Item 4(vii) LRB-2022-33

Perth and Kinross Council · 20 September 2022
Back to Local Review Body — 20 September 2022 and its agenda

Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.

Original council PDF · Download plain text

Page 1

4(vii)
LRB-2022-33
LRB-2022-33
22/00532/FLL – Erection of a dwellinghouse, land 25
metres north east of No. 2 Laggan Road, Crieff
INDEX
(a) Papers submitted by the Applicant (Pages 667-702)
(b) Decision Notice (Pages 679-680)
Report of Handling (Pages 693-700)
Reference Documents (Pages 681-692 and 701)
(c) Representations (Pages 707-724)
665

Page 2

Page 3

4(vii)(a)
LRB-2022-33
LRB-2022-33
22/00532/FLL – Erection of a dwellinghouse, land 25
metres north east of No. 2 Laggan Road, Crieff
PAPERS SUBMITTED
BY THE
APPLICANT
667

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Page 8

Page 9

Statement
Notice of Review 
Erection of a dwellinghouse Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank, Laggan
Road, Crieff.
22/00532/FLL 
Introduction 
This Notice of Review is submitted following the refusal of planning permission under
delegated powers on the 25 May 2022 for the erection of a dwellinghouse on land
25m north east of 2 Laggan Road Crieff. (Doc 1)
The reasons for refusal are outlined below relating to impact on the character and
quality of the area and car parking:- 
1. The proposal has not demonstrated that the development of a dwelling can
contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment
taking account of design, density, siting, height, massing, materials, finishes and
colours. The dwelling has the appearance of being squeezed into the garden ground
of Oakbank, 2 Laggan Road and fails to respect the character and amenity of place
accordingly the proposal is contrary to Placemaking Policy 1A and Policy 1B of the
Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 
2. The proposal is contrary to Policy 17: Residential Areas of the Perth and Kinross
Local Development Plan 2 (2019) which seeks to ensure that development is
compatible with the amenity and character of the area. It has not been demonstrated
that a dwellinghouse can be accommodated on the site while respecting its environs
or improve the character and environment of the area. 
3. The proposal is contrary to Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility
Requirements: New Development Proposals of the Perth and Kinross Local
Development Plan 2 (2019) as the site layout has not demonstrated that two car
parking spaces can be provided within the site which would also enable cars to
manoeuvre and turn within the site to enable them to enter and leave the site in a
forward gear.  
In this Review it will be demonstrated that:- 
• A dwelling house can be accommodated on the site without having a
detrimental impact on the character or amenity of the area
• There is adequate parking and turning facilities within the site in accordance
with roads standards.
673

Page 10

The submitted Design Statement is an important material consideration and provides
support for the Review proposal countering the conclusions reached in the
Delegated Report. (Doc 2) 
Background
The Review proposal is for residential development within the garden ground of
‘Oakbank’ which is a relatively modern-styled late1970s large dwellinghouse with
extensive garden ground on the corner of Turretbank Road and Laggan Road.
Planning consent was granted for 2 dwellinghouses within the front garden ground of
Oakbank on 19 Jan 2021 under application 20/01679/FLL. The footprint of these
dwellinghouses is indicated on the Review proposal site plan (Doc 4)
It is agreed that the principle of development is acceptable here as the Review site is 
within the Crieff settlement boundary. In detail, the acceptability of any proposal will
depend on whether the design and layout of the dwellinghouse will have an adverse
impact on the character of the host dwelling or the neighbouring residential area.   
Current Planning Policy Context 
The Development Plan for the area comprises the TAYplan Strategic Development
Plan 2016-2036 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 
TAYplan Strategic Development Plan 2016 – 2036 - Approved October 2017 
Whilst there are no specific policies or strategies directly relevant to this proposal the
overall vision of the TAYplan should be noted.  The vision states “By 2036 the
TAYplan area will be sustainable, more attractive, competitive and vibrant without
creating an unacceptable burden on our planet. The quality of life will make it a place
of first choice where more people choose to live, work, study and visit, and where
businesses choose to invest and create jobs.” 
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  
674

Page 11

Policy 1B: Placemaking   
Policy 5: Infrastructure Contributions   
Policy 6: Settlement Boundaries   
Policy 17: Residential Areas   
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 
OTHER POLICIES
Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance 
Placemaking Supplementary Guidance 
Developer Contributions Supplementary Guidance 
Reason for Refusal and Grounds of the Review 
The reasons for the review and matters to be taken into account in the determination
of the review refer to the reasons for refusal, which state that the proposal is contrary
to the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 Placemaking Policy 1A and
Policy 1B of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) where the
dwelling has the appearance of being squeezed into the garden ground of Oakbank,  
contrary to Policy 17: Residential Areas which seeks to ensure that development is
compatible with the amenity and character of the area. It has not been demonstrated
that a dwellinghouse can be accommodated on the site while respecting its environs
or improve the character and environment of the area. 
The proposal is contrary to Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility
Requirements: New Development Proposals as the site layout has not demonstrated
that two car parking spaces can be provided within the site which would also enable
cars to manoeuvre and turn within the site to enable them to enter and leave the site
in a forward gear.
The above issues will be considered below in the applicant’s statement and
argument against the reasons for refusal in support of the Review. 
675

