan Name: Allocation Number / Reference: If yes, what is the proposed use for the site as identified in the local plan? Select from List If Other please specify: Does the local development plan and/or any pre-application advice, identify any flood risk issues with or requirements for the site. Select from List If so, please specify: What is the proposed land use vulnerability? Highly Vulnerable Supporting Information Have clear maps / plans been provided within the FRA (including topographic and flood inundation plans)? Yes Has sufficient supporting information, in line with our Technical Guidance, been provided? For example: site plans, photos, topographic information, structure information and other site specific information. Yes Has a historic flood search been undertaken? Yes Is a formal flood prevention scheme present? No Current / historical site use: Is the site considered vacant or derelict? No Development Requirements Freeboard on design water level: m Is safe / dry access and egress available? Vehicular and Pedestrian Min access/egress level: m AOD Design levels: Ground level: m AOD Min FFL: mAOD Mitigation Can development be designed to avoid all areas at risk of flooding? Yes Is mitigation proposed? No If yes, is compenstory storage necessary? Select from List Demonstration of compensatory storage on a "like for like" basis? Select from List Should water resistant materials and forms of construction be used? Select from List This document must be attached within the front cover of any Flood Risk Assessments issued to Local Planning Authorities (LPA) in support of a development proposal which may be at risk of flooding. The document will take only a few minutes to complete and will assist SEPA in reviewing FRAs, when consulted by LPAs. This document should not be a substitute for a FRA. Craig Burn Craigburn House Perth and Kinross Council N/A 2no. Residential Properties If flood records in vicinity of the site please provide details: Do the proposals represent an increase in land use vulnerability? Yes If known, state the standard of protection offered: Agricultural Year of Publication:Is the site identified within the local development plan? No
Page 57
Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Checklist (SS-NFR-F-001 - Version 16 - Last updated 27/08/2019 Hydrology Is there a requirement to consider fluvial flooding? Yes Area of catchment: 5.61 km2 Is a map of catchment area included in FRA? Estimation method(s) used (please select all that apply): Pooled Analysis If Pooled analysis have group details been included? Single Site Analysis Enhanced Single Site ReFH2 FEH RRM Other If other (please specify methodology used): Estimate of 200 year design flood flow: 5.03 m3/s Qmed estimate: m3/s Method: Statistical Distribution Selected: Select from List Reasons for selection: Hydraulics Software used: If other please specify: Number of cross sections: 4 Source of data (i.e. topographic survey, LiDAR etc): Site measurements Date obtained / surveyed: 07/02/2025 Modelled reach length: m Any changes to default simulation parameters? If yes please provide details: Model timestep: Model grid size: Any structures within the modelled length? Select from List Specify, if combination: Maximum observed velocity: m/s Brief summary of sensitivity tests, and range: variation on flow (%) % Please specify climate change scenario considered: variation on channel roughness (%) % blockage of structure (range of % blocked) % boundary conditions: Upstream Downstream (1) type Flow Select from List Specify if other Specify if other: (2) does it influence water levels at the site? Select from List Select from List Has model been calibrated (gauge data / flood records)? Select from List Is the hydraulic model available to SEPA? Select from List Design flood levels: 200 year N/A m AOD N/A m AOD Cross section results provided? Select from List Long section results provided? Select from List Cross section ratings provided? Select from List Tabular output provided (i.e. levels, velocities)? Mass balance error: % Coastal Is there a requirement to consider coastal / tidal flooding? Select from List Estimate of 200 year design flood level: m AOD Estimation method(s) used: Select from List If other please specify methodology used: Allowance for climate change (m): m Allowance for wave action etc (m): m Overall design flood level: m AOD Approved by: Organisation: Date: CLICK HERE Zak Ritchie Gondolin Land & Water 30/03/2026 Note: Further details and guidance is provided in 'Technical Flood Risk Guidance for Stakeholders' which can be accesssed here:- 200 year plus climate change Catchment Descriptors Select from List 39% Uplift Manning No Select from ListHydraulic modelling method:
Page 58
Appendix B Peak Flow Estimation
Page 59
Summary of estimate using the Flood Estimation Handbook revitalised flood hydrograph method (ReFH2) Site details Site description: Catchment Area (km²): 5.61 None Site name: Craig Burn Easting: 323400 Northing: 727200 Model run: 200 year 1.39 CC Summary of results Rainfall - FEH22 (mm): 84.76 Total Rainfall (mm): 55.25 Peak Rainfall (mm): 9.43 7.33 295.06 91.81Total runoff (ML): Total flow (ML): Peak flow (m³/s): Loss model parameters Name Value User-defined? Cini (mm) 100.55 No Cmax (mm) 434.46 No Use alpha correction factor No No Alpha correction factor n/a No Rainfall parameters (Rainfall - FEH22) Name Value User-defined? Duration (hh:mm:ss) 03:45:00 No Timestep (hh:mm:ss) 00:15:00 No SCF (Seasonal correction factor) 0.68 No ARF (Areal reduction factor) 0.96 No Seasonality Winter No Routing model parameters Parameters Where the user has overriden a system-generated value, this original value is shown in square brackets after the value used. * Indicates that the user locked the duration/timestep Climate change factor 1.39 Yes UK Design Flood Estimation Generated on 21 February 2025 09:22:32 by DuncanBowie Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Checksum: D4EF-CBD6 Country: Scotland Using plot scale calculations: No Model: 2.3 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 1 of 14
Page 60
Name Value User-defined? Tp (hr) 2 No Up 0.65 No Uk 0.8 No Name Value User-defined? BF0 (m³/s) 0.11 No BL (hr) 31.61 No BR 2.23 No Baseflow model parameters Name Value User-defined? Sewer capacity (m³/s) 0 No Exporting drained area (km²) 0 No Urban area (km²) 0.03 No Effective URBEXT2000 0 n/a Impervious runoff factor 0.7 No Imperviousness factor 0.4 No Tp scaling factor 0.75 No Depression storage depth (mm) 0.5 No Urbanisation parameters Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 2 of 14
Page 61
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 00:00:00 0.826 0.000 0.193 0.000 0.114 0.114 00:15:00 1.207 0.000 0.285 0.006 0.113 0.119 00:30:00 1.759 0.000 0.421 0.028 0.112 0.140 00:45:00 2.557 0.000 0.625 0.072 0.112 0.184 01:00:00 3.700 0.000 0.931 0.149 0.113 0.263 01:15:00 5.319 0.000 1.393 0.277 0.116 0.393 01:30:00 7.542 0.000 2.087 0.479 0.122 0.600 01:45:00 9.427 0.000 2.792 0.792 0.132 0.923 02:00:00 7.542 0.000 2.381 1.260 0.149 1.409 02:15:00 5.319 0.000 1.758 1.884 0.175 2.058 02:30:00 3.700 0.000 1.261 2.615 0.212 2.827 02:45:00 2.557 0.000 0.890 3.406 0.263 3.668 03:00:00 1.759 0.000 0.621 4.211 0.327 4.537 03:15:00 1.207 0.000 0.430 4.983 0.404 5.387 03:30:00 0.826 0.000 0.296 5.668 0.493 6.161 03:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.198 0.592 6.791 04:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.491 0.698 7.189 04:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.526 0.806 7.331 04:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.358 0.912 7.270 04:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.048 1.013 7.061 05:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.642 1.107 6.749 05:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.177 1.193 6.369 05:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.684 1.270 5.953 05:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.192 1.337 5.529 06:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.736 1.396 5.131 06:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.333 1.447 4.779 06:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.972 1.491 4.463 06:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.643 1.528 4.171 07:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.335 1.560 3.895 07:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.044 1.586 3.630 07:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.767 1.607 3.374 07:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.502 1.623 3.125 08:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.247 1.634 2.881 08:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.002 1.641 2.643 Time series data Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 3 of 14
Page 62
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 08:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.771 1.644 2.415 08:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.561 1.643 2.204 09:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.384 1.638 2.022 09:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.248 1.631 1.879 09:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.153 1.621 1.774 09:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.089 1.611 1.700 10:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.048 1.599 1.647 10:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 1.587 1.609 10:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 1.575 1.583 10:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 1.563 1.564 11:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.550 1.550 11:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.538 1.538 11:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.526 1.526 11:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.514 1.514 12:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.502 1.502 12:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.490 1.490 12:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.479 1.479 12:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.467 1.467 13:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.455 1.455 13:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.444 1.444 13:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.432 1.432 13:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.421 1.421 14:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.410 1.410 14:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.399 1.399 14:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.388 1.388 14:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.377 1.377 15:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.366 1.366 15:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.355 1.355 15:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.345 1.345 15:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.334 1.334 16:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.324 1.324 16:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.313 1.313 16:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.303 1.303 16:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.293 1.293 17:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.282 1.282 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 4 of 14
Page 63
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 17:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.272 1.272 17:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.262 1.262 17:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.252 1.252 18:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.242 1.242 18:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.233 1.233 18:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.223 1.223 18:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.213 1.213 19:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.204 1.204 19:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.194 1.194 19:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.185 1.185 19:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.175 1.175 20:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.166 1.166 20:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.157 1.157 20:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.148 1.148 20:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.139 1.139 21:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.130 1.130 21:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.121 1.121 21:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.112 1.112 21:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.103 1.103 22:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.095 1.095 22:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.086 1.086 22:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.078 1.078 22:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.069 1.069 23:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.061 1.061 23:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.052 1.052 23:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.044 1.044 23:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.036 1.036 24:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.028 1.028 24:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.020 1.020 24:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.011 1.011 24:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.004 1.004 25:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.996 0.996 25:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.988 0.988 25:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.980 0.980 25:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.972 0.972 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 5 of 14
Page 64
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 26:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.965 0.965 26:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.957 0.957 26:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.949 0.949 26:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.942 0.942 27:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.935 0.935 27:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.927 0.927 27:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.920 0.920 27:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.913 0.913 28:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.905 0.905 28:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.898 0.898 28:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.891 0.891 28:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.884 0.884 29:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.877 0.877 29:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.870 0.870 29:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.863 0.863 29:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.857 0.857 30:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.850 0.850 30:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.843 0.843 30:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.837 0.837 30:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.830 0.830 31:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.823 0.823 31:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.817 0.817 31:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.811 0.811 31:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.804 0.804 32:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.798 0.798 32:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.792 0.792 32:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.785 0.785 32:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.779 0.779 33:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.773 0.773 33:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.767 0.767 33:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.761 0.761 33:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.755 0.755 34:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.749 0.749 34:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.743 0.743 34:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.737 0.737 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 6 of 14
Page 65
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 34:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.731 0.731 35:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.726 0.726 35:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.720 0.720 35:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.714 0.714 35:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.709 0.709 36:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.703 0.703 36:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.697 0.697 36:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.692 0.692 36:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.687 0.687 37:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.681 0.681 37:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.676 0.676 37:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.670 0.670 37:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.665 0.665 38:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.660 0.660 38:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.655 0.655 38:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.650 0.650 38:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.644 0.644 39:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.639 0.639 39:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.634 0.634 39:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.629 0.629 39:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.624 0.624 40:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.619 0.619 40:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.615 0.615 40:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.610 0.610 40:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.605 0.605 41:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.600 0.600 41:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.595 0.595 41:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.591 0.591 41:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.586 0.586 42:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.581 0.581 42:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.577 0.577 42:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.572 0.572 42:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.568 0.568 43:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.563 0.563 43:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.559 0.559 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 7 of 14
Page 66
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 43:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.555 0.555 43:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.550 0.550 44:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.546 0.546 44:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.542 0.542 44:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.537 0.537 44:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.533 0.533 45:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.529 0.529 45:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.525 0.525 45:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.521 0.521 45:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.516 0.516 46:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.512 0.512 46:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.508 0.508 46:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.504 0.504 46:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.500 47:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.496 0.496 47:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.492 0.492 47:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.489 0.489 47:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.485 0.485 48:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.481 0.481 48:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.477 0.477 48:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.473 0.473 48:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.470 0.470 49:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.466 0.466 49:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.462 0.462 49:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.459 0.459 49:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.455 0.455 50:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.451 0.451 50:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.448 0.448 50:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.444 0.444 50:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.441 0.441 51:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.437 0.437 51:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.434 0.434 51:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.431 0.431 51:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.427 0.427 52:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.424 0.424 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 8 of 14
