(b) Planning Decision Notice, Report of Handling and Reference Documents (Pages 127-146)
Perth and Kinross Council · 15 January 2024
Back to Local Review Body — 15 January 2024 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(ii)(b) LRB-2023-45 LRB-2023-45 23/00921/FLL – Alterations to boundary wall to form vehicular access, formation of driveway, car parking and paths at Lower Flat, Rose Cottage, Isla Road, Perth, PH2 7HG PLANNING DECISION NOTICE REPORT OF HANDLING REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (part included in applicant’s submission, pages 65-126)
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 23/00921/FLL Ward No P12- Perth City Centre Due Determination Date 11th August 2023 Draft Report Date 4th August 2023 Report Issued by AR Date 4.8.23 PROPOSAL: Alterations to boundary wall to form vehicular access, formation of driveway, car parking and paths LOCATION: Lower Flat Rose Cottage Isla Road Perth PH2 7HG 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 Rose Cottage is a traditional two-storey detached building split into two flatted residences. The building is a category C listed building (HES ref. LB39483) and can be accessed, via pedestrian access, from Isla Road (A93). The application seeks detailed planning permission for the formation of a vehicular access, driveway, parking area and paths within the property’s front curtilage and connecting to the adjoining A93. An associated application for listed building consent (ref. 23/00922/LBC) has also been submitted and will be considered separately. SITE HISTORY No planning history. PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION Pre application Reference: none. 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 7: Historic Assets and Places Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place Policy 16: Quality Homes Policy 18: Infrastructure First 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 17: Residential Areas Policy 27A: Listed Buildings Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development Proposals Statutory Supplementary Guidance 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 75 Planning for Transport PAN 77 Designing Safer Places
Page 7
Designing Streets 2010 Designing Streets is the policy statement in Scotland for street design and changes the emphasis of guidance on street design towards place-making and away from a system focused upon the dominance of motor vehicles. It was created to support the Scottish Government’s place-making agenda, alongside Creating 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 (1st consultation) Further details of the pedestrian and vehicle visibility splay required. Re-consultation required. Transportation And Development (2nd consultation) Updated response. Not in support of application due to lack of [pedestrian and vehicular visibility splay] information being provided. Conservation Team Internal discussion. No impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings. Structures And Flooding No concerns or objections. Biodiversity/Tree Officer No objection subject to condition if minded to approve. REPRESENTATIONS No representations were received. Additional Statements Received: Screening Opinion Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not applicable Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations AA Not Required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Not Required Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Not Required
Page 8
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. In this instance, section 14(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 places a duty on planning authorities in determining such an application as this to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. 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. Policy Appraisal Alterations and improvements to existing dwellings, are generally considered to be acceptable in principle. Nevertheless, consideration must be given to the scale, form, massing, design, position, proportions and external finishes of the proposed development, within the context of the application site, and whether it would have an adverse impact upon visual, residential or environmental amenity. In this instance the proposals are considered inappropriate and cannot be approved due to the lack of requisite information and resulting concerns with the proposal’s detrimental effect on public safety on exiting from the proposed vehicular access. Design and Layout The application seeks to introduce the formation of a two-vehicle parking area with turning head, driveway, access ramp, vehicular access and gate, all within and to the flatted building’s front curtilage. A portion of the property’s listed boundary wall would be altered and perforated to include two gatepiers either side of the vehicular entrance and a 2.5 metres wide vehicular gate opening. Dropped kerbs would also be sought. Relating to the design, layout and finish of the proposed parking area, turning head and access ramp, finished with block paving to a recessive colour and texture finish and edging, there are no concerns however details of the specification and colour of the proposed external finishing materials for the gatepiers has not been provided in full. More crucially, the creation of the vehicular access presents pedestrian and vehicular safety concerns which will be discussed within the ‘Roads and Access’ section of this report. The proposal does not comply with NPF4 Policy 14 (a), (b – connected) and (c) and Policy 16 (g)(i) relating to lack of full detail for gatepier finishes; LDP2 Policy 1A and 1B (a), (c) and (e); and as informed by Placemaking Supplementary Guidance and Designing Streets.