Page 12

Impact on the Character and Amenity of the area 
In the Delegated Report (Doc 3) it was stated that:-
The erection of a dwellinghouse in the northeast curtilage which sits in front of the
Oakbank building line which faces Turretbank Road still has the impression of being
squeezed into the side garden ground especially when viewed from the south.
The Review site area is 620 sq m, which is a reasonably sized house plot where a
minimum plot size is around 400 sq m. As outlined in the Design Statement (Doc 4)
the plot ratio of the Review proposal is 22% and this falls within the density pattern of
the surrounding housing, which ranges in plot ratio from 16 – 24%. It is apparent
therefore, that despite the Planning Officer’s impression of the site geometry as
being squeezed in, that in reality the Review site is a reasonably sized residential
plot and the plot ratio allows for suitable private amenity space, privacy distances, no
overlooking or overshadowing and adequate space for on-site parking and turning
facilities, which is in accordance with accepted site planning guidance.
In terms of site planning, the Review proposal has been designed to address
Turretbank Road, similar to the existing dwellings to the north. As stated in the
Design Statement:-
The house has been positioned to address Turretbank Road and follow the line and
layout of the houses further north on this street and has also been developed to
minimise the impact on the existing house to the south east which has the main
living accommodation facing west and south therefore not being impacted on by this
proposed development.
In terms of the proposed house design the site context has been considered and the
Design Statement explains that:-
There is no one definitive or unifying architectural style to the surrounding area.
Instead, there is a mixture of sizes and styles which reflect the period in which the
houses were built.
The design is single storey in scale and has been developed to create a new
contemporary, open plan, family home, designed for modern living. The aesthetic of
the house design is traditional in proportions and detailing with a pitched roof central
feature and smaller wings to the east and west, also with pitched roofs. Proposed
materials of render and timber style cladding to the walls and a slate effect roof tile
which complements the houses under construction to the south of the proposed site.
Overlooking and privacy has again been taken into consideration in the development
of the floor plans with minimal windows proposed on the north and south elevations
with these only serving bathrooms and a utility room.
Contrary to the first reason for refusal, the Review proposal has taken account of
design, density, siting, height, massing, materials, finishes and colours in
accordance with Placemaking Policy 1A and Policy 1B of the adopted local plan.
676

Page 13

The proposed design will not be detrimental to the quality of the surrounding built
environment and will improve the street scene on this part of Turretbank Road and
complement sympathetically the existing housing, being compatible with the amenity
and character of the area in accordance with Policy 17: Residential Areas.
The existing dwelling, Oakbank backs onto Turretbank Road and the back boundary
onto this road is characterised by a long stretch of relatively high timber boarded
fencing. The Review proposal will remove about 30m of this fencing and create
frontage to Turretbank Road, which will arguably improve the visual appearance and
character of this part of the street scene by providing frontage rather than the current
aspect, which is backland in character and weaker aesthetically. This is generally in
accordance with Policy 17 which seeks to improve the character and environment of
the area.
There will be no adverse impact on the character or appearance of the existing
dwellinghouse as a result of the proposal. The garden ground to the front and west 
has already been developed with 2 dwellings. Boundary treatment and planting will
protect existing amenity and there will be no privacy or overlooking issues arising.
There will be a substantial amount of amenity ground remaining for Oakbank and the
Review proposal along with the previous consents, will not have a significantly
detrimental impact on the private amenity of the existing dwelling. 
On site parking and turning facilities
With regard to the third reason for refusal this was surprising as there were no
objections raised in the application’s consultation response from Transport Planning
subject to a standard condition (Doc 5).  Furthermore, onsite parking and turning
facilities were clearly indicated on the proposed site plan (Doc 4) with no issues in
this regard.
It is concluded therefore that, contrary to the reason for refusal, it has been
demonstrated that two car parking spaces can be provided within the site which
would also enable cars to manoeuvre and turn within the site to enable them to enter
and leave the site in a forward gear in accordance with Policy 60B: Transport
Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development Proposals. 
Conclusions
It is apparent that the crux of the refusal in this case is based on an impression from
the Planning Officer that the Review proposal is being squeezed in to the corner of
the garden ground of Oakbank. It may look like this in plan form, however in reality
the Review site is an adequately-sized housing plot where the architect has
endeavoured to relate the proposal to existing housing on Turretbank Road by
addressing the street and not the host dwellinghouse which has an aspect to the
west. 
677

Page 14

The Review proposal will improve the street scene by creating frontage and
removing existing high boarded fencing which backs onto Turretbank Road.
The plot density is similar to the wider area and the proposed design is not at odds
with existing housing character or appearance. There will be no adverse impact on
the character or appearance of Oakbank for the reasons cited above and this house
will still be left with a substantial amount of amenity ground around it.
The Review proposal has satisfactory on-site parking and turning facilities and there
have been no objections from Transport Planning.
There have been no objections to the proposal from the main consultees.
For the reasons outlined above it is considered that the Review proposal for a single
dwellinghouse is acceptable and in accordance with the Development Plan and it is
respectfully requested that the Review is upheld.   
678