Page 67
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 52:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.420 0.420 52:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.417 0.417 52:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.414 0.414 53:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.411 0.411 53:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.407 0.407 53:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.404 0.404 53:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.401 0.401 54:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.398 0.398 54:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.395 0.395 54:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.392 0.392 54:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.388 0.388 55:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.385 0.385 55:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.382 0.382 55:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.379 0.379 55:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.376 0.376 56:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.373 0.373 56:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.370 0.370 56:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.368 0.368 56:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.365 0.365 57:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.362 0.362 57:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.359 0.359 57:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.356 0.356 57:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.353 0.353 58:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.350 0.350 58:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.348 0.348 58:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.345 0.345 58:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.342 0.342 59:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.340 0.340 59:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.337 0.337 59:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.334 0.334 59:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.332 0.332 60:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.329 0.329 60:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.326 0.326 60:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.324 0.324 60:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.321 0.321 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 9 of 14
Page 68
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 61:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.319 0.319 61:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.316 0.316 61:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.314 0.314 61:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.311 0.311 62:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.309 0.309 62:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.306 0.306 62:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.304 0.304 62:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.302 0.302 63:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.299 0.299 63:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.297 0.297 63:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.295 0.295 63:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.292 0.292 64:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.290 0.290 64:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.288 0.288 64:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.285 0.285 64:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.283 0.283 65:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.281 0.281 65:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.279 0.279 65:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.276 0.276 65:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.274 0.274 66:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.272 0.272 66:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.270 0.270 66:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.268 0.268 66:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.266 0.266 67:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.264 0.264 67:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.262 0.262 67:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.260 0.260 67:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.257 0.257 68:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.255 0.255 68:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.253 0.253 68:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.251 0.251 68:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.249 0.249 69:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.247 0.247 69:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.246 0.246 69:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.244 0.244 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 10 of 14
Page 69
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 69:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.242 0.242 70:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.240 0.240 70:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.238 0.238 70:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.236 0.236 70:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.234 0.234 71:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.232 0.232 71:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.230 0.230 71:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.229 0.229 71:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.227 0.227 72:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.225 0.225 72:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.223 0.223 72:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.222 0.222 72:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.220 0.220 73:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.218 0.218 73:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.216 0.216 73:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.215 0.215 73:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.213 0.213 74:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.211 0.211 74:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.210 0.210 74:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.208 0.208 74:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.206 0.206 75:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.205 0.205 75:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.203 0.203 75:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.201 0.201 75:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.200 0.200 76:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.198 0.198 76:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.197 0.197 76:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.195 0.195 76:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.194 0.194 77:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.192 0.192 77:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.191 0.191 77:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.189 0.189 77:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.188 0.188 78:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.186 0.186 78:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.185 0.185 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 11 of 14
Page 70
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 78:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.183 0.183 78:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.182 0.182 79:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.180 0.180 79:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.179 0.179 79:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.178 0.178 79:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.176 0.176 80:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.175 0.175 80:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.173 0.173 80:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.172 0.172 80:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.171 0.171 81:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.169 0.169 81:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.168 0.168 81:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.167 0.167 81:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.165 0.165 82:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.164 0.164 82:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.163 0.163 82:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.161 0.161 82:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.160 0.160 83:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.159 0.159 83:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.158 0.158 83:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.156 0.156 83:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.155 0.155 84:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.154 0.154 84:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.153 0.153 84:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.152 0.152 84:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.150 0.150 85:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.149 0.149 85:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.148 0.148 85:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.147 0.147 85:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.146 0.146 86:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.145 0.145 86:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.143 0.143 86:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.142 0.142 86:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.141 0.141 87:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.140 0.140 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 12 of 14
Page 71
Time (hh:mm:ss) Rain (mm) Sewer Loss (m³/s) Net Rain (mm) Runoff (m³/s) Baseflow (m³/s) Total Flow (m³/s) 87:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.139 0.139 87:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.138 0.138 87:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.137 0.137 88:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.136 0.136 88:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.135 0.135 88:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.134 0.134 88:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.132 0.132 89:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.131 0.131 89:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.130 0.130 89:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.129 0.129 89:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.128 0.128 90:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.127 0.127 90:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.126 0.126 90:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.125 0.125 90:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.124 0.124 91:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.123 0.123 91:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.122 0.122 91:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.121 0.121 91:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.120 0.120 92:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.120 0.120 92:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.119 0.119 92:30:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.118 0.118 92:45:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.117 0.117 93:00:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.116 0.116 93:15:00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.115 0.115 Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 13 of 14
Page 72
Appendix Catchment descriptors Name Value User-defined value used? Area (km²) 5.61 No ALTBAR 200 No ASPBAR 155 No ASPVAR 0.28 No BFIHOST 0.6 No BFIHOST19 0.51 No DPLBAR (km) 3.05 No DPSBAR (mkm-¹) 147.8 No FARL 0.98 No LDP 5.26 No PROPWET 0.46 No RMED1H 9.1 No RMED1D 35.8 No RMED2D 46.4 No SAAR (mm) 771 No SAAR4170 (mm) 810 No SPRHOST 29.68 No URBEXT2000 0 No URBEXT1990 0 No URBCONC 0 No URBLOC 0 No DDF parameter C -0.02 No DDF parameter D1 0.46 No DDF parameter D2 0.41 No DDF parameter D3 0.26 No DDF parameter E 0.25 No DDF parameter F 2.2 No DDF parameter C (1km grid value) -0.02 No DDF parameter D1 (1km grid value) 0.48 No DDF parameter D2 (1km grid value) 0.43 No DDF parameter D3 (1km grid value) 0.29 No DDF parameter E (1km grid value) 0.25 No DDF parameter F (1km grid value) 2.15 No Printed from the ReFH2 Flood Modelling software package, version 4.1.8879.22466 Page 14 of 14
Page 73
Appendix C Scottish Water Asset Plans
Page 74
¯ The representation of physical assets and the boundaries of areas in which Scottish Water and others have an interest does not necessarily imply their true positions. For further details contact the appropriate District office. © Crown copyright and database rights 2025 OS AC0000824238. You are granted a non-exclusive, royalty free, revocable licence solely to view the Licensed Data for non-commercial purposes for the period during which Scottish Water makes it available. You are not permitted to copy, sub-license, distribute, sell or otherwise make available the Licensed Data to third parties in any form. Third party rights to enforce the terms of this licence shall be reserved to OS. The Bridge 6 Buchanan Gate Stepps Glasgow G33 6FB Tel No: 08000 778 778 0 1010 20205 Meters SCALE: Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS. Date: 28/02/2025 Plotted By: Duncan.bowie@gondolinltd.co.uk Craigburn Water & Wastewater PlansCraigburn Water & Wastewater Plans 1:1,323
Page 75
SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET WATER LEGEND This legend is to be used in conjunction with plots obtained from the SW GIS Extranet v1.0 - October 2020 SW Public General Fittings Pipes
Page 76
SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET WASTE WATER LEGEND This legend is to be used in conjunction with plots obtained from the SW GIS Extranet v1.0 - October 2020 SW Public General Fittings Pipes
Page 77
Appendix D Site Photography
Page 78
No embedded text on this page.
Page 79
No embedded text on this page.
Page 80
No embedded text on this page.
Page 81
No embedded text on this page.
Page 82
DRAWINGS
Page 83
Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025]Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: FRA-001 Site Location Plan_01.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD 15 Quayside Street Edinburgh EH6 6EJ Registered Company No. SC706920 LEGEND N © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 04/25 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE SITE LOCATION PLAN 1:2,000 @ A3 MARCH 2026 FRA-001 0101 FOR PLANNING 0 12.5 2525 37.5 50m 7575 100 125 Metres 1:1,250 PLANNING BOUNDARY ASSESSMENT AREA 0101 03/26 REVISED ISSUE DBDB ZRZR
Page 84
Craigburn House North Lodge Springside Cottage FBFB Witches Knowe S-01 S-02 CS-04 CS-03 CS-02 CS-01 Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: FRA-002 Flood Risk Summary.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE NOTES LEGEND CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD 15 Quayside Street Edinburgh EH6 6EJ Registered Company No. SC706920 N © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 04/25 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE FLOOD RISK SUMMARY 1:750 @ A2 MARCH 2026 FRA-002 0000 FOR PLANNING 0 7.5 1515 22.5 30m 4545 6060 7575 Metres 1:750 PLANNING BOUNDARY LAND OWNERSHIP BOUNDARY CRAIG BURN EXISTING MAJOR CONTOURS (2.5m INTERVAL) EXISTING MINOR CONTOURS (0.5m INTERVAL) EXISTING POND 1.1. TOPOGRAPHY DERIVED FROM LIDAR DATA SOURCED FROM THE SCOTTISH REMOTE SENSING PORTAL. OVERLAND FLOWPATH EXISTING BRIDGE EXISTING WEIR RUNOFF FOLLOWS NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY TO THE SOUTH CROSS-SECTIONCS-XX POND OUTFLOW WEIR HISTORIC CURLING POND CRAIG BURN CONTAINED WITHIN ARTIFICIALLY STRAIGHTENED AND DEEPENED CHANNEL SCOTTISH WATER PUMPING STATION BLOCKAGES WOULD OCCUR AT UPSTREAM BRIDGE DUE TO RELATIVELY SMALL CAPACITY IN A BLOCKAGE SCENARIO EXCEEDANCE FLOWS OVERTOP BRIDGE TO RETURN TO CHANNEL IMMEDIATELY DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL OF THE CRAIG BURN HAS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT CAPACITY TO CONTAIN DESIGN FLOOD FLOWS DEVELOPMENT SITE CONSIDERED NOT TO BE IN A FLOOD RISK AREA EXCEEDANCE FLOWS FROM POND RETURN TO CHANNEL DOWNSTREAM ASSESSMENT AREA RESIDUAL EXCEEDANCE FLOWS RETURN TO CHANNEL DOWNSTREAM EXCEEDANCE FLOWPATH 0101 03/26 REVISED ISSUE DBDB ZRZR
Page 85
Civil Engineering and Environmental Solutions Gondolin Land and Water Ltd is a small environmental and engineering consultancy business based in Scotland with coverage throughout the UK. Office Address: 15 Quayside Street Edinburgh EH6 6EJ Registered Company No. SC706920 Sectors: Onshore Renewables & Storage | Infrastructure | Mining and Minerals Property & Urban Regeneration | Retail, Industrial & Manufacturing | Waste Management
Page 86
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 1 Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development Drainage Impact Assessment Client: Stuart Heslop Project/Proposal No: GON.1123.0578 Version: 1 Date: 30/03/2026
Page 87
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 2 Document Information Project Name: Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development Document Title: Drainage Impact Assessment Client Name: Stuart Heslop Document Status: Final for Issue Author: Duncan Bowie Reviewed: Zak Ritchie Approved: Zak Ritchie Approver Qualifications: BEng(hons), MSc, C.WEM, C.Eng, MCIWEM Date: 30/03/2026 Version: 1 Project/Proposal Number: GON.1123.0578 Revision History Version Date Authored Reviewed Approved Notes 1 30/03/2026 Duncan Bowie Zak Ritchie Zak Ritchie For Issue The contents of this document are confidential to the addressed recipient and may not be revealed. This document may contain confidential information. If received in error, please delete it without making or distributing copies. Opinions and information that do not relate to the official business of Gondolin Land and Water Ltd, registered at 26 Leith Walk EH6 5AA, are not endorsed by the company. Limitation: This document has been prepared exclusively for the use of the Client and any party with whom a warranty agreement has been executed, or an assignment has been agreed. No other parties may rely on the contents of this document without written approval from Gondolin Land and Water Ltd for which a payment may be applicable. Gondolin Land and Water Ltd accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of use of this document for any purpose other than that for which it was authorised, nor the use of this document by any third party with whom an agreement has not been reached. © Copyright 2026 Gondolin Land and Water Ltd. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of the company. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Gondolin Land and Water Ltd constitutes an infringement of copyright unless otherwise explicitly agreed by contract.
