(b) Planning Decision Notice, Report of Handling and Reference Documents (Pages 278-310)
Perth and Kinross Council · 18 December 2023
Back to Local Review Body — 18 December 2023 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(iii)(b) LRB-2023-40 LRB-2023-40 23/00923/IPL - Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle), land 75 metres north west of Mullmach, Saucher, Kinross PLANNING DECISION NOTICE REPORT OF HANDLING REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (part included in applicant’s submission, pages 253-257 and 260-286)
Page 2
No embedded text on this page.
Page 3
No embedded text on this page.
Page 4
No embedded text on this page.
Page 5
REPORT OF HANDLING DELEGATED REPORT Ref No 23/00923/IPL Ward No P2- Strathmore Due Determination Date 12th August 2023 Draft Report Date 18th July 2023 Report Issued by JW Date 18 July 2023 PROPOSAL: Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle) LOCATION: Land 75 Metres North West Of Mullmac Saucher Kinrossie PH2 6HY 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 dwellinghouse and formation of a new access within a small hamlet called Saucher which is located to the north east of Perth. There are approximately 14 dwellings within the hamlet set around a square green. The application sites is located in the north east corner of the hamlet and extends to 0.27 hectares. The application site is rectangular and an indicative site plan has been submitted showing the possible position of a dwelling in the southern corner. Access is proposed to be taken from the public road to the east partly using an existing access and a new lengthy driveway which is proposed to travel in a north westerly direction to the rear of Mullmac and Kanrosmar to the site. SITE HISTORY None PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION Pre application Reference: 23/00047/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
Page 6
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 5: Soils Policy 6: Forestry, Woodland and Trees Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place Policy 15: Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods Policy 16: Quality Homes Policy 17: Rural Homes Policy 22: Flood Risk and Water Management Policy 29: Rural Development 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 2: Design Statements Policy 5: Infrastructure Contributions Policy 6: Settlement Boundaries Policy 19: Housing in the Countryside Policy 32: Embedding Low & Zero Carbon Generating Technologies in New Development
Page 7
Policy 39: Landscape Policy 40B: Forestry, Woodland and Trees: Trees, Woodland and Development Policy 41: Biodiversity Policy 51: Soils 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 - Developer Contributions & Affordable Housing (adopted in 2020) Supplementary Guidance - Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments (adopted in 2021) Supplementary Guidance - Forest & Woodland Strategy (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 POLICIES Non Statutory Guidance Planning Guidance - Planning & Biodiversity NATIONAL GUIDANCE The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through The National Planning Framework, Planning Advice Notes, Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and a series of Circulars. Planning Advice Notes The following Scottish Government Planning Advice Notes (PANs) and Guidance Documents are of relevance to the proposal: PAN 40 Development Management PAN 61 Planning and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PAN 68 Design Statements PAN 75 Planning for Transport
Page 8
Creating Places 2013 Creating Places is the Scottish Government’s policy statement on architecture and place. It sets out the comprehensive value good design can deliver. It notes that successful places can unlock opportunities, build vibrant communities and contribute to a flourishing economy and set out actions that can achieve positive changes in our places. 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. CONSULTATION RESPONSES INTERNAL Transportation And Development – no objections subject to conditions Biodiversity/Tree Officer – no comments Development Contributions Officer – condition recommended EXTERNAL Scottish Water – no objection REPRESENTATIONS A total of nine representations have been received which raise the following issues. Impact on farming operations/access Lack of sewage capacity Inappropriate land use Inappropriate housing density Lack of car parking Light pollution Loss of open space Loss of sunlight or daylight Loss of trees Noise Pollution Out of character with area Overlooking
Page 9
Impact of new access road on character/amenity Noise from construction operations Ecological impact Impact on character and density of area Maintenance of private road Road safety Flood risk Loss of prime agricultural land Contrary to Development Plan These issues are addressed within the appraisal section of this report. Additional Statements Received: Screening Opinion EIA Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not Required Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations Habitats Regulations AA Not Required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Submitted Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Not Required 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 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 In policy 19 - Housing in the Countryside of the LDP2, it is acknowledged that opportunities do exist for housing in rural areas to support the viability of communities, meet development needs in appropriate locations while safeguarding the character of the countryside as well as ensuring that a high standard of siting and
Page 10
design is achieved. Thus the development of single houses or groups of houses which fall within the six identified categories will be supported. This is also referenced in the recently adopted National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) where Policy 9 states that greenfield sites will be supported where there are explicitly supported by LDP policies. Policy 17 of NPF4 is also relevant and seeks to encourage and promote and facilitate affordable and sustainable homes in the right locations and provides criteria in which proposals for new rural homes will be accepted. The Council will support proposals for the erection, or creation through conversion, of single houses and groups of houses in the countryside which fall into at least one of the following categories: 1) Building Groups 2) Infill site 3) New houses in the countryside on defined categories of sites as set out in section 3 of the Supplementary Guidance 4) Renovation or replacement of houses 5) Conversion or replacement of redundant non-domestic buildings 6) Development on rural brownfield land The proposal does not meet any the criteria for categories 2-6 of the SG, however the proposed site is considered to be within a building group and therefore the criteria within category 1 requires to be considered. Category 1 states that development will be granted for houses within building groups provided it can be demonstrated that: - New housing will respect the character, scale and form of the existing group and will be integrated into