Page 15

Page 1 of 3
Oakbank Crieff Ltd
c/o Denholm Partnership Architects
11 Dunira
Street
Comrie
PH6 2LJ
Pullar House
35 Kinnoull Street
PERTH  
PH1  5GD
Date of Notice:25th May 2022
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 
Application Reference: 22/00532/FLL
I am directed by the Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland)
Acts currently in force, to refuse your application registered on 30th March 2022 for Planning
Permission for Erection of a dwellinghouse Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank
Laggan Road Crieff  
David Littlejohn
Head of Planning and Development
Reasons for Refusal
1.   The proposal has not demonstrated that the development of a dwelling can contribute
positively to the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment taking account
of design, density, siting, height, massing, materials, finishes and colours. The dwelling
has the appearance of being squeezed into the garden ground of Oakbanlk, 2 Laggan
Road and fails to respect the character and amenity of place accordingly the proposal
is contrary to Placemaking Policy 1A and Policy 1B of the Perth and Kinross Local
Development Plan 2 (2019).
2.   The proposal is contrary to Policy 17: Residential Areas of the Perth and Kinross Local
Development Plan 2 (2109) which seeks to ensure that development is compatible with
the amenity and character of the area. It has not been demonstrated that a
dwellinghouse can be accommodated on the site while respecting its environs or
improve the character and environment of the area.
3.  The proposal is contrary to Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility
Requirements: New Development Proposals of the Perth and Kinross Local
Development Plan 2 (2109) as the site layout has not demonstrated that two car
parking spaces can be provided within the site which would also enable cars to
manoeuvre and turn within the site to enable them to enter and leave the site in a
forward gear.
679

Page 16

2
Justification
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 relating to this decision are listed below and are
displayed on Perth and Kinross Council’s website at www.pkc.gov.uk “Online
Planning Applications” page
Plan Reference
01
02
03
04
680

Page 17

DESIGN STATEMENT
Proposed House
Plot 3, Oakbank
Crieff 
681

Page 18

CONTENTS 
1.0  SITE 
2.0 PLANNING  HISTORY 
3.0  DESIGN PRINCIPLES, SOLUTIONS & 
PLANNING POLICY 
682

Page 19

1.0  SITE
1.1 Location
The application site is located in Oakbank, West Crieff 
Proposed Site 
Proposed site
683

Page 20

1.2 Site & Surroundings 
Aerial map of proposed site 
684

Page 21

Aerial view/surrounding plot ratio & pattern of development 
north
685

Page 22

1.3 Surrounding Architectural Character
Given the pattern of development noted above there is no one definitive or unifying
architectural style to the surrounding area. Instead, there is a mixture of sizes and styles
which reflect the period in which the houses were built. 
View looking into site from Turretbank Road 
View of housing to the north of the site on Turretbank Road
686

Page 23

View from Turretbank Road - existing house to South East of proposed house
As illustrated by the examples above there is a mix of traditional pitched and more
contemporary mono pitch roofs. In terms of materials the predominant external finish
is render with small elements of timber style cladding. The majority of the adjacent
houses on Turretbank road are two storey and there are also some single storey
houses, in particular the existing house to the south west. 
1.4 Pattern of Development
Plot ratio of houses to the north in Turretbank Road are a good example of the existing
pattern of development and the proposed new house site has been developed and
designed to complement and fit in with this established pattern. 
The approximate plot ratio of the houses is Turretbank Road varies from 16-24%. The
proposed new house plot ration is 22% and is well within the range of the existing
surrounding setting. 
687

Page 24

2.0 PLANNING HISTORY
2.1 Planning History 
20/00709/FLL
Detailed planning permission was sought for 4 no. new dwellnghouses. During the
process of the planning application and with feedback from the planning officer, it was
decided to withdraw this application due to concerns over the scale of the proposed
development. 
20/01679/FLL
Following the withdrawal of the application noted above (4 no. houses), the proposals
were re-considered and an application for 2 no. houses was developed, and a detailed
planning permission was approved in January 2021. These houses are currently under
construction. 
2.2 Planning Feedback for Plot 3 
Preliminary discussions were held with the planning officer to establish the likelihood
of a successful planning consent for an additional house in the north east corner of
the original site. Feedback was as follows – 
- Wider context of the site to be considered to ensure not too “cramped”. 
- Pattern of development to be looked at and proposals developed to suit this.
- Additional information would be required in support of a detailed planning
application i.e. a design statement to analyse the site, surroundings and context
of the proposals.
- Proposals for surface water (SUDS) would be required for a detailed application. 
It was suggested that if any further feedback was required then a pre application
enquiry be submitted for the proposals to allow this to be appropriately considered. 
688

Page 25

3.0 DESIGN PRINCIPLES, SOLUTIONS &
PLANNING POLICY
3.1 Design Principles
The design is single storey in scale and has been developed to create a new contemporary,
open plan, family home, designed for modern living. The aesthetic of the house design is
traditional in proportions and detailing with a pitched roof central feature and smaller wings
to the east and west, also with pitched roofs. Proposed materials of render and timber style
cladding to the walls and a slate effect roof tile which complements the houses under
construction to the south of the proposed site.
Overlooking and privacy has again been taken into consideration in the development of the
floor plans with minimal windows proposed on the north and south elevations with these
only serving bathrooms and a utility room.
The house has been positioned to address Turretbank Road and follow the line and layout
of the houses further north on this street and has also been developed to minimise the impact
on the existing house to the south east which has the main living accommodation facing
west and south therefore not being impacted on by this proposed development. Refer to
section 3.4 for further detail.
3.2 Boundaries, Landscaping & Access
The existing timber fence boundary to the north of the site is to remain as is. The new
boundary to the west and south are proposed to have a fence and Viburnum hedge with
surrounding planting. The boundary to the east will be planted with an opening formed for
vehicle access.
Previous correspondence has been carried out with Niall Moran, Perth & Kinross Roads
Department regarding the possibility of a new access being formed onto Turretbank Road.
Extract of e mail response as follows –
“I had a quick look on good streetview and I can’t see too many issues with either location
– both are within residential streets with footways so I would imagine suitable visibility would
be achievable.”
Garden Planting
Existing on Plot
Large Conifer
Eucryphia Nymansensis
Camelia Donation
Cotinus
Approximate 1 metre high borders as indicated on plan. Consisting of a mix of evergreen
and deciduous plants/shrubs suitable for a small garden. These will be planted to provide
privacy, colour and interest all year round. Plants selected at the time of planting subject to
availability and seasonal interest e.g.
689