Page 88
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 3 Contents Document Information 2 Contents 3 1. Introduction 5 1.1 Preamble 5 1.2 Site Context and Proposed Development 5 1.3 Topography 5 1.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 5 1.5 Existing Hydrology & Drainage System 6 2. Proposed Surface Water Drainage Design 7 2.1 Design Overview 7 2.2 Design Criteria 7 2.3 SuDS Performance Review 9 2.4 Outline Maintenance Schedule 10 3. Wastewater Drainage Design 11 3.1 Overview 11 3.2 Wastewater Loading Calculations 11 3.3 Soil Infiltration Rate 12 3.4 Soakaway Sizing 12 3.5 Pipe Network Design 12 4. Closure 12
Page 89
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 4 Document References Tables Table 1 Hydrological Summary ...................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2 Catchment Hydrological Summary ................................................................................................ 6 Table 3 Suitability of Surface Water Disposal Methods ............................................................................... 7 Table 4 SuDS Water Quality Design Criteria: Index Approach Review ...................................................... 8 Table 5 Soakaway - Provisional Summary Design Details ........................................................................... 9 Table 6 SuDS System - Hydraulic Modelling Summary ................................................................................. 9 Table 7 Soakaway Outline Maintenance Requirements .......................................................................... 10 Table 8 Proposed Provisional Treatment Standards .................................................................................. 11 Table 9 Wastewater Loading Calculations ................................................................................................ 11 Appendices Appendix A – PKC Certification Appendix B – Scottish Water Asset Plans Appendix C – MicroDrainage Modelling Extracts Appendix D – Site Photography Appendix E – Wastewater Loading Calculations Drawings Drawing DIA-001 – Site Location Plan Drawing DIA-002 – Hydrological Overview Drawing DIA-003 – Proposed Drainage Layout Drawing DIA-004 – Typical Drainage Details
Page 90
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 5 1. Introduction 1.1 Preamble Gondolin Land and Water Ltd (Gondolin) have been appointed by Mr Stuart Heslop(the Client) to prepare a Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) report in support of a planning application for the development of a single residential dwelling and associated works on land at Craigburn House, Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU. This report provides the relevant design information for the proposed site surface water drainage / SuDS scheme taking due cognisance of local / national drainage design guidance (CIRIA Report C753), Perth and Kinross Councils supplementary guidance1. A signed compliance certificate is included in Appendix A, to certify that this assessment has been carried out in accordance with the relevant guidance and legislation. The site was visited in January 2025 by a suitably qualified Civil Engineer to inform the assessment and assessment overseen by a Chartered Hydrologist / Civil Engineer with >14 years experience of undertaking drainage designs in Scotland. 1.2 Site Context and Proposed Development The development site is located to the south of the existing Craigburn properties at approximate National Grid Reference (NGR): NO 23331 27173. The proposals are for 1no. residential dwelling on a 0.13ha plot in the east of the site neighbouring the existing properties. The site is bounded by the existing Craigburn properties to the north, a minor road to the northwest and agricultural land on all other sides. Access is provided from the existing track bounding the site to the northeast or from the minor road in the west. The site currently consists of improved grassland surrounded by large hedges. A site location plan is included as Drawing DIA-001. 1.3 Topography An assessment of site topography has been undertaken using 1m resolution LiDAR data sourced from the Scottish Remote Sensing Portal in conjunction with on-site observations and measurements. The site slopes down to the south at an approximate gradient of 1 in 15. The maximum elevation of 20.5mAOD is located in the north next to the existing public road and the approximate minimum elevation of 14.8mAOD is found at the southern extent. 1.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 1.4.1 Geology 1.4.1.1 Superficial Review of the British Geological Survey2 (BGS) online geology maps indicates that superficial deposits at the proposed development site are Glaciofluvial Ice Contact Deposits of gravel, sand and silt. The area around the site takes the appearance of an Alluvial Fan, formed on the Carse of Gowrie around the apex of the constricted upstream channel of the Craig Burn. 1.4.1.2 Bedrock Review of the BGS online geology maps shows that the bedrock geology at the development area is of the Glenvale Sandstone Formation. Brown, yellow, read, purple and cream feldspathic sandstones of the Devonian Epoch. Approximately 30m upgradient to the northwest, the bedrock transitions to andesite and pyroxene of the Ochil Volcanic Formation. 1 Perth & Kinross Council (2021) Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments 2 British Geological Survey (2025) Natural Environment Research Council – GeoIndex Onshore Viewer, available at: https://www.bgs.ac.uk/map-viewers/geoindex-onshore/ (accessed on 19th December 2025)
Page 91
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 6 1.4.2 Hydrogeology Review of the BGS online hydrogeology maps indicates that the underlying bedrock at the development area is of the Stratheden Group and hence is a moderately productive aquifer with Sandstone, partly pebbly with subordinate siltstone and mudstone producing moderate amounts of groundwater through intergranular flow. 1.5 Existing Hydrology & Drainage System Surface runoff from the site would follow the natural topography to the south in the form of sheet flow, potentially with some minor gullying towards the base of the hedges on the southwestern boundary. A hydrological summary and characteristics of the site are shown in Table 1 below. The data is taken from the Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH)3 Web Service and the point characteristics of the site has been delineated from NGR: NO 23369 27197. Table 1 Hydrological Summary Catchment Location (NGR) BFIHOST191 PROPWET2 SAAR3 (mm) NO 23369 27197 0.424 0.46 709 1BFIHOST19 = Base Flow Index derived using the UK Hydrology of Soil Types (Host) classification (released 2019) 2PROPWET = Proportion of Time the Soil Moisture Deficit (SMD) was equal to, or below, 6mm during 1961-1990 3SAAR= Standard Annual Average Rainfall A hydrological overview of the site is available in Drawing DIA-002. Review of the Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) Web Service4 and other available mapping shows that the Craig Burn passes the site approximately 10m to the northeast of the development boundary. The FEH Web Service provides a catchment of 5.61km2 for the Craig Burn where it passes the development site. It was observed that the burn had been artificially straightened and deepened as is typical for ‘pow’ watercourses in the Gowrie region. No other open watercourses are recorded within the vicinity of the proposed development area. A hydrological summary and characteristics for the Craig Burn catchment at the development site are shown in Table 2 below. The data shown is taken from the FEH Web Service and the catchment characteristics of the site have been delineated from NGR: NO 23400 27200, a point in the watercourse immediately adjacent to the site. Table 2 Catchment Hydrological Summary Waterbody Catchment Area (km2) SAAR1 (mm) URBEXT2 (%) PROPWET3 SPRHOST4 (%) ALTBAR5 (m) Craig Burn 5.61 771 0 0.46 29.68 200 1SAAR = Standard Annual Average Rainfall between 1961-1990 2URBEXT = Extent of Urban and Suburban Land Cover (1990) 3PROPWET = Proportion of Time the Soil Moisture Deficit (SMD) was equal to, or below, 6mm during 1961-1990 4SPRHOST = Standard Percentage Runoff using UK Hydrology of Soil Types (HOST) Classification 5ALTBAR = Mean Catchment Altitude The FEH data indicates that the Craig Burn catchment experiences a moderate SAAR value for a Scottish catchment and that the catchment is essentially rural. An SPRHOST value of 29.68% indicates a low-moderate runoff potential. The flood risk presented by the Craig Burn has been considered in a separate Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) report also produced by Gondolin (separate submission document which accompanies the planning application). 3 UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (2024) Flood Estimation Handbook Web Service: https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/ (accessed: 19th December 2025) 4 UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2025) Flood Estimation handbook Web Service, available at: https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/ (accessed on 19th December 2025)
Page 92
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 7 2. Proposed Surface Water Drainage Design 2.1 Design Overview The management of surface water drainage from the development has been developed taking due cognisance of national and local guidance – as follows: CIRIA, Report C753 – the SuDS Manual, 2015 CIRIA, Report C635 – Designing for Exceedance in Urban Drainage, Good Practice (2006) Perth and Kinross Council – Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments, 2021 SEPA, WAT-RM-08 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS), 2019 Scottish Water – Sewers for Scotland v4, 2018 Scottish Government – Building Standards Technical Handbook, 2026 Building Research Establishment (BRE) – Digest 365, Soakaway Design The proposed drainage / SuDS scheme for the site is for a surface water drainage soakaway in the southeast of the site to allow storm water to safely discharge to ground. The system will manage surface water runoff from all impermeable areas of the site. Rainwater downpipes shall be installed on the proposed dwelling house to convey surface water runoff directly to the drainage system. The proposed access and parking area will be constructed from unbound permeable material to allow direct infiltration to ground, as such these areas are not included within the drainage / SuDS scheme for the site. The Proposed Drainage Layout scheme for the development is provided as Drawing DIA-003 and typical drainage details are shown on Drawing DIA-004. 2.2 Design Criteria 2.2.1 Drainage Discharge Locations In accordance with the aforementioned guidance documents, the hierarchy for favoured disposal options of surface water runoff from development sites is as follows: 1. Infiltration to Ground; 2. Discharge to Surface Waters; or 3. Discharge to Sewer. Table 3 below discusses the disposal method suitability in the context of the site and proposed development. Table 3 Suitability of Surface Water Disposal Methods Surface Water Disposal Method Suitability Description Method Suitable? (Y/N) Infiltration to Ground As outlined in Section 1.4.1 superficial deposits at the site are Glaciofluvial ice contact deposits of gravel, sand and silt. As such, the geology is likely to be favourable to infiltration-based SuDS techniques. Y Surface Water Discharge The Craig Burn runs adjacent to the site on the opposite side of the existing access to the northeast and could serve as a potential outlet option. Y Sewer Discharge Scottish Water Asset Plans have been sourced for the development site and have been appended to this document as Appendix B. No surface water or combined sewers are available for a connection to be made. N
Page 93
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 8 Review of Table 3 above confirms that infiltration to ground is the most suitable method for the development site and is also the most favoured solution within the hierarchy of options. Therefore, infiltration to ground is chosen as the proposed discharge method for the site. Infiltration testing will be conducted at the post planning stages of development to confirm the viability of the method and inform the final drainage design. This requirement can readily be secured via an appropriately worded planning condition attached to a planning consent. In the unlikely event infiltration to ground would not be viable, a discharge to surface waters at the adjacent Craig Burn would also be feasible. 2.2.2 Storm Events and Hydraulic Design Criteria The hydraulic design of the system has been prepared in accordance with CIRIA Report C753 and Section 2.6 of Sewers for Scotland, as follows: No flooding occurs in conveyance features or in any part of the site up to the 1:30-year event; and, Where flooding occurs in the 1:200-year event (plus 39% climate change), measures are taken to ensure that access and egress to the site for emergency vehicles is not impeded, and appropriate overland flood routes are considered / integrated into the site layout design. In addition, the following criteria have also been applied: None of the system ‘surcharges’ under the 1:2-year event; The proposed soakaway area is sized to contain and safely discharge the 1:200-year event (plus 39% climate change) to ground without flooding. These criteria provide a betterment to those required by Sewers for Scotland. All drainage features have been sized using industry standard methods and the MicroDrainage software suite. 2.2.3 Drainage Exceedance Considerations Exceedance flow routes from the proposed soakaway and drainage network would follow the natural topography of the land and flow overland to the southeast with no risk to neighbouring properties – i.e. flows would follow the existing natural hydrological regime. 2.2.4 Water Quality Review (Simple Index Approach) In accordance with CIRIA Report C753, it is necessary to undertake a ‘Water Quality Risk Management’ assessment to determine the suitability of SuDS methods from a water quality perspective. The approach outlined below is based on the ‘Simple Index Approach’ for discharge to groundwater as detailed in the SuDS Manual (Section 26.7, Tables 26.2 and 26.4). Table 4 below compares the SuDS Mitigation Indices (MI) against the maximum Pollution Hazard Index (PI) for the proposed development. This is based on the application of a constructed soakaways with suitable underlying (unsaturated) soil media of at least 300mm depth. Table 4 SuDS Water Quality Design Criteria: Index Approach Review Land Use Pollution Hazard and SuDS Mitigation Indices Comparison Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Metals Hydro-Carbons Pollution Index Mitigation Index Pollution Index Mitigation Index Pollution Index Mitigation Index Residential Roofs (accommodation) 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.05 0.4 Notes: Mitigation Index based on permeable paving discharging to groundwater The SuDS Mitigation Index offered by the proposed SuDS is ≥ Pollution Hazard Index therefore the water quality assessment criteria is satisfied.