the existing layout and building pattern. - New housing will not detract from the visual amenity of the group when viewed from the wider landscape. - A high standard of residential amenity will be provided for both existing and new housing. In this instance the proposed position of the dwelling is considered to be located within the existing building group, being adjacent to two existing dwellings and the indicative layout which has been provided demonstrates that there is scope for the dwelling to relate successfully to the character, layout and building pattern of the group provided it is appropriately sited and appropriate landscaping is provided as per the submitted drawings. However, the proposed access into the site runs along the edge and outwith of the grouping as it is not possible to access the site from the current access which serves the wider grouping. The introduction of a new access extending approximately 70 metres along the edge and outwith the well nucleated building group fails to respect the existing layout and building pattern of the group. The placemaking policies of the LDP2 state that accesses should reinforce the streetscene and open space. The proposed access fails to do so. As mentioned elsewhere and within pre application comments the grouping is considered to be
Page 11
very well nucleated and is served by an existing access which contributes to the character and building pattern of the grouping. The introduction of a new access of this length is considered to completely alter the established character of the grouping and fails to relate to the building pattern of the grouping contrary to the criteria outlined within Category 1 of the Housing in the Countryside SG. The proposed access arrangements are also considered to be contrary to Placemaking Policy 1A and 1B(d) of the LDP2 and Policy 14(b) of NPF4 which requires accesses to reinforce the existing street scene and development overall to contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment. If there was scope for an alternative access which utilises the existing access arrangement within the group the proposal may be looked upon more favourably, but based upon the existing access arrangement the proposal is considered to be contrary to policy. Design 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. Furthermore, the siting criteria outlined within the Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance is also relevant. 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. The proposal seeks to form a new access which will result in Kanrosmar and Mullmac being sandwiched between two accesses which is not considered to be appropriate in terms of residential amenity. Furthermore the new access fails to respect the existing building pattern and built form of the grouping. The other properties within the small hamlet are accessed using an existing access arrangement including an access track which is located between Mullmac/Kanrosmar to the north and a row of terraced cottages to the south. This access continues to the west to serve the remaining properties within the hamlet. The application site is not proposed to be served by this existing access arrangement and instead a new convoluted access is proposed along the edge and outwith the building group. As outlined above this is considered to be contrary to the siting criteria outlined in the Housing in the Countryside SG and placemaking and design/layout policies of the LDP2 and NPF4. Residential Amenity The site is of sufficient scale and there is an opportunity to position any dwelling in a location which ensures that the neighbouring properties are not overlooked. Furthermore, boundary planting to provide some screening and containment for the site could be secured by condition at detailed stage should any permission be granted. As this application is only in principle there is no opportunity to assess this in detail, at this stage, however this can be assessed when a detailed application is received should any permission be granted. It is noted that the site is elevated above the site to the south and this would mean that the orientation and scale of the dwelling would require to be carefully considered to ensure it does not impact on the amenity of the neighbour. It is considered that there is scope to do so but this would be considered through any detailed application. Window position and boundary
Page 12
treatments would require to be carefully considered and would require to be orientated to the north west and north east to avoid overlooking neighbours. Furthermore, the scale and height of the dwelling would require to be limited to ensure it does not result in overshadowing to the neighbours. The orientation of the house and height, together with the window positions will be an important consideration in the detailed application. Overall, this issue can be addressed at the detailed application stage should the application be supported. Whilst the house location is considered to be potentially supportable, the position of the new access would result in Kanrosmar and Mullmac being sandwiched between two access to the front and rear which is considered to detrimentally impact on their residential amenity. The proposed layout would result in vehicular traffic passing to the front and rear of these properties, resulting in potential noise and light pollution from moving vehicles. The proposed access is therefore considered to be contrary to the relevant policies of the LDP2 and NPF4 where they relate to respecting residential amenity. Roads and Traffic The site is capable of being safely accessed from the public road and the detailed development will be subject to a further detailed application which will require to comply with the LDP2 and National Roads Development Guide in terms of parking provision, turning facilities, road safety and access. Transportation and Development have been consulted on the application and offered no objections. However, the access arrangements are considered to be unacceptable given the residential amenity and building pattern/character concerns as outlined elsewhere in this report. It is noted that part of the access may be used for agricultural operations currently. If this is the case an agreement would require to be reached between the farm and developer regarding this issue. This is considered to be a private civil matter and not material to the assessment of this application. Drainage The application form indicates that the site is to connect to be served by 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 LD2 and Policy 22 of NPF4. The proposal for a sustainable urban drainage system is considered to be sufficient to cater for surface water drainage at the site. The specific location of the drainage system will require to be indicated in the detailed application and its location relative to neighbours. The letters of representation indicate that there may be capacity constraints with the existing village septic tank. This could potentially be resolved through provision of a new private system serving the dwelling and could be considered further should a detailed application be submitted. Flood Risk The site is not considered to be at risk from flooding.