Page 26

Rhododendrons small/medium size
Azaleas    Potentila
Viburnum   Buddleia
Gamelia   Roses
Pieris    Peone
Hebe    Hydrangea
Photinia   Forsythia
Choicya   Prunus
Drymus    Philadelphus
Escallonia   Chaenomeles
Osmanthus   Clematis
Ceanothus   Pyracantha
Skimmia   Hel
Pernettya   Privet
Kalmia    Ribes
Abelia    Deutzia
Cistus    Fuchsia
Lavatera   Berberis
Exochorda 
Trees
Positioned to give height and scuplture to the garden, privacy and frame the house.
A selection of small trees suitable for a small garden e.g.
Sorbus/Rowan   Amelanchier
Cornus    Cytisus Battandieri
Ornamental Acer  Pyrus Salicifolia
Ornamental Betula/Birch Weeping Cotoneaster
Magnolia   Holly 
Ornamental Yew - Taxus Baccata Dovastonii
Eucryphia 
Ground Cover - low growing for front of borders under 30cm high.
Available at time of planting along with mix of bulbs, Polyanthus, Pulmonaria, Scabious,
Geum, border Geraniums, Heathers, Lavender etc. 
3.3 Drainage
Detailed drainage proposals have been developed for both surface water and foul water
drainage in tandem with the development of the two houses currently under construction.
The proposed surface water drainage has been indicated on the drawings accompanying
this planning application. 
690

Page 27

3.4 Relationship with neighbouring existing house
The accommodation in the existing neighbouring house to the south of the application site
consists of kitchen/dining and living spaces. The window and door positions have been
indicated on the plan. Reference is also to be made to the photograph of the relevant north
elevation of the existing house. 
The windows/openings of the main living and bedroom spaces are orientated to the east
and west in order to prevent any intrusion on the neighbouring house. There is also a strong
landscape and boundary treatment proposed on the boundary between the proposed and
existing house. 
We believe that this demonstrates that there is no negative impact on the existing house in
terms of direct overlooking and privacy. 
691

Page 28

3.5 Planning Policy
The scale and design of the proposed dwellinghouse has been considered carefully and will
respect the character and amenity of the surrounding housing around Turretbank Road. The
design has traditional and more contemporary elements and good quality external materials
which will contribute positively to the surrounding built environment, in accordance with
Policy 1A Placemaking of the adopted Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan (PKLDP)
2019.
The plot density at 22% is in accordance with the surrounding dwellinghouses where plot
ratios fall between 16% and 24% and the proposal fits in with the existing pattern of
development, in accordance with Policy 1A of PKLDP 2019
The distances to neighbouring boundaries are in accordance with the accepted “rule of
thumb” guidelines and there will be no overlooking or overshadowing of neighbouring
properties. The residential amenity of both existing dwellinghouses and the proposed
dwellinghouse will be protected. The existing building line has been respected and the
vehicular access onto Turretbank Road is satisfactory in terms of road safety, in line with the
Council’s Road Design Guidelines and in accordance with Policy 1B and Policy 60B of PKLDP
2019.
It is considered in summary that the proposed dwellinghouse is acceptable in terms of scale,
design, siting and road safety and not have any detrimental impact on the character or
appearance of the existing area, in accordance with the adopted local plan. 
692

Page 29

1 
Doc 3
REPORT OF HANDLING 
DELEGATED REPORT 
Ref No 22/00532/FLL
Ward No P6- Strathearn
Due Determination Date 29th May 2022 
Draft Report Date 24th May 2022
Report Issued by JHR Date 24.05.2022 
PROPOSAL:  Erection of a dwellinghouse    
LOCATION:  Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank Laggan
Road Crieff  
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. 
SITE VISIT: 
In line with established practices, the need to visit the application site has been
carefully considered by the case officer.  The application site and its context have been
viewed by a variety of remote and electronic means, such as aerial imagery and
Streetview, in addition to photographs submitted by interested parties. 
This information has meant that, in this case, it is possible and appropriate to
determine this application without a physical visit as it provides an acceptable basis
on which to consider the potential impacts of this proposed development. 
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 
This application is for the erection of one single storey dwelling house within the
garden grounds of Oakbak, Laggan Road, Crieff. 
An earlier application for four dwelling houses within the curtilage of Oakbak, was
considered to constitute overdevelopment of the site and that application was
withdrawn. 
A further application 20/01679/FLL was submitted and approved. Plot 1 fronts
Horseshoe Drive while Plot 2 fronts Laggan Road and the agent has confirmed in
their drawings that these are now under construction. 
693