Page 94
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 9 2.3 SuDS Performance Review 2.3.1 Key Design Details The SuDS system has been sized to accommodate the 1:200yr plus 39% climate change event, and details are presented on Drawing DIA-003 and Drawing DIA-004. The key design parameters / geometry is summarised in Table 5 below. Table 5 Soakaway - Provisional Summary Design Details Parameter Unit Value Notes Total depth m 1.4 Topsoil depth + soakaway depth Minimum topsoil depth mm 200 Above soakaway Gravel storage area depth mm 1200 Cover level – wrapped in a permeable geotextile / liner Minimum surface area m2 58.5 Measured from AutoCAD drawing Storage porosity - 35% Standard value as per CIRIA report C753 Storage volume m3 24.57 Calculated as: (58.5m2 x 1.2m x 35%) Contributing impermeable area m2 214 Impermeable developed areas of site with a runoff coefficient of 1 applied as a conservative estimate Design infiltration rate m/hr 0.005 Mid-range estimate for silt loam. Does not include Safety Factor applied in accordance with best practice guidance – refer to Appendix C 2.3.2 Hydraulic Analysis The proposed SuDS infiltration system has been modelled using the industry standard MicroDrainage software suite and a summary of the modelling results is included as Table 6 below. Table 6 SuDS System - Hydraulic Modelling Summary Return Period Event (1 in X) Max. Water Depth (m) Freeboard Allowance (mm) Storage Volume (m3) Critical Storm Duration (hours) Half Drain Time (mins) 2 0.251 949 3.8 16 546 10 0.356 844 6.0 16 818 30 0.450 750 7.9 16 1041 100 0.579 621 10.5 24 1319 200 0.668 532 12.4 24 1500 200 + 39% CC 0.977 223 18.7 36 2046 1000 0.897 303 17.0 24 1920 The results above confirm that runoff from the impermeable areas of development can be adequately contained within the 1200mm deep soakaway storage depth area for all rainfall events up to and including the design 200yr + 39% climate change event. Suitable freeboard depth allowance is also included within the design for all design storm events. Full copies of the hydraulic modelling and model details are enclosed as Appendix C. As the consequences of failure are minor for this site, a factor of safety of 1.5 has been applied as per Table 25.2 of the SuDS Manual. This also factors in a reduction in soakaway performance over time due to siltation. Furthermore, silt traps will be installed on the incoming upstream surface water pipe runs to allow for pre-settlement to reduce silt ingress into the system. MicroDrainage modelling software calculated a maximum inflow to the pipe network of 13.8l/s for the worst-case 15 min summer storm event. The capacity of the pipe network was checked against
Page 95
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 10 published tables for the hydraulic design of pipes5 using the Colebrook-White equation method. Design assumed 150mm UPVC pipes and a minimum gradient of 1:200. This provides a maximum flowrate of 15.3l/s, and as such provides adequate capacity to prevent overloading of the network. It is noted that this is a very conservative estimate given that greater gradients are easily achievable at this site. 2.4 Outline Maintenance Schedule 2.4.1 Overview To ensure efficient operation of the proposed surface water management / SuDS scheme, drainage components should be inspected and maintained throughout the life of the development. Regular inspection / maintenance will ensure efficient operation and prevent potential failure / blockage of drainage components. The following provisional maintenance plan has been developed from best practice guidance, professional experience and information provided in CIRIA Report C753 (The SuDS Manual). All drainage components will be retained under private ownership, with the Applicant remaining responsible for ongoing maintenance. This maintenance schedule will be integrated into the overall site operating and maintenance strategy and tailored / refined over time as required. The following sections provide maintenance actions for specific drainage elements. 2.4.2 Surface Water Soakaway Table 7 below provides the inspection and maintenance recommendations set out in Table 13.1 of CIRIA Report C753 for Soakaways. Table 7 Soakaway Outline Maintenance Requirements Maintenance Schedule Required Action Typical Frequency Regular Maintenance Inspect for sediment and debris in pre- treatment components and floor of inspection tube or chamber and inside of concrete manhole rings Annually Cleaning of gutters and any filters on downpipes Annually (or as required based on inspections) Trimming any roots that may be causing blockages Annual (or as required) Occasional Maintenance Remove sediment and debris from pre- treatment components and floor of inspection tube or chamber and inside of concrete manhole rings As required, based on inspections Remedial Actions Reconstruct soakaway and/or replace or clean void fill if performance deteriorates or failure occurs As required Replacement of clogged geotextile (will require reconstruction of soakaway in some circumstances) As required Monitoring Inspect silt traps and note rate of sediment accumulation Monthly in the first year and then annually Check soakaway to ensure emptying is occurring Annually 5 HR Wallingford and D.I.H Barr (2006) Tables for the hydraulic design of pipes, sewers and channels, 8th Edition, Volume I & II
Page 96
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 11 2.4.3 Inspection Chambers and Manholes It is recommended that the inspection chamber and manhole covers are lifted at least half yearly to check for debris / silt accumulations, and to check the drainage runs are flowing freely. Any silt / debris accumulations should be manually removed, and jet washed where required. 3. Wastewater Drainage Design 3.1 Overview The proposed development will generate wastewater flows in the form of ‘domestic’ sewage and thus a wastewater drainage design has been prepared. In terms of wastewater drainage disposal, the favoured hierarchy of options is as follows: 1. Discharge to public sewer 2. Discharge to ground via soakaway 3. Discharge to surface waters 4. Discharge to raised soakaway mound Scottish Water asset plans have been sourced for the site and have been appended to this document as Appendix B. It is confirmed that there are no public sewers in the vicinity of the development to which a connection could be made. The Craig Burn could in principle accept a treated wastewater discharge depending on dilution rates, catchment area etc however the superficial deposits present at the site indicate that discharge to ground (Option 2) is likely to be feasible and this is the preferred choice over Options 3 and 4. As such the proposed Wastewater Drainage Scheme is for wastewater to be collected from proposed dwelling via conventional sealed pipework which will discharge to a EN12566 (Part 3) Certified Secondary Treatment plant providing provisional treatment standards as outlined in Table 8 below. Table 8 Proposed Provisional Treatment Standards Parameter Unit Value BOD Discharge Limit mg/l 10 Ammonia (as N) Discharge Limit mg/l 5 Suspended Solids Discharge Limit mg/l 20 The final treatment standards would be confirmed at the detailed design / post planning stages through a formal EASR Application made to SEPA. 3.2 Wastewater Loading Calculations With reference to British Water Flows and Loads 4 a summary of the wastewater loading calculations is outlined in Table 9 below. Full calculations are provided in Appendix E for reference. Table 9 Wastewater Loading Calculations Parameter Unit Value Notes No of units - 1 Single domestic dwelling Total Population Equivalent (p.e.) - 5 As specified by SEPA in WAT-G-057 Guidance Daily flow per person l 150 As per British Flows and Loads 4 Total maximum daily flow l 750 p.e. multiplied by daily flow per person
Page 97
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 12 Parameter Unit Value Notes Instantaneous Average Flow l/s 0.0087 Over 24-hour period Peak Flow Rate l/s 0.0217 2.5x multiplication factor as per Scottish Water advice 3.3 Soil Infiltration Rate Review section 1.4.1.1 indicates that the site is underlain by Glaciofluvial Ice Contact Deposits of gravel, sand and silt. The immediate area around the site sits on an alluvial fan formed where the Craig Burn drops from the Sidlaw Hills onto the Carse of Gowrie. Alluvial fans are typically a formed of a wide ranging diamicton of clay through to boulders, but predominantly consist of sand, gravel and silt. As such, infiltration is likely to be feasible at the site. However, no specific infiltration testing has been conducted and therefore the conservative mid-range assumption of 70s/mm has been made. This allows for a precautious approach to the wastewater soakaway design. 3.4 Soakaway Sizing As per Scottish Building Standards the soakaway is sized via the following formula: 𝐴 = 𝑉𝑝 𝑥 𝑝.𝑒 𝑥 0.20 Where: A = Surface Area in (m2) Vp = Soil Percolation Rate in (s/mm) p.e. = Total Population Equivalent 0.2 = reduction factor for use of a Secondary Treatment Plant Based on the above formula and with reference to Table 9 previously the minimum required area of the soakaway is 70m2. The proposed field drainage soakaway is located more than 10m from any surface water body and more than 5m from the proposed dwelling house and the client’s land ownership boundary. Soil percolation rate testing will be conducted at the post planning stages (and secured via an appropriately worded planning conditions) to validate the infiltration rate adopted and it is noted there remains additional space within the site to extend the sizing if required. In the highly unlikely event the soil percolation rate testing indicates a discharge to ground is not viable then a treated wastewater discharge to the adjacent Craig Burn would be pursued as a ‘back up’ option. 3.5 Pipe Network Design In accordance with Sewers for Scotland 4, the wastewater drainage pipes are to be minimum 150mm diameter and the alignment has a minimum gradient of 1:60 to the treatment plant. 4. Closure Gondolin Land and Water Ltd (Gondolin) has been appointed by Mr Stuart Heslop (the Client) to prepare a Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) report in support of a planning application for the development of a dwelling house and associated works on land at Craigburn, Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU. This report provides the relevant design information for the proposed site surface water drainage / SuDS scheme taking due cognisance of local / national drainage design guidance (CIRIA Report C753), Perth and Kinross Council specific guidance and Scottish Water Sewers for Scotland 4th Edition.
Page 98
Gondolin Land and Water Ltd | Craigburn House, Rait – Proposed Residential Development – DIA| 30/03/2026 Registered Company No. SC706920 13 The site was visited in January 2025 by a suitably qualified Civil Engineer to inform the assessment and assessment overseen by a Chartered Hydrologist / Civil Engineer with >14 years’ experience of undertaking drainage designs in Scotland. A conservative approach has been adopted within the design by incorporating appropriate factors of safety, adopting a conservative infiltration rate at the SuDS location, inclusion of a freeboard allowance and inclusion of a +39% climate change uplift. Additionally, wastewater drainage arising from the site has been incorporated into the site design and details presented in this assessment. The wastewater will be routed via a wastewater treatment system, to discharge to ground via soakaway and conservative soil percolation rates have been used. Taking all the above into account it is considered there is no impediment to the development proposals being granted planning permission on the grounds of surface water or wastewater drainage provision.