Page 9
Residential and Visual Amenity The proposal would present no residential amenity concerns in terms of overshadowing or overlooking and privacy impact given the nature of development. Equally, the development would not present any visual amenity concerns. The proposal complies with NPF4 Policy 16 (g)(ii) and LDP2 Policy 17. Roads, Access and Safety On initial consultation with Transportation & Development (T&D) colleagues, it was highlighted that the agent had not provided or shown visibility splays for the vehicle access. It was requested that a pedestrian splay to the left and right of the vehicle access was to be shown. It was later confirmed that a vehicular visibility splay would also be required. Further to the visibility splay requests, T&D noted that although unclear whether the number of car parking spaces meets the requirements of the National Roads Development Guide for the size of the flat, new spaces have been formed [nevertheless when compared to no spaces currently being on site]. Also, in the interests of safeguarding the historic environment, T&D were willing, in this instance, to allow a 2.5 metre wide vehicular access which falls short of the relevant minimum standard (2.75 metres). Ultimately, further details were required to be in a position to support the application. On discussing the case with the agent, the case was argued where “the provision of the pedestrian visibility splay depicted on PKC Type A and B Access is desirable from a transport planning perspective however, the inclusion of the pedestrian visibility splays is caveated ‘where appropriate’”. The agent further noted “pedestrians navigating the Isla Road and Dundee Road are already used to this type of configuration within the streetscape.” A vehicular access precedent justification document was provided (plan 10). This document (plan 10) has been taken into full consideration however, in the interests of public safety and road safety, the application has been assessed on its own merits and individual site specifics. The proposed vehicular access would be flanked by a tall boundary wall and with minimal perforation of said wall, limited and obstructed peripheral visibility would result; entry and exit to the site is from a busy A-class public road; the vehicular access would be in close proximity to an operational bus stop; and presence of pedestrian activity inclusive of those alighting from public transport, all present factors that present concern where we must ensure that the safety of road and pedestrian users are addressed. One key note within Designing Streets is that streets should be designed to be safe places. It goes on to mention that the absence of wide visibility splays at private driveways will encourage drivers to emerge more cautiously. Consideration should be given to whether this will be appropriate, taking into account the following: the frequency of vehicle movements; the amount of pedestrian activity; and the width of the footway. As informed by Designing Streets, it is considered that the visibility obstruction of the tall boundary walls would obscure a whole vehicle and pedestrian and can be
Page 10
considered to have a significant impact on road safety, especially if vehicle users do not emerge cautiously. As contained within National Roads Development Guide section 3.1, where any new development gains access to the existing road network, the junction would need to meet specific stopping sight distance and visibility requirements. This information is detailed within Designing Streets where, specific to this case, the stopping sight distance for the A93 (30mph) is 40 metres and 43 metres when adjusted for bonnet length. To meet visibility requirements, it must be ensured that views are not obstructed by vertical obstructions of more than 1.05 metres, to the left and right of the visibility splay. Furthermore, as per Perth & Kinross Council Vehicular Access Guide Type A Junction detail is relevant in understanding pedestrian visibility splay requirements – 2.4m x 2.4m in this case. No visibility splay information was submitted by the agent. A quick assessment on the estimated pedestrian and vehicle visibility splay was carried out internally (see below) and the splay(s) would appear to be obstructed by structures more than 1.05 metres in height resulting in an inappropriate vehicular access design and layout. It cannot be dismissed that a detrimental impact to vehicle and pedestrian safety upon vehicle emergence from the proposed access point, could happen. On re-consultation with Transportation & Development (T&D), an update was provided to confirm that full assessment of the vehicle access could not be carried out as further information was not submitted. As such, Transportation & Development could not offer support to the proposal. The proposal does not comply with NPF4 Policy 14 (a), (b - connected) and (c) and Policy 18 (b); LDP2 Policy 60B (a); and as informed by the National Roads Development Guide and Designing Streets.
Page 11
Drainage and Flooding There are no drainage or flooding implications associated with this proposed development. Conservation Considerations It is a welcome approach that the proposed downtaking works represent a minimum amount of historic fabric loss sought in creating a vehicular access. Further to that, on consultation with Conservation Team colleagues, there are no concerns that the proposal in its entirety would impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings, including to the host listed building. The proposal complies with NPF4 Policy 7 (c) and LDP2 Policy 27A. Natural Heritage and Biodiversity As noted on the proposed site plan (plan 06), it is proposed to remove three trees (T4, T6 and T7). On consultation with the Biodiversity Officer, the proposal raises no concerns subject to conditions being applied when minded for approval. 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. Conditions and Reasons 1. Approval would be contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 14 (a) where the proposal is designed in such a way that does not improve the quality of the area, and (b) lacks connected designing for pedestrian experience relating to safety and inappropriate connectivity to the public road network inconsistent with the 'connected' quality of a successful place, and (c); Policy 16 criteria (g)(i) where the proposal lacks full clarity on gatepier material finishes; and Policy 18 (b) where there would be a resultant detrimental impact onto the infrastructure network; and as informed by Placemaking Supplementary Guidance, the National Roads Development Guide and Designing Streets.
Page 12
2. Approval would be contrary to the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 Policy 1A and 1B with particular note to criteria (a), (c) and (e) where the proposal would result in road user and pedestrian safety issues at its access point and full clarity of gatepier material finishes have not been provided; and Policy 60B where the proposal has not been designed for the safety of all potential users; and as informed by the National Roads Development Guide and Designing Streets. 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 1 There are no relevant informatives. Procedural Notes Not Applicable. PLANS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THIS DECISION 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
Page 13
No embedded text on this page.
Page 14
No embedded text on this page.
Page 15
No embedded text on this page.
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.