Page 30

2 
SITE HISTORY 
20/00709/FLL Erection of 4 dwellinghouses and a garage 6 October 2020
Application Withdrawn 
20/01679/FLL Erection of 2 dwellinghouses 19 January 2021 Application Approved 
PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION 
Pre application Reference: Discussions following earlier withdrawal. Concerns raised
with developing the corner site. 
NATIONAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 
The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through The National
Planning Framework, the Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), Planning Advice Notes
(PAN), Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and
a series of Circulars.   
DEVELOPMENT PLAN 
The Development Plan for the area comprises the TAYplan Strategic Development
Plan 2016-2036 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 
TAYplan Strategic Development Plan 2016 – 2036 - Approved October 2017 
Whilst there are no specific policies or strategies directly relevant to this proposal the
overall vision of the TAYplan should be noted.  The vision states “By 2036 the
TAYplan area will be sustainable, more attractive, competitive and vibrant without
creating an unacceptable burden on our planet. The quality of life will make it a place
of first choice where more people choose to live, work, study and visit, and where
businesses choose to invest and create jobs.” 
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 6: Settlement Boundaries   
Policy 17: Residential Areas   
Policy 53B: Water Environment and Drainage: Foul Drainage
694

Page 31

3 
Policy 53C: Water Environment and Drainage: Surface Water Drainage 
Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development
Proposals 
OTHER POLICIES 
Placemaking Guide
Developer Contributions and Affordable Housing SPG 
CONSULTATION  RESPONSES 
Scottish Water – No objection. 
Transport Planning – No objection. 
Development Contributions Officer – No objection subject to developer contributions
being secured. 
REPRESENTATIONS 
The following points were raised in the 2 representation(s) received: 
• Adverse affect on visual amenity
• Loss of open space
• Over intensive development
• Road safety concerns
• Loss of amenity and privacy
• Impact on water and waste capacity 
The above issues are discussed in the appraisal section below. The following
matters are best addressed at this point in time. 
• Concerns that some of the information appears to be out of date photography
– The anomaly is noted however the plans and drawings provide sufficient
information to assess the application.
• Disruption nuisance associated with construction and construction deliveries -
The concern regarding construction activity in the representations received
are noted however this would be a short-term change to the status quo. If the
construction activity noise is so significant this matter can be investigated
under the Control of Pollution Act. 
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS 
Screening Opinion  EIA Not Required
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA):
Environmental Report
Not Required
Appropriate Assessment Habitats Regulations 
AA Not Required
695

Page 32

4 
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 for the
area comprises the approved TAYplan and the adopted LDP2. 
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 
This site is located within the settlement boundary of Crieff which complies with
Policy 6 Settlement Boundaries. 
Within the settlement boundary Policy 17 of the adopted Local Development Plan 2
also applies. This recognises that residential development within existing settlements
can often make a useful contribution to the supply of housing land but acknowledges
the potential conflicts new development can have within the existing built
environment. Proposals will be encouraged where they satisfy the criteria set out in
the policy in particular criteria a) Infill residential development at a density which
represents the most efficient use of the site while respecting its environs and c)
proposals which will improve the character and environment of the area. 
Policies P1A and P1B Placemaking are also of relevance.  These policies require
proposals to contribute positively to the surrounding built and natural environment
and to respect the character and amenity of the place. 
Policy 53 B and 53 C relates to foul and SUDS drainage. 
Policy 60 B seeks safe access, egress and appropriate car parking. 
The proposal does not relate to open space accordingly policy 14A is not applicable
in the assessment of the application 
Design, Layout and Landscape 
The placemaking policies confirm that development must contribute positively to the
quality of the surrounding built and natural environment. All development should be
planned and designed with reference to climate change, mitigation and adaptation. 
During the assessment of 20/00709/FLL, the earlier application for four units
concerns were raised regarding this proposed plot which had the appearance of
being squeezed into the site as well as access and egress concerns. 
696

Page 33

5 
Application 20/00709/FLL was ultimately withdrawn and a subsequent application for
two houses granted on the western side of the Oakbank curtilage under application
20/01679/FLL. 
This proposal seeks to revisit the erection of a dwelling within the northeast corner of
the Oakbank curtilage. In support of the application the agent has submitted a design
statement which explains the applications design ethos. This discusses the house
and plot ratios associated to the north and concludes that the proposed house and
footprint ratio is comparable to other plot ratios. 
However, the proposed plot is seen in the context of the existing Oakbank House, a
bespoke dwellinghouse of its era. The erection of a dwellinghouse in the northeast
curtilage which sits in front of the Oakbank building line which faces Turretbank
Road still has the impression of being squeezed into the side garden ground
especially when viewed from the south. 
Overall, from a placemaking and visual amenity perspective the development does
not contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built environment, fails to
respect the character and amenity of the area and has an adverse impact on the
visual amenity of the area due to an inappropriate siting, density and design. The
proposal fails to comply with placemaking policies 1A and 1B as well as Policy 17
Residential Areas 
Residential Amenity 
The formation of residential development has the potential to result in overlooking
and overshadowing to neighbouring dwellings and garden ground. There is a need to
secure privacy for all the parties to the development those who would live in the new
dwelling, those that live in the existing house. Planning control has a duty to future
occupiers not to create situations of potential conflict between neighbours. 
Overlooking:- 
Taking account of the internal layout as well as the proposed house being single
storey in height and the retention and incorporation of new screening to the
boundaries there is not considered to be a significant loss of amenity to neighbouring
residential properties. 
Overshadowing, loss of sunlight and daylight:- 
The Building Research Establishment (BRE) document ‘Site Layout Planning
for Daylight and Sunlight - a guide to good practice 1991’ sets out guidelines on how
to assess the potential impact. Taking cognisance of the BRE document a
reasonable level of daylight and sunlight is maintained to neighboring properties and
the extent of overshadowing of neighboring amenity ground is not significant and
does not warrant refusal of the applications. 
Private Amenity Space:-
The extent in which private amenity space is used relates specifically to the
dwelling’s occupants. It is therefore particularly difficult to forecast the extent of
697