Page 99
APPENDICES
Page 100
Appendix A PKC Certification
Page 101
45 Appendix B - Assessment Compliance Certification and Insurance Assessment Compliance Certification I certify that all reasonable skill, care and attention has been exercised in undertaking the attached Flood Risk Assessment/ Drainage Impact Assessment/Surface Water Drainage Design* (delete as appropriate). The documentation has been prepared for the below noted development in accordance with the PKC Developers’ Guidance Note on Flooding and Drainage. Planning Application Number Name and Address of Organisation Preparing this Assessment Signed Name Name of Development Craigburn House - Proposed Residential Development Address of Development Craigburn Fingask, Rait, Perth & Kinross, PH2 7RU N/A Edinburgh, EH6 5AA 26 Leith Walk Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Zak Ritchie Stuart HeslopStuart Heslop Name of Developer Managing Director Position Held
Page 102
46 Engineering Qualification(1) (1) Chartered Engineer or equivalent from an appropriate Engineering Institution. Insurance Please attach a copy of your professional indemnity insurance policy to this document. C.Eng, C.WEM, MCIWEM Date 30/03/2026
Page 103
Appendix B Scottish Water Asset Plans
Page 104
¯ The representation of physical assets and the boundaries of areas in which Scottish Water and others have an interest does not necessarily imply their true positions. For further details contact the appropriate District office. © Crown copyright and database rights 2025 OS AC0000824238. You are granted a non-exclusive, royalty free, revocable licence solely to view the Licensed Data for non-commercial purposes for the period during which Scottish Water makes it available. You are not permitted to copy, sub-license, distribute, sell or otherwise make available the Licensed Data to third parties in any form. Third party rights to enforce the terms of this licence shall be reserved to OS. The Bridge 6 Buchanan Gate Stepps Glasgow G33 6FB Tel No: 08000 778 778 0 1010 20205 Meters SCALE: Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS.Warning! Damaging a large diameter trunk main (12"/300mm and above) can result in loss of life and major water supply and water quality problems. If you're planning any extension work in the vicinity of any large diameter mains shown on our maps, you must contact Scottish Water to arrange a site visit 08000 778 778 WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE WORKS. Date: 28/02/2025 Plotted By: Duncan.bowie@gondolinltd.co.uk Craigburn Water & Wastewater PlansCraigburn Water & Wastewater Plans 1:1,323
Page 105
SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET WATER LEGEND This legend is to be used in conjunction with plots obtained from the SW GIS Extranet v1.0 - October 2020 SW Public General Fittings Pipes
Page 106
SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET WASTE WATER LEGEND This legend is to be used in conjunction with plots obtained from the SW GIS Extranet v1.0 - October 2020 SW Public General Fittings Pipes
Page 107
Appendix C MicroDrainage Modelling Results
Page 108
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 1 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Rainfall Details ©1982-2020 Innovyze Rainfall Model FEH Return Period (years) 200 FEH Rainfall Version 2013 Site Location GB 323369 727197 NO 23369 27197 Data Type Point Summer Storms Yes Winter Storms Yes Cv (Summer) 0.750 Cv (Winter) 0.840 Shortest Storm (mins) 15 Longest Storm (mins) 10080 Climate Change % +39 Time Area Diagram Total Area (ha) 0.021 Time From: (mins) To: Area (ha) 0 4 0.021
Page 109
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 2 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Model Details ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storage is Online Cover Level (m) 1.200 Trench Soakaway Structure Infiltration Coefficient Base (m/hr) 0.00500 Trench Width (m) 4.5 Infiltration Coefficient Side (m/hr) 0.00500 Trench Length (m) 13.0 Safety Factor 1.5 Slope (1:X) 100.0 Porosity 0.35 Cap Volume Depth (m) 0.000 Invert Level (m) 0.000 Cap Infiltration Depth (m) 0.000 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 110
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 3 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 2 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 546 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.114 0.114 0.0 1.0 O K 30 min Summer 0.132 0.132 0.1 1.4 O K 60 min Summer 0.150 0.150 0.1 1.7 O K 120 min Summer 0.177 0.177 0.1 2.3 O K 180 min Summer 0.192 0.192 0.1 2.6 O K 240 min Summer 0.201 0.201 0.1 2.8 O K 360 min Summer 0.212 0.212 0.1 3.0 O K 480 min Summer 0.218 0.218 0.1 3.1 O K 600 min Summer 0.222 0.222 0.1 3.2 O K 720 min Summer 0.225 0.225 0.1 3.3 O K 960 min Summer 0.227 0.227 0.1 3.3 O K 1440 min Summer 0.226 0.226 0.1 3.3 O K 2160 min Summer 0.219 0.219 0.1 3.1 O K 2880 min Summer 0.209 0.209 0.1 3.0 O K 4320 min Summer 0.189 0.189 0.1 2.5 O K 5760 min Summer 0.171 0.171 0.1 2.2 O K 7200 min Summer 0.156 0.156 0.1 1.9 O K 8640 min Summer 0.144 0.144 0.1 1.6 O K 10080 min Summer 0.135 0.135 0.1 1.4 O K 15 min Winter 0.121 0.121 0.1 1.2 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 26.978 0.0 19 30 min Summer 18.221 0.0 33 60 min Summer 11.984 0.0 62 120 min Summer 8.217 0.0 122 180 min Summer 6.454 0.0 182 240 min Summer 5.402 0.0 240 360 min Summer 4.174 0.0 360 480 min Summer 3.466 0.0 418 600 min Summer 2.996 0.0 484 720 min Summer 2.658 0.0 552 960 min Summer 2.199 0.0 684 1440 min Summer 1.672 0.0 966 2160 min Summer 1.265 0.0 1384 2880 min Summer 1.036 0.0 1788 4320 min Summer 0.780 0.0 2556 5760 min Summer 0.639 0.0 3336 7200 min Summer 0.550 0.0 4040 8640 min Summer 0.488 0.0 4752 10080 min Summer 0.442 0.0 5448 15 min Winter 26.978 0.0 18 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 111
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 4 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 2 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.140 0.140 0.1 1.5 O K 60 min Winter 0.161 0.161 0.1 2.0 O K 120 min Winter 0.192 0.192 0.1 2.6 O K 180 min Winter 0.209 0.209 0.1 3.0 O K 240 min Winter 0.221 0.221 0.1 3.2 O K 360 min Winter 0.235 0.235 0.1 3.5 O K 480 min Winter 0.242 0.242 0.1 3.6 O K 600 min Winter 0.246 0.246 0.1 3.7 O K 720 min Winter 0.248 0.248 0.1 3.8 O K 960 min Winter 0.251 0.251 0.1 3.8 O K 1440 min Winter 0.248 0.248 0.1 3.7 O K 2160 min Winter 0.234 0.234 0.1 3.5 O K 2880 min Winter 0.217 0.217 0.1 3.1 O K 4320 min Winter 0.184 0.184 0.1 2.4 O K 5760 min Winter 0.157 0.157 0.1 1.9 O K 7200 min Winter 0.136 0.136 0.1 1.5 O K 8640 min Winter 0.124 0.124 0.1 1.2 O K 10080 min Winter 0.116 0.116 0.1 1.1 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 18.221 0.0 33 60 min Winter 11.984 0.0 62 120 min Winter 8.217 0.0 120 180 min Winter 6.454 0.0 178 240 min Winter 5.402 0.0 236 360 min Winter 4.174 0.0 348 480 min Winter 3.466 0.0 456 600 min Winter 2.996 0.0 558 720 min Winter 2.658 0.0 588 960 min Winter 2.199 0.0 740 1440 min Winter 1.672 0.0 1052 2160 min Winter 1.265 0.0 1496 2880 min Winter 1.036 0.0 1932 4320 min Winter 0.780 0.0 2724 5760 min Winter 0.639 0.0 3464 7200 min Winter 0.550 0.0 4112 8640 min Winter 0.488 0.0 4760 10080 min Winter 0.442 0.0 5544 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 112
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 5 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 10 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 818 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.157 0.157 0.1 1.9 O K 30 min Summer 0.189 0.189 0.1 2.5 O K 60 min Summer 0.225 0.225 0.1 3.3 O K 120 min Summer 0.257 0.257 0.1 3.9 O K 180 min Summer 0.276 0.276 0.1 4.3 O K 240 min Summer 0.287 0.287 0.1 4.6 O K 360 min Summer 0.301 0.301 0.1 4.8 O K 480 min Summer 0.309 0.309 0.1 5.0 O K 600 min Summer 0.312 0.312 0.1 5.1 O K 720 min Summer 0.314 0.314 0.1 5.1 O K 960 min Summer 0.317 0.317 0.1 5.2 O K 1440 min Summer 0.315 0.315 0.1 5.1 O K 2160 min Summer 0.307 0.307 0.1 5.0 O K 2880 min Summer 0.296 0.296 0.1 4.7 O K 4320 min Summer 0.272 0.272 0.1 4.2 O K 5760 min Summer 0.249 0.249 0.1 3.8 O K 7200 min Summer 0.228 0.228 0.1 3.3 O K 8640 min Summer 0.210 0.210 0.1 3.0 O K 10080 min Summer 0.194 0.194 0.1 2.6 O K 15 min Winter 0.168 0.168 0.1 2.1 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 48.768 0.0 19 30 min Summer 33.179 0.0 34 60 min Summer 21.775 0.0 64 120 min Summer 13.547 0.0 122 180 min Summer 10.188 0.0 182 240 min Summer 8.303 0.0 242 360 min Summer 6.208 0.0 362 480 min Summer 5.054 0.0 480 600 min Summer 4.311 0.0 594 720 min Summer 3.787 0.0 642 960 min Summer 3.089 0.0 762 1440 min Summer 2.315 0.0 1026 2160 min Summer 1.733 0.0 1448 2880 min Summer 1.411 0.0 1848 4320 min Summer 1.053 0.0 2680 5760 min Summer 0.857 0.0 3464 7200 min Summer 0.733 0.0 4248 8640 min Summer 0.646 0.0 4936 10080 min Summer 0.582 0.0 5656 15 min Winter 48.768 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 113