Page 13
Developer Contributions As this application is only in principle it is not possible to determine whether the local school is at capacity. However, to cover this aspect a condition is recommended to ensure the Council's Developer Contributions Policy and Supplementary Guidance is adhered to should any detailed application be forthcoming. Ecology The existing trees may be habitat to protected species and therefore Policy 41 of LDP2 applies which requires the protection of all wildlife and wildlife habitats and ecological assessments to be undertaken to understand the extent of impact. Policy 3(a) Bio Diversity of NPF4 seeks to protect but also enhance bio diversity on a site. Policy 40 of the LDP2 is also applicable which requires tree surveys to be prepared. An ecological survey could be secured by condition should any planning permission be granted. Trees The Council will apply the principles of the Scottish Government Policy on Control of Woodland Removal and there will be a presumption in favour of protecting woodland resources. Where the loss of woodland is unavoidable, mitigation measures in the form of compensatory planting will be required. This is outlined within Policy 40B of the LDP2 and NPF4 Policy 6(a). The proposal does not indicate any intention to fell trees and mentions that the trees on the north west boundary would be retained. Should any planning permission be granted this should be subject to a condition which ensures the retention of these trees. A further condition could also limit the build footprint of the house to ensure it is remote from the trees, which would therefore ensure that no tree survey would be necessary. Construction Noise Whilst it is appreciated that there would be disturbance associated with construction operations this would be for a temporary period and is not considered to have any significant weighting in this determination. Prime Agricultural Land The site is identified as level 3.1 in terms of the soils classification for agriculture: "Land capable of producing consistently high yields of a narrow range of crops or moderate yields of a wider range of crops". The area of land which would be lost is considered to be limited and would not occupy a significant level of the existing agricultural fields. The proposal is therefore not considered to have a significant impact on the availability of agricultural land in the area and therefore meets the requirements of Policy 5 of NPF4. Maintenance of Private Access The letters of representation raise concerns about the condition of the private access, the presence of potholes and the possibility of additional traffic exacerbating the poor condition.
Page 14
There are a number pot holes and Transportation and Development have offered no objections to its use to serve the site. No upgrade is recommended to serve a single dwelling. There will however, be responsibility for any future owner of the site to contribute towards maintenance of the track. This matter is a private civil issue which will require to be agreed between users of the track. The maintenance of the track during construction periods will also be a private matter between the parties involved and not something which planning legislation can dictate. 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. 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) as whilst the proposed indicative position of the house is within the existing building group, the proposed convoluted new access into the site is located outwith the building group and fails to respect the character and building pattern of the existing well nucleated grouping as required by Category 1 of the SG. The proposal also fails to meet any of the other categories of development outlined in the SG. 2 The proposal is 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. 3 The proposed new access into the site would result in Mullmac and Kanrosmar being sandwiched between two accesses to the detriment of the
Page 15
residential amenity of these properties. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 1A of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 (LDP2) and Policy 14(c) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as the proposal fails to respect the residential amenity of the area. 4 The proposal is contrary to Policy 1A and 1B(d) of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) and Policy 14(b) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as the proposed new access fails to contribute positively to the surrounding built and natural environment and fails to reinforce the existing streetscene and building pattern of the grouping. 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 06 07 08 09 10 11
Page 16
No embedded text on this page.
Page 17
No embedded text on this page.
Page 18
No embedded text on this page.
Page 19
No embedded text on this page.
Page 20
No embedded text on this page.
Page 21
No embedded text on this page.
Page 22
No embedded text on this page.
Page 23
No embedded text on this page.
Page 24
No embedded text on this page.