Page 34

6 
garden ground required and ultimately overtime this will change with any new
occupants. Nevertheless, it is important to seek an outside area that can perform the
minimum to be expected of a garden i.e. clothes drying, dustbin storage and sitting
out. The layout achieves an appropriate level of amenity space for the occupants’
needs both present and future. 
Roads and Access 
The Council’s Transport Planning Section has been consulted on the application who
have highlighted they have no objection subject to conditional control which seeks
the implementation of the vehicular access to a suitable construction specification. 
However, from a review of the site layout the access and egress arrangements
appear particularly tight. Especially as there is a requirement to accommodate two
car parking spaces within the site to meet the requirements of the National Roads
Development Guide. Given the sites relationship with the bend on the public road as
well as the road topography access and egress vehicles would need to enter and
leave in a forward gear to enable safe. As it stands it has not been adequately
illustrated that this can be achieved and, on this basis, there is a conflict with Policy
60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development
Proposals. 
Drainage and Flooding 
The site is not in an area subject to river flooding. 
Foul drainage arrangements will be to the public system, and this complies with
Policy 53B. A developer would need to secure a connection from Scottish Water and
if there is a capacity problem this is a matter between the developer and network
operator to resolve prior to development proceeding on the site. 
Disposal of surface water should be via a sustainable urban drainage system to
comply with policy 53C. An indicative SUDS arrangement has been illustrated on the
plans and the delivery of SUDS could be controlled by condition. 
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 Crieff Primary School and a contribution is
required. 
Economic Impact 
The economic impact of the proposal is likely to be minimal and limited to the
construction phase of the development.
698

Page 35

7 
VARIATION OF APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 32A 
This application was not varied prior to determination, in accordance with the terms
of section 32A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended. 
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 adopted
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 adopted Development Plan. 
Accordingly, the proposal is refused on the grounds identified below. 
Conditions and Reasons 
1 The proposal has not demonstrated that the development of a dwelling can
contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built and natural
environment taking account of design, density, siting, height, massing,
materials, finishes and colours. The dwelling has the appearance of being
squeezed into the garden ground of Oakbanlk, 2 Laggan Road and fails to
respect the character and amenity of place accordingly the proposal is
contrary to Placemaking Policy 1A and Policy 1B of the Perth and Kinross
Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 
2 The proposal is contrary to Policy 17: Residential Areas of the Perth and
Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2109) which seeks to ensure that
development is compatible with the amenity and character of the area. It has
not been demonstrated that a dwellinghouse can be accommodated on the
site while respecting its environs or improve the character and environment of
the area. 
3 The proposal is contrary to Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility
Requirements: New Development Proposals of the Perth and Kinross Local
Development Plan 2 (2109) as the site layout has not demonstrated that two
car parking spaces can be provided within the site which would also enable
cars to manoeuvre and turn within the site to enable them to enter and leave
the site in a forward gear. 
699