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 6 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 10 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.204 0.204 0.1 2.8 O K 60 min Winter 0.245 0.245 0.1 3.7 O K 120 min Winter 0.282 0.282 0.1 4.4 O K 180 min Winter 0.303 0.303 0.1 4.9 O K 240 min Winter 0.318 0.318 0.1 5.2 O K 360 min Winter 0.335 0.335 0.1 5.5 O K 480 min Winter 0.346 0.346 0.1 5.7 O K 600 min Winter 0.352 0.352 0.1 5.9 O K 720 min Winter 0.355 0.355 0.1 5.9 O K 960 min Winter 0.356 0.356 0.1 6.0 O K 1440 min Winter 0.353 0.353 0.1 5.9 O K 2160 min Winter 0.340 0.340 0.1 5.6 O K 2880 min Winter 0.321 0.321 0.1 5.3 O K 4320 min Winter 0.282 0.282 0.1 4.4 O K 5760 min Winter 0.245 0.245 0.1 3.7 O K 7200 min Winter 0.213 0.213 0.1 3.0 O K 8640 min Winter 0.185 0.185 0.1 2.5 O K 10080 min Winter 0.162 0.162 0.1 2.0 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 33.179 0.0 33 60 min Winter 21.775 0.0 62 120 min Winter 13.547 0.0 120 180 min Winter 10.188 0.0 180 240 min Winter 8.303 0.0 238 360 min Winter 6.208 0.0 352 480 min Winter 5.054 0.0 466 600 min Winter 4.311 0.0 578 720 min Winter 3.787 0.0 686 960 min Winter 3.089 0.0 886 1440 min Winter 2.315 0.0 1110 2160 min Winter 1.733 0.0 1576 2880 min Winter 1.411 0.0 2020 4320 min Winter 1.053 0.0 2892 5760 min Winter 0.857 0.0 3688 7200 min Winter 0.733 0.0 4464 8640 min Winter 0.646 0.0 5184 10080 min Winter 0.582 0.0 5856 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 114
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 7 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 30 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 1041 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.190 0.190 0.1 2.6 O K 30 min Summer 0.235 0.235 0.1 3.5 O K 60 min Summer 0.285 0.285 0.1 4.5 O K 120 min Summer 0.322 0.322 0.1 5.3 O K 180 min Summer 0.343 0.343 0.1 5.7 O K 240 min Summer 0.357 0.357 0.1 6.0 O K 360 min Summer 0.375 0.375 0.1 6.3 O K 480 min Summer 0.385 0.385 0.1 6.5 O K 600 min Summer 0.391 0.391 0.1 6.7 O K 720 min Summer 0.394 0.394 0.1 6.7 O K 960 min Summer 0.396 0.396 0.1 6.8 O K 1440 min Summer 0.396 0.396 0.1 6.8 O K 2160 min Summer 0.390 0.390 0.1 6.7 O K 2880 min Summer 0.380 0.380 0.1 6.5 O K 4320 min Summer 0.355 0.355 0.1 5.9 O K 5760 min Summer 0.329 0.329 0.1 5.4 O K 7200 min Summer 0.305 0.305 0.1 4.9 O K 8640 min Summer 0.282 0.282 0.1 4.4 O K 10080 min Summer 0.261 0.261 0.1 4.0 O K 15 min Winter 0.205 0.205 0.1 2.9 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 65.914 0.0 19 30 min Summer 45.323 0.0 34 60 min Summer 29.748 0.0 64 120 min Summer 17.832 0.0 124 180 min Summer 13.184 0.0 182 240 min Summer 10.635 0.0 242 360 min Summer 7.856 0.0 362 480 min Summer 6.354 0.0 482 600 min Summer 5.397 0.0 600 720 min Summer 4.727 0.0 720 960 min Summer 3.840 0.0 836 1440 min Summer 2.869 0.0 1096 2160 min Summer 2.147 0.0 1496 2880 min Summer 1.746 0.0 1908 4320 min Summer 1.301 0.0 2728 5760 min Summer 1.056 0.0 3568 7200 min Summer 0.898 0.0 4328 8640 min Summer 0.788 0.0 5104 10080 min Summer 0.706 0.0 5856 15 min Winter 65.914 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 115
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 8 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 30 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.256 0.256 0.1 3.9 O K 60 min Winter 0.313 0.313 0.1 5.1 O K 120 min Winter 0.355 0.355 0.1 5.9 O K 180 min Winter 0.379 0.379 0.1 6.4 O K 240 min Winter 0.396 0.396 0.1 6.8 O K 360 min Winter 0.417 0.417 0.1 7.2 O K 480 min Winter 0.431 0.431 0.1 7.5 O K 600 min Winter 0.440 0.440 0.1 7.7 O K 720 min Winter 0.446 0.446 0.1 7.8 O K 960 min Winter 0.450 0.450 0.1 7.9 O K 1440 min Winter 0.448 0.448 0.1 7.8 O K 2160 min Winter 0.439 0.439 0.1 7.7 O K 2880 min Winter 0.422 0.422 0.1 7.3 O K 4320 min Winter 0.381 0.381 0.1 6.5 O K 5760 min Winter 0.340 0.340 0.1 5.6 O K 7200 min Winter 0.301 0.301 0.1 4.8 O K 8640 min Winter 0.266 0.266 0.1 4.1 O K 10080 min Winter 0.235 0.235 0.1 3.5 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 45.323 0.0 33 60 min Winter 29.748 0.0 62 120 min Winter 17.832 0.0 122 180 min Winter 13.184 0.0 180 240 min Winter 10.635 0.0 238 360 min Winter 7.856 0.0 354 480 min Winter 6.354 0.0 470 600 min Winter 5.397 0.0 584 720 min Winter 4.727 0.0 694 960 min Winter 3.840 0.0 912 1440 min Winter 2.869 0.0 1156 2160 min Winter 2.147 0.0 1620 2880 min Winter 1.746 0.0 2076 4320 min Winter 1.301 0.0 2980 5760 min Winter 1.056 0.0 3808 7200 min Winter 0.898 0.0 4616 8640 min Winter 0.788 0.0 5440 10080 min Winter 0.706 0.0 6152 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 116
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 9 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 100 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 1319 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.228 0.228 0.1 3.3 O K 30 min Summer 0.290 0.290 0.1 4.6 O K 60 min Summer 0.357 0.357 0.1 6.0 O K 120 min Summer 0.399 0.399 0.1 6.8 O K 180 min Summer 0.424 0.424 0.1 7.3 O K 240 min Summer 0.441 0.441 0.1 7.7 O K 360 min Summer 0.465 0.465 0.1 8.2 O K 480 min Summer 0.480 0.480 0.1 8.5 O K 600 min Summer 0.490 0.490 0.1 8.7 O K 720 min Summer 0.497 0.497 0.1 8.8 O K 960 min Summer 0.503 0.503 0.1 9.0 O K 1440 min Summer 0.507 0.507 0.1 9.1 O K 2160 min Summer 0.504 0.504 0.1 9.0 O K 2880 min Summer 0.495 0.495 0.1 8.8 O K 4320 min Summer 0.468 0.468 0.1 8.3 O K 5760 min Summer 0.440 0.440 0.1 7.7 O K 7200 min Summer 0.411 0.411 0.1 7.1 O K 8640 min Summer 0.384 0.384 0.1 6.5 O K 10080 min Summer 0.359 0.359 0.1 6.0 O K 15 min Winter 0.248 0.248 0.1 3.7 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 86.001 0.0 19 30 min Summer 59.721 0.0 34 60 min Summer 39.152 0.0 64 120 min Summer 22.906 0.0 124 180 min Summer 16.754 0.0 182 240 min Summer 13.437 0.0 242 360 min Summer 9.877 0.0 362 480 min Summer 7.967 0.0 482 600 min Summer 6.756 0.0 602 720 min Summer 5.913 0.0 720 960 min Summer 4.805 0.0 952 1440 min Summer 3.593 0.0 1182 2160 min Summer 2.688 0.0 1560 2880 min Summer 2.185 0.0 1988 4320 min Summer 1.621 0.0 2812 5760 min Summer 1.310 0.0 3632 7200 min Summer 1.110 0.0 4464 8640 min Summer 0.970 0.0 5192 10080 min Summer 0.865 0.0 6048 15 min Winter 86.001 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 117
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 10 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 100 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.318 0.318 0.1 5.2 O K 60 min Winter 0.393 0.393 0.1 6.7 O K 120 min Winter 0.441 0.441 0.1 7.7 O K 180 min Winter 0.470 0.470 0.1 8.3 O K 240 min Winter 0.491 0.491 0.1 8.7 O K 360 min Winter 0.519 0.519 0.1 9.3 O K 480 min Winter 0.538 0.538 0.1 9.7 O K 600 min Winter 0.551 0.551 0.1 10.0 O K 720 min Winter 0.561 0.561 0.1 10.2 O K 960 min Winter 0.574 0.574 0.1 10.4 O K 1440 min Winter 0.579 0.579 0.1 10.5 O K 2160 min Winter 0.573 0.573 0.1 10.4 O K 2880 min Winter 0.559 0.559 0.1 10.1 O K 4320 min Winter 0.517 0.517 0.1 9.3 O K 5760 min Winter 0.472 0.472 0.1 8.3 O K 7200 min Winter 0.427 0.427 0.1 7.4 O K 8640 min Winter 0.385 0.385 0.1 6.6 O K 10080 min Winter 0.346 0.346 0.1 5.8 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 59.721 0.0 33 60 min Winter 39.152 0.0 64 120 min Winter 22.906 0.0 122 180 min Winter 16.754 0.0 180 240 min Winter 13.437 0.0 240 360 min Winter 9.877 0.0 356 480 min Winter 7.967 0.0 472 600 min Winter 6.756 0.0 586 720 min Winter 5.913 0.0 700 960 min Winter 4.805 0.0 924 1440 min Winter 3.593 0.0 1342 2160 min Winter 2.688 0.0 1668 2880 min Winter 2.185 0.0 2136 4320 min Winter 1.621 0.0 3068 5760 min Winter 1.310 0.0 3928 7200 min Winter 1.110 0.0 4760 8640 min Winter 0.970 0.0 5616 10080 min Winter 0.865 0.0 6360 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 118
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 11 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 200 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 1500 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.252 0.252 0.1 3.8 O K 30 min Summer 0.325 0.325 0.1 5.3 O K 60 min Summer 0.402 0.402 0.1 6.9 O K 120 min Summer 0.448 0.448 0.1 7.8 O K 180 min Summer 0.477 0.477 0.1 8.4 O K 240 min Summer 0.497 0.497 0.1 8.8 O K 360 min Summer 0.524 0.524 0.1 9.4 O K 480 min Summer 0.543 0.543 0.1 9.8 O K 600 min Summer 0.557 0.557 0.1 10.1 O K 720 min Summer 0.566 0.566 0.1 10.3 O K 960 min Summer 0.577 0.577 0.1 10.5 O K 1440 min Summer 0.583 0.583 0.1 10.6 O K 2160 min Summer 0.580 0.580 0.1 10.6 O K 2880 min Summer 0.571 0.571 0.1 10.4 O K 4320 min Summer 0.542 0.542 0.1 9.8 O K 5760 min Summer 0.511 0.511 0.1 9.1 O K 7200 min Summer 0.480 0.480 0.1 8.5 O K 8640 min Summer 0.451 0.451 0.1 7.9 O K 10080 min Summer 0.422 0.422 0.1 7.3 O K 15 min Winter 0.275 0.275 0.1 4.3 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 98.442 0.0 19 30 min Summer 68.744 0.0 34 60 min Summer 44.965 0.0 64 120 min Summer 26.145 0.0 124 180 min Summer 19.077 0.0 182 240 min Summer 15.278 0.0 242 360 min Summer 11.211 0.0 362 480 min Summer 9.042 0.0 482 600 min Summer 7.669 0.0 602 720 min Summer 6.713 0.0 722 960 min Summer 5.452 0.0 960 1440 min Summer 4.072 0.0 1238 2160 min Summer 3.038 0.0 1620 2880 min Summer 2.462 0.0 2020 4320 min Summer 1.821 0.0 2852 5760 min Summer 1.467 0.0 3688 7200 min Summer 1.240 0.0 4472 8640 min Summer 1.081 0.0 5280 10080 min Summer 0.963 0.0 6056 15 min Winter 98.442 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 119
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 12 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 200 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.356 0.356 0.1 6.0 O K 60 min Winter 0.443 0.443 0.1 7.7 O K 120 min Winter 0.496 0.496 0.1 8.8 O K 180 min Winter 0.529 0.529 0.1 9.5 O K 240 min Winter 0.553 0.553 0.1 10.0 O K 360 min Winter 0.586 0.586 0.1 10.7 O K 480 min Winter 0.609 0.609 0.1 11.1 O K 600 min Winter 0.627 0.627 0.1 11.5 O K 720 min Winter 0.640 0.640 0.1 11.8 O K 960 min Winter 0.657 0.657 0.1 12.1 O K 1440 min Winter 0.668 0.668 0.1 12.4 O K 2160 min Winter 0.662 0.662 0.1 12.2 O K 2880 min Winter 0.649 0.649 0.1 11.9 O K 4320 min Winter 0.605 0.605 0.1 11.1 O K 5760 min Winter 0.557 0.557 0.1 10.1 O K 7200 min Winter 0.509 0.509 0.1 9.1 O K 8640 min Winter 0.463 0.463 0.1 8.2 O K 10080 min Winter 0.420 0.420 0.1 7.3 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 68.744 0.0 33 60 min Winter 44.965 0.0 64 120 min Winter 26.145 0.0 122 180 min Winter 19.077 0.0 180 240 min Winter 15.278 0.0 240 360 min Winter 11.211 0.0 356 480 min Winter 9.042 0.0 472 600 min Winter 7.669 0.0 588 720 min Winter 6.713 0.0 702 960 min Winter 5.452 0.0 926 1440 min Winter 4.072 0.0 1356 2160 min Winter 3.038 0.0 1712 2880 min Winter 2.462 0.0 2164 4320 min Winter 1.821 0.0 3108 5760 min Winter 1.467 0.0 3984 7200 min Winter 1.240 0.0 4832 8640 min Winter 1.081 0.0 5704 10080 min Winter 0.963 0.0 6464 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 120
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 13 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 200 year Return Period (+39%) ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 2046 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.326 0.326 0.1 5.3 O K 30 min Summer 0.428 0.428 0.1 7.4 O K 60 min Summer 0.536 0.536 0.1 9.6 O K 120 min Summer 0.604 0.604 0.1 11.0 O K 180 min Summer 0.646 0.646 0.1 11.9 O K 240 min Summer 0.677 0.677 0.1 12.5 O K 360 min Summer 0.721 0.721 0.1 13.4 O K 480 min Summer 0.753 0.753 0.1 14.1 O K 600 min Summer 0.777 0.777 0.1 14.6 O K 720 min Summer 0.796 0.796 0.1 15.0 O K 960 min Summer 0.822 0.822 0.1 15.5 O K 1440 min Summer 0.845 0.845 0.1 16.0 O K 2160 min Summer 0.849 0.849 0.1 16.1 O K 2880 min Summer 0.843 0.843 0.1 15.9 O K 4320 min Summer 0.816 0.816 0.1 15.4 O K 5760 min Summer 0.783 0.783 0.1 14.7 O K 7200 min Summer 0.750 0.750 0.1 14.0 O K 8640 min Summer 0.718 0.718 0.1 13.4 O K 10080 min Summer 0.686 0.686 0.1 12.7 O K 15 min Winter 0.357 0.357 0.1 6.0 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 136.834 0.0 19 30 min Summer 95.554 0.0 34 60 min Summer 62.502 0.0 64 120 min Summer 36.341 0.0 124 180 min Summer 26.516 0.0 184 240 min Summer 21.237 0.0 244 360 min Summer 15.583 0.0 362 480 min Summer 12.568 0.0 482 600 min Summer 10.660 0.0 602 720 min Summer 9.331 0.0 722 960 min Summer 7.578 0.0 962 1440 min Summer 5.660 0.0 1430 2160 min Summer 4.223 0.0 1776 2880 min Summer 3.422 0.0 2160 4320 min Summer 2.531 0.0 2980 5760 min Summer 2.039 0.0 3808 7200 min Summer 1.723 0.0 4616 8640 min Summer 1.502 0.0 5448 10080 min Summer 1.338 0.0 6256 15 min Winter 136.834 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 121
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 14 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 200 year Return Period (+39%) ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.472 0.472 0.1 8.3 O K 60 min Winter 0.593 0.593 0.1 10.8 O K 120 min Winter 0.671 0.671 0.1 12.4 O K 180 min Winter 0.719 0.719 0.1 13.4 O K 240 min Winter 0.755 0.755 0.1 14.1 O K 360 min Winter 0.806 0.806 0.1 15.2 O K 480 min Winter 0.845 0.845 0.1 16.0 O K 600 min Winter 0.875 0.875 0.1 16.6 O K 720 min Winter 0.898 0.898 0.1 17.1 O K 960 min Winter 0.933 0.933 0.1 17.8 O K 1440 min Winter 0.968 0.968 0.1 18.5 O K 2160 min Winter 0.977 0.977 0.1 18.7 O K 2880 min Winter 0.967 0.967 0.1 18.5 O K 4320 min Winter 0.930 0.930 0.1 17.7 O K 5760 min Winter 0.880 0.880 0.1 16.7 O K 7200 min Winter 0.829 0.829 0.1 15.6 O K 8640 min Winter 0.778 0.778 0.1 14.6 O K 10080 min Winter 0.729 0.729 0.1 13.6 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 95.554 0.0 34 60 min Winter 62.502 0.0 64 120 min Winter 36.341 0.0 122 180 min Winter 26.516 0.0 180 240 min Winter 21.237 0.0 240 360 min Winter 15.583 0.0 358 480 min Winter 12.568 0.0 474 600 min Winter 10.660 0.0 590 720 min Winter 9.331 0.0 708 960 min Winter 7.578 0.0 934 1440 min Winter 5.660 0.0 1384 2160 min Winter 4.223 0.0 2012 2880 min Winter 3.422 0.0 2276 4320 min Winter 2.531 0.0 3200 5760 min Winter 2.039 0.0 4144 7200 min Winter 1.723 0.0 5040 8640 min Winter 1.502 0.0 5880 10080 min Winter 1.338 0.0 6760 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 122
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 15 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 1000 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Half Drain Time : 1920 minutes. Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 15 min Summer 0.315 0.315 0.1 5.1 O K 30 min Summer 0.417 0.417 0.1 7.2 O K 60 min Summer 0.521 0.521 0.1 9.3 O K 120 min Summer 0.582 0.582 0.1 10.6 O K 180 min Summer 0.621 0.621 0.1 11.4 O K 240 min Summer 0.649 0.649 0.1 12.0 O K 360 min Summer 0.690 0.690 0.1 12.8 O K 480 min Summer 0.718 0.718 0.1 13.4 O K 600 min Summer 0.738 0.738 0.1 13.8 O K 720 min Summer 0.753 0.753 0.1 14.1 O K 960 min Summer 0.772 0.772 0.1 14.5 O K 1440 min Summer 0.781 0.781 0.1 14.7 O K 2160 min Summer 0.774 0.774 0.1 14.5 O K 2880 min Summer 0.760 0.760 0.1 14.2 O K 4320 min Summer 0.723 0.723 0.1 13.5 O K 5760 min Summer 0.684 0.684 0.1 12.7 O K 7200 min Summer 0.648 0.648 0.1 11.9 O K 8640 min Summer 0.613 0.613 0.1 11.2 O K 10080 min Summer 0.581 0.581 0.1 10.6 O K 15 min Winter 0.345 0.345 0.1 5.7 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 15 min Summer 131.355 0.0 19 30 min Summer 92.677 0.0 34 60 min Summer 60.600 0.0 64 120 min Summer 34.950 0.0 124 180 min Summer 25.431 0.0 184 240 min Summer 20.338 0.0 242 360 min Summer 14.890 0.0 362 480 min Summer 11.978 0.0 482 600 min Summer 10.132 0.0 602 720 min Summer 8.845 0.0 722 960 min Summer 7.143 0.0 960 1440 min Summer 5.282 0.0 1398 2160 min Summer 3.899 0.0 1732 2880 min Summer 3.135 0.0 2128 4320 min Summer 2.293 0.0 2940 5760 min Summer 1.835 0.0 3752 7200 min Summer 1.544 0.0 4608 8640 min Summer 1.341 0.0 5440 10080 min Summer 1.192 0.0 6248 15 min Winter 131.355 0.0 19 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 123
Gondolin Land & Water Ltd Page 16 Craig Burn Surface Water Soakaway Date 27/02/2026 Designed by DB File CRAIGBURN HOUSE SOAKAWA... Checked by ZR Innovyze Source Control 2020.1.3 Summary of Results for 1000 year Return Period ©1982-2020 Innovyze Storm Event Max Level (m) Max Depth (m) Max Infiltration (l/s) Max Volume (m³) Status 30 min Winter 0.459 0.459 0.1 8.1 O K 60 min Winter 0.577 0.577 0.1 10.5 O K 120 min Winter 0.647 0.647 0.1 11.9 O K 180 min Winter 0.691 0.691 0.1 12.8 O K 240 min Winter 0.724 0.724 0.1 13.5 O K 360 min Winter 0.771 0.771 0.1 14.5 O K 480 min Winter 0.805 0.805 0.1 15.2 O K 600 min Winter 0.831 0.831 0.1 15.7 O K 720 min Winter 0.850 0.850 0.1 16.1 O K 960 min Winter 0.876 0.876 0.1 16.6 O K 1440 min Winter 0.897 0.897 0.1 17.0 O K 2160 min Winter 0.889 0.889 0.1 16.9 O K 2880 min Winter 0.871 0.871 0.1 16.5 O K 4320 min Winter 0.819 0.819 0.1 15.4 O K 5760 min Winter 0.763 0.763 0.1 14.3 O K 7200 min Winter 0.707 0.707 0.1 13.2 O K 8640 min Winter 0.655 0.655 0.1 12.1 O K 10080 min Winter 0.606 0.606 0.1 11.1 O K Storm Event Rain (mm/hr) Flooded Volume (m³) Time-Peak (mins) 30 min Winter 92.677 0.0 34 60 min Winter 60.600 0.0 64 120 min Winter 34.950 0.0 122 180 min Winter 25.431 0.0 180 240 min Winter 20.338 0.0 240 360 min Winter 14.890 0.0 358 480 min Winter 11.978 0.0 474 600 min Winter 10.132 0.0 590 720 min Winter 8.845 0.0 706 960 min Winter 7.143 0.0 934 1440 min Winter 5.282 0.0 1382 2160 min Winter 3.899 0.0 1988 2880 min Winter 3.135 0.0 2248 4320 min Winter 2.293 0.0 3160 5760 min Winter 1.835 0.0 4096 7200 min Winter 1.544 0.0 4976 8640 min Winter 1.341 0.0 5800 10080 min Winter 1.192 0.0 6664 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA
Page 124
Appendix D Site Photography
Page 125
Entrance junction Existing access track
Page 126
Proposed dwelling house plot looking southwest Proposed dwelling house plot looking west
Page 127
Proposed dwelling house plot looking northwest Neighbouring plot to west
Page 128
Appendix E Wastewater Loading Calculations
Page 129
Flow (l) BOD (g) NH3 (g) Qty Flow (l) BOD (g) NH3 (g) Domestic Dwellings - Standard Residential. 150 60 8 5 750 300 40 Single domestic dwelling. Assumed less than or equal to 3 bedrooms. 750 300 40 5 5 0.750 0.009 0.02 Average Flow rate multiplied by 2.5 as per Scottish Water advice Notes: LOADING CALCULATIONS 1. From British Water Flows and Loads Code of Practice 4 2. All units in person / activity / day unless specified otherwise Grand Totals Population Equivalent Item(1),(2) Per Activity Per Person Totals Notes Maximum Daily Flow (m3/d) Average Flow Rate (l/s) Peak flow rate
Page 130
DRAWINGS
Page 131
Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025]Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: DIA-001 Site Location Plan_00.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA Registered Company No. SC706920 LEGEND N © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 03/26 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE SITE LOCATION PLAN 1:1,250 @ A3 MARCH 2026 DIA-001 0000 FOR PLANNING 0 12.5 2525 37.5 50m 7575 100 125 Metres 1:1,250 PLANNING BOUNDARY
Page 132
Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: DIA-002 Hydrological Overview_00.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE NOTES LEGEND CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD Registered Company No. SC706920 N © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 03/26 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE HYDROLOGICAL OVERVIEW 1:400 @ A2 MARCH 2026 DIA-002 0000 FOR PLANNING 0 20m 4040 Metres 1:400 8 1.1. TOPOGRAPHY DERIVED FROM LIDAR DATA SOURCED FROM THE SCOTTISH REMOTE SENSING PORTAL. 2.2. ALIGNMENT OF SCOTTISH WATER MAINS APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON ASSET PLAN SOURCED FROM THE SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET DATED 19/12/25. EXISTING MAJOR CONTOURS (1.0m INTERVAL) EXISTING MINOR CONTOURS (0.25m INTERVAL) OVERLAND FLOWPATH PLANNING BOUNDARY CRAIG BURN RUNOFF FOLLOWS NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY TO THE SOUTH EXISTING SCOTTISH WATER MAIN SCOTTISH WATER 250mm DUCTILE IRON DISTRIBUTION MAIN SCOTTISH WATER 200mm DUCTILE IRON DISTRIBUTION MAIN 4.5m ACCESS DISTANCE FROM SCOTTISH WATER MAINS 8.25m STAND-OFF DISTANCE FROM SCOTTISH WATER MAINS