Page 36

8 
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 
700

Page 37

GIFGFJ<; J@K< GC8E
.+/--
EFIK?
. / 0 1 2 .-- /-.2
JTR]V 7 .7/--
<8JK <C<M8K@FE
.+.--
>IFLE; =CFFI GC8E
..5db^
.+.--
B@K:?<E
;@E@E>
J@KK@E>
I8@J<;
:<@C@E>
89FM<
9<;IFFD .
9<;IFFD /
JKL;P
<E JL@K<
98K?I%D
LK@C@KP
IFFD
N
8I;IF9<
N
8I;IF9<
GCFK 0
M<CLO
N<JK <C<M8K@FE
.+.--
"JC8K<" <==<:K :FE:I<K< IFF= K@C<
I<;C8E; I@:?DFE; .- &FI <HL8C'
I<E;<I =@E@J?
M<CLO
8
899
',)$
&+)$
')$$
&%$$
(&$$
*$$$
),$$
',)$
%)$$
&&&)
&+)$
.
'.%'*
'.%'(
'.%'*
'.%()
'.%)'
'.%)&
'.%'+
'.%&(
'-%/*
'-%,'
'-%(*
',%.&
',%+,
',%)-
'+%/.
'+%-(
'+%,+
'+%,-
'+%-(
'+%-)
'+%-)
'+%,,
'+%+.
'+%+&
'+%+-
'+%-(
',%'(
',%,(
'-%(+
'-%*.
'-%/*
:=
:=
:=
:=
:=
2:'+%/.
2:'+%.+
2:'-%+,
2:'-%+)
'.%('
'-%&-
'+%.&
'+%./
'+%,,
'+%,*
'-%,'
'.%&-
'.%(,
'-%))
'.%&/
'.%.&
'.%'(
'/%&)
'/%'+
57
;DSMHS RQTU
@QEY
@QEY
',%-(
'+%,.
'+%-&
'.%&*
'.%/+
'/%&/
'/%'+
'.%+,
'.%*-
'+%./
'+%.-
'+%-,
'+%--
'+%.'
'+%.*
',%&,
',%'*
',%++
',%.*
'-%&/
'-%,*
'.%&&
'.%(/
'.%**
'.%*,
'.%))
'.%,&
'.%(/
',%*&
',%+/
'-%&&
'-%*&
'-%+.
'-%-/
'.%&&
'-%//
'.%'/
'.%'/
'.%)/
'.%).
'-%(-
'.%-/
'/%&&
'/%'.
'/%'.
'/%'.
'.%/.
'.%+.
'.%,&
'+%,&
>QQI KHLJKU (+%+.4DWH KHLJKU (*%'/
4DWH KHLJKU ()%/,
4DWH KHLJKU ()%/,
>QQI KHLJKU (,%',
>QQI KHLJKU ()%*/
>QQI KHLJKU (&%.(
'.%(&
'/%,,
'.%'(
'-%),
'/%('
'.%-)
>QQI KHLJKU (,%((
'.%/+
4DWH KHLJKU (*%.,
=QTU
(&%&&&
.5+.-
.4+/-
.4+02
.4+52
.4+52
.4+65
(.3+2-
.4+--
(.3+--
.4+2-
.4+--
.5+32
.6+--
.6+--
.6+--
E<N KI<<J 8E;
C8E;J:8G@E> KF
9FLE;8I@<J
(.3+3-
(.3+2-
.4+4-
.4+52
GN\ 5J[Q BX]PQLJ[\ 7RWR[Q
GCFK 0
GCFK 8I<8 3/-db^
GFJJ@9C< ?FLJ< =FFKGI@EK
J@Q< .04db^ &//# F= GCFK'
E<N ?<;><
GC8EK@E> $
C8E;J:8G@E> 8K
9FLE;8I@<J
@E;@:8K@M< JN
;I8@E8><* I<=<I
KF <E>@E<<I
==C (.6+/-
E<N ?FLJ< LE;<I
:FEJKIL:K@FE GC8EE@E>
:FEJ<EK I<=+ /-,-.346,=CC
E<N ?FLJ< LE;<I
:FEJKIL:K@FE GC8EE@E>
:FEJ<EK I<=+ /-,-.346,=CC
'/%(&
'.%)'
<O@JK@E> ?FLJ< *
GCFK J@Q< /./-db^
?FLJ< =FFKGI@EK /-0db^
&6+2# F= GCFK'
GC8EK@E>,
J?IL9J 8E;
JD8CC KI<<
>I8JJ KF I<8I
>8I;<E
<O@JK@E>
:FE@=<I
GC8EK@E>,
J?IL9J
JFLK? <C<M8K@FE
.+.--
:FDGFJ@K< J?@GC8G
:C8;;@E> "K@D9<I
<==<:K" <OK<IE8C N8CCJ
EFIK? <C<M8K@FE
.+.--
J<:K@FE 8*8
.+.--
&($$
J<:K@FE 9*9
.+.--
>8I;<E GC8EK@E>
<iZdeZ_X `_ G]`e
CRcXV :`_ZWVc
<fTcjaYZR Ej^R_dV_dZd
:R^V]ZR ;`_ReZ`_
:`eZ_fd
8aac`iZ^ReV . ^VecV YZXY S`cUVcd Rd Z_UZTReVU `_ a]R_
:`_dZdeZ_X `W R ^Zi `W VgVcXcVV_ R_U UVTZUf`fd a]R_ed,dYcfSd dfZeRS]V
W`c R d^R]] XRcUV_+ KYVdV hZ]] SV a]R_eVU e` ac`gZUV acZgRTj) T`]`fc R_U
Z_eVcVde R]] jVRc c`f_U+
G]R_ed dV]VTeVU Re eYV eZ^V `W a]R_eZ_X dfS[VTe e` RgRZ]RSZ]Zej R_U
dVRd`_R] Z_eVcVde V+X+
IY`U`UV_Uc`_d d^R]],^VUZf^ dZkV
8kR]VRd G`eV_eZ]R
MZSfc_f^ 9fUU]VZR
>R^V]ZR I`dVd
GZVcZd GV`_V
?VSV ?jUcR_XVR
GY`eZ_ZR =`cdjeYZR
:Y`ZTjR Gcf_fd
;cj^fd GYZ]RUV]aYfd
<dTR]]`_ZR :YRV_`^V]Vd
Fd^R_eYfd :]V^ReZd
:VR_`eYfd GjcRTR_eYR
J\Z^^ZR ?V]
GVc_VeejR GcZgVe
BR]^ZR IZSVd
8SV]ZR ;VfekZR
:Zdefd =fTYdZR
CRgReVcR 9VcSVcZd
<i`TY`cUR
KcVVd
G`dZeZ`_VU e` XZgV YVZXYe R_U dTfa]efcV e` eYV XRcUV_) acZgRTj R_U
WcR^V eYV Y`fdV+
8 dV]VTeZ`_ `W d^R]] ecVVd dfZeRS]V W`c R d^R]] XRcUV_ V+X+
J`cSfd,I`hR_ 8^V]R_TYZVc
:`c_fd :jeZdfd 9ReeR_UZVcZ
Fc_R^V_eR] 8TVc Gjcfd JR]ZTZW`]ZR
Fc_R^V_eR] 9Vef]R,9ZcTY NVVaZ_X :`e`_VRdeVc
DRX_`]ZR ?`]]j
Fc_R^V_eR] PVh * KRifd 9RTTReR ;`gRde`_ZZ
<fTcjaYZR
>c`f_U :`gVc * ]`h Xc`hZ_X W`c Wc`_e `W S`cUVcd f_UVc 0-T^ YZXY+
8gRZ]RS]V Re eZ^V `W a]R_eZ_X R]`_X hZeY ^Zi `W Sf]Sd) G`]jR_eYfd)
Gf]^`_RcZR) JTRSZ`fd) >Vf^) S`cUVc >VcR_Zf^d) ?VReYVcd) CRgV_UVc
VeT+
JTR]V 7 .7.--
. / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 .--
I<M@J@FE;N>+ EF+AF9 EF+
J:8C<
:C@<EK
GIFA<:K
;I8N@E> K@KC<
;I8NE 9P
2[KN[\X[
9NJU\Q 9J`JZM[
EWMNZPZX]WM C\Z]L\]ZN[
2MSJLNW\2L\R^R\RN[
CR\N BN[\ZRL\RXW[
@\QNZ %CYNLRO_&
C\Z]L\]ZJU :W[\JKRUR\_
8ZX]WM 4XWMR\RXW[
4XW\JVRWJ\RXW
3]ZRNM JWM @^NZQNJM CNZ^RLN[
I<M ;8K< 9P ;<K8@CJ>HRSQGVFULQP EY RHSOLTTLQP QI <SGPDPFH ?VSWHY
QP EHKDNI QI 7;?<%Z2SQXP 2QRYSLJKU #2QPUSDFU
YHDS (& $% 0NN SLJKUT SHTHSWHG% :LFHPTH PVOEHS
'&&&'&')-%
2== C:I6C D@ 36 C:D6 F6B:7:65
D9:C 5B2G:?8 :C 4@AHB:89D
:7 :? 5@E3D'A=62C6 2C<
EFK<J ?<8CK? 8E; J8=<KP EFK<J7
J@>E@=@:8EK I<J@;L8C ?8Q8I;J GI<J<EK ;<J:I@GK@FE 8:K@FEJ , EFK<J7
I<M@J@FEJ
G8G<I J@Q<
;8K<GLIGFJ<
hhh+UV_Y`]^aRce_VcdYZa+T`+f\ K7&-.431' 34-566
;<E?FCDG8IKE<IJ?@G8I:?@K<:KJ
5@ ?@D C42=6 7@B 4@?CDBE4D:@? AEBA@C6C
5B2G:?8C 2?5 2B49:D64DEB2= CA64:7:42D:@?
D@ 36 B625 :? 4@?;E?4D:@? G:D9 6?8?:66B$C
@JTKJWT 4ZRNOO =\M
*1*))(+)) 2*
,)(),(+)++A= 2.*/-
AZXYX[NM 9X][N J\=JWM J\@JTKJWT
4ZRNOO
A)0
CR\N AUJW
AUJW[' CNL\RXW # 6UN^J\RXW[
A=@D ,
- '$#$'#&& 1< -HHDC@>JCGF?GKFA>IL KHA>JBA
Doc 4
701