Page 133
Craigburn HouseCraigburn House RWP RWP RWP RWP Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: DIA-003 Proposed Drainage Layout_00.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE NOTES LEGEND CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD Registered Company No. SC706920 N © Crown copyright and database rights [2025] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 03/26 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE PROPOSED DRAINAGE LAYOUT 1:200 @ A2 MARCH 2026 DIA-003 0000 FOR PLANNING 0 10m 2020 Metres 1:200 4 1.1. TOPOGRAPHY DERIVED FROM LIDAR DATA SOURCED FROM THE SCOTTISH REMOTE SENSING PORTAL. 2.2. ALIGNMENT OF SCOTTISH WATER MAINS APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON ASSET PLAN SOURCED FROM THE SCOTTISH WATER GIS EXTRANET DATED 19/12/25. 3.3. SOAKAWAY SIZING APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON TYPICAL VALUES FOR THE SUPERFICIAL DEPOSITS INDICATED. INFILTRATION TESTING REQUIRED AT LATER PROJECT STAGE TO CONFIRM. 4.4. DRAWING TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL OTHER SCHEME DRAWINGS. 5.5. DESIGN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PROVISIONAL OUTLINE DETAIL TO BE REFINED AT DETAILED DESIGN STAGE. SCOTTISH WATER 250mm DUCTILE IRON DISTRIBUTION MAIN SCOTTISH WATER 200mm DUCTILE IRON DISTRIBUTION MAIN PLANNING BOUNDARY 4.5m ACCESS DISTANCE FROM SCOTTISH WATER MAINS 8.25m STAND-OFF DISTANCE FROM SCOTTISH WATER MAINS INDICATIVE SURFACE WATER SOAKAWAY INDICATIVE WASTEWATER SOAKAWAY INDICATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT CRAIG BURN PROPOSED WASTEWATER SOAKAWAY POSITIONED DOWNSLOPE OF PROPERTY AND AWAY FROM WATERCOURSE SURFACE WATER AND WASTEWATER SOAKAWAYS MAINTAIN A 5m BUFFER FROM THE PROPOSED PROPERTY PROPOSED SURFACE WATER SOAKAWAY OUTLINE DETAILS: · SURFACE AREA = 58.5 m2 · STORAGE DEPTH = 1.2 m · POROSITY = 0.35 · STORAGE VOLUME = 24.6m³ PROPOSED FOUL WATER PIPEWORK PROPOSED FOUL WATER DRAINAGE MANHOLE / INSPECTION CHAMBER INDICATIVE RAINWATER DOWNPIPES PROPOSED CONVENTIONAL DRAINAGE PROPOSED WASTEWATER SOAKAWAY WITH MINIMUM AREA OF 70m2 PROPOSED SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM (KLARGESTER BIODISC OR SIMILAR) RAINFALL TO BE COLLECTED FROM ROOF AREAS VIA STANDARD RAINWATER PIPEWORK PROPOSED MANHOLE / INSPECTION CHAMBER RWP
Page 134
1350 1200 INTERNAL DIAMETER OF MANHOLE (MM) 1500 1800 375 to 450 LESS THAN 375 500 to 700 750 to 900 DIAMETER OF LARGEST PIPE IN MANHOLE (MM) INTERNAL DIAMETER OF CONCRETE MANHOLES MIN ROCKER PIPE LENGTH NOMINAL DIAMETER(mm) over 750 150 to 600 over 600 to 750 600 1000 1250 L(mm) NOTE: RIGID PIPES BUILT INTO MANHOLES SHALL HAVERIGID PIPES BUILT INTO MANHOLES SHALL HAVEA FLEXIBLE JOINT AS CLOSE AS FEASIBLE TO THE EXTERNAL FACE OF THE STRUCTURE ANDTHE LENGTH OF THE NEXT ROCKER PIPE SHALL BE AS IN THE TABLE BELOW PIPE DIAMETER +900>900 600 450 DIAMETER OF INSPECTION CHAMBER (MM) 750 160 to 300 LESS THAN 160 300 to 450 DIAMETER OF LARGEST PIPE IN MANHOLE (MM) INTERNAL DIAMETER OF INSPECTION CHAMBERSINTERNAL DIAMETER OF INSPECTION CHAMBERS PROVIDE FULL DEPTH FLEXIBLE JOINTS @ 5000MMPROVIDE FULL DEPTH FLEXIBLE JOINTS @ 5000MM CENTRES MAX. USING 18MM THK. COMPRESSIBLECENTRES MAX. USING 18MM THK. COMPRESSIBLE FIBREBOARD, PRE-CUT TO PIPE DIA. CLASS 'Z' PIPE BEDDING & BACKFILLING DETAIL PIPES WHERE COVER TO CROWN IS LESS THAN 1200MMPIPES WHERE COVER TO CROWN IS LESS THAN 1200MM UNDER ROADS AND FOOTPATHS CLASS 'S' PIPE BEDDING & BACKFILLING DETAIL PIPES WHERE COVER TO CROWN IS GREATER THANPIPES WHERE COVER TO CROWN IS GREATER THAN 1200MM UNDER ROADS AND FOOTPATHS CONCRETE SURROUND, GEN 3 20MM MAX. AGGREGATE SIZE. APPROVED GRANULAR FILL FREE FROM STONES LARGER THAN 40MM. GRANULAR HAUNCH & BEDDING SIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH BS EN 12620:2002 APPROVED GRANULAR FILL FREE FROM STONES LARGER THAN 40MM. D D NOTE: TYPE 'B' NOT TO BE USED UNDER CARRIAGEWAYS AND PARKINGNOTE: TYPE 'B' NOT TO BE USED UNDER CARRIAGEWAYS AND PARKING AREAS ON CLAY SITES INDICATED ON SECTIONS. IT IS TO BE SUBSTITUTEDAREAS ON CLAY SITES INDICATED ON SECTIONS. IT IS TO BE SUBSTITUTED BY DOT TYPE 2. FILL TYPE 'B' WILL CONSIST OF READILY COMPACTED MATERIAL FREE FROMFILL TYPE 'B' WILL CONSIST OF READILY COMPACTED MATERIAL FREE FROM TREE ROOTS, VEGETABLE MATTER, BUILDING MATERIAL, FROZEN SOIL,TREE ROOTS, VEGETABLE MATTER, BUILDING MATERIAL, FROZEN SOIL, CLAY LUMPS RETAINED ON A 75MM SIEVE AND STONES LARGER THANCLAY LUMPS RETAINED ON A 75MM SIEVE AND STONES LARGER THAN PERMITTED FOR TYPE 'A' MATERIAL TYPE 'B' FILL MATERIAL % PASSING BY MASS B.S. 410 SIEVE SIZES (mm) GRANULAR BEDDING TYPE 'A'GRANULAR BEDDING TYPE 'A' TRENCH BEDDING AND FILL MATERIALSTRENCH BEDDING AND FILL MATERIALS USE FOR NOMINAL PIPE (DIA.) TYPE <300A10 - 6363 -- 37.5 2020 0.25 5 85.1100 10101414 2.36 2.36 450W 600 150100D 850700 1050 TRENCH DIMENSIONS 300225 375 APPROPRIATE SLEEVE CONNECTION FROM RWP TO UNDERGROUND PIPEWORK TO BE PROVIDED GROUND LEVEL RWP RODDING EYE/ACCESS POINT TO BE PROVIDED AT 0.6m ABOVE GROUND LEVEL RWP CONNECTION DETAIL TO NEAREST MANHOLE / INSPECTION CHAMBER 150MM THICK MASS CONC. (GRADE GEN 3) BED AND SURROUND TO COVER FRAME AND CHAMBER. 12MM THICK COMPRESSIBLE FIBRE BOARD BETWEEN CHAMBER AND CONCRETE TO ACT AS BOND BREAK. 150MM THICK MASS CONC. (GRADE GEN 3) SURROUND TO ALL CHAMBERS. 450 I.D POLYPROPYLENE CIRCULAR INSPECTION CHAMBER (LARGER DIAMETER ALSO SUITABLE AT DEVELOPER'S DISCRETION) TYPICAL INSPECTION CHAMBER DETAILTYPICAL INSPECTION CHAMBER DETAIL 1:25 REFER TO PIPE BEDDING DETAILS. COVER AND FRAME TO B.S. EN 124:1994 (LOCKABLE COVER IN PAVEMENTS) REFER TO SCHEDULE FOR CLASS AND SIZE. ALL INSITU CONCRETE TO BE GEN 3 WITH SULPHATE RESISTING CEMENT OR EQUIVALENTSULPHATE RESISTING CEMENT OR EQUIVALENT COMBINATION GROUPS 2A, 3, GIVEN IN BS 8500-2: 2002 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE.8500-2: 2002 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE. POLYPROPYLENE CIRCULAR INSPECTION CHAMBER (450mm - 750mm ID) TYPICAL INSPECTION CHAMBER DETAILTYPICAL INSPECTION CHAMBER DETAIL (GRAVEL SURROUND - NON-TRAFFICKED AREAS)(GRAVEL SURROUND - NON-TRAFFICKED AREAS) NTS REFER TO PIPE BEDDING DETAILS. C250 COVER TO B.S. EN 124:1994 EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE STATED (LOCKABLE COVER IN PAVEMENTS) 300mm THICK SURROUND OF SINGLE SIZE PEA GRAVEL 0.30m 50mm SAND BLINDING LAYER 0.10m 0.30m CONNECTION SEWER CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEW OF SEWER A 0°0° ACCEPTABLE RANGE BACKFILL REINFORCED COMPRESSIBLE GRANULAR PIPE 300mm MINIMUM BEARING COMPRESSIBLE FILLER PIPE 100 100 CONCRETE PIPE SURROUNDSPIGOT AND SLEEVE JOINT CONCRETE PIPE SURROUND PIPE 100 100 COMPRESSIBLE FILLER NTS ON ORIGINAL GROUND ALTERNATIVE PIPE PROTECTION DETAILALTERNATIVE PIPE PROTECTION DETAIL MATERIAL CONCRETE SLAB SURROUND JOINTS FOR CONCRETE ENCASEDJOINTS FOR CONCRETE ENCASED PIPES SOCKET JOINT PIPE BRANCH SEWER CONNECTIONBRANCH SEWER CONNECTION DETAIL NTS NTS 1m PIPE SPACING SECTION THROUGH PROPOSED SURFACE WATER SOAKAWAYSECTION THROUGH PROPOSED SURFACE WATER SOAKAWAYSECTION THROUGH PROPOSED SURFACE WATER SOAKAWAY 1:25 GRANULAR FILTER MEDIUM FILTER MEDIUM WRAPPED IN GEOTEXTILE MINIMUM 200mm TOPSOIL ABOVE SOAKAWAY MIN. 1.0m UNSATURATED ZONE BELOW INVERT OF WASTEWATER SOAKAWAY 0.2m INLET FROM SURFACE WATER / WASTEWATER PIPE NETWORK 100mm Ø PERFORATED PIPES TO DISTRIBUTE FLOWS THROUGHOUT TRENCH. INVERT OF PIPE TO BE 100mm ABOVE TRENCH BASE AND TO HAVE LONGITUDINAL FALL TO MATCH EXISTING GROUND LEVEL (MIN 0.5%) CLEAN WASHED 16-32mm GRAVEL FLOW DISTRIBUTION MANHOLE FILTER MEDIUM TO BE WRAPPED IN GEOTEXTILE SEPARATOR (TERRAM 1000 OR SIMILAR APPROVED) INDICATIVE EXISTING GROUND PROFILE MIN. 300mm THICKNESS REINSTATED TOPSOIL EXISTING SUPERFICIALS EXISTING TOPSOIL Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2024]Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights [2024] DRAWING NUMBER: REV: REV BYBY CHK SCALE: DESCRIPTION DATE: DIA-004 Typical Drainage Details_00.dwg DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: DATE NOTES CLIENT: GONDOLIN LAND & WATER LTD 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA Registered Company No. SC706920 N © Crown copyright and database rights [2024] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 Crown copyright and database rights [2024] Ordnance Survey 0100031673 © This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons.© This drawing and its content are the copyright of Gondolin Land & Water Ltd and may not be edited or reproduced except by prior written consent. Gondolin accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. DRAWING STATUS: 0000 03/26 INITIAL ISSUE DBDB ZRZR STUART HESLOP CRAIGBURN HOUSE TYPICAL DRAINAGE DETAILS AS SHOWN @ A1 MARCH 2026 DIA-004 0000 FOR PLANNING 1.1. ALL DRAINAGE TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEWERS FOR SCOTLAND / SCOTTISH TECHNICAL HANDBOOK WHERE REQUIRED. 2.2. DESIGN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED OUTLINE ENGINEERING DESIGN. FINAL LEVELS, ALIGNMENTS AND GRADIENTS TO BE CONFIRMED AT DETAILED DESIGN STAGE.
Page 135
Civil Engineering and Environmental Solutions Gondolin Land and Water Ltd is a small environmental and engineering consultancy business based in Scotland with coverage throughout the UK. Office Address: 26 Leith Walk Edinburgh EH6 5AA Registered Company No. SC706920 Sectors: Onshore Renewables & Storage | Infrastructure | Mining and Minerals Property & Urban Regeneration | Retail, Industrial & Manufacturing | Waste Management
Page 136
No embedded text on this page.