Page 38

Doc 5
Comments to the Development Quality Manager on a Planning Application
Planning
Application ref.
22/00532/FLL Comments
provided by
Dean Salman
Development Engineer
Service/Section Transport Planning Contact
Details 
Description of
Proposal
Erection of a dwellinghouse
Address of site Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank
Laggan Road
Crieff
Comments on the
proposal 
Insofar as the Roads matters are concerned, I have no objection to this
proposal on the following condition.
Recommended
planning
condition(s) 
Prior to the development hereby approved being completed or brought into
use, the vehicular access shall be formed in accordance with Perth & Kinross
Council's Road Development Guide Type B Figure 5.6 access detail, of Type B
Road construction detail.  The Type B Road construction detail shall continue
into the entrance for a distance of 5 metres from the boundary of the public
road surface.
Recommended
informative(s) for
applicant 
The applicant is advised that, in terms of Sections 56 of the Roads (Scotland)
Act 1984, he/she/they must obtain from the Council, as Roads Authority,
consent to open an existing road or footway prior to the commencement of
works.  Information on junction types, requirements for Vehicular Access
consents (VA1) and application forms are available at
www.pkc.gov.uk/vehicleaccess. Advice on the disposal of surface water
should be sought at the initial stages of design from Scottish Water and the
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. 
The applicant is advised to contact the Streetlighting Partnership to discuss
requirements and gain technical approval for lowering the existing
underground street light cable to a depth of 450mm across the proposed
new vehicle access.
Date comments
returned  10 May 2022 
702

Page 39

4(vii)(b)
LRB-2022-33
LRB-2022-33
22/00532/FLL – Erection of a dwellinghouse, land 25
metres north east of No. 2 Laggan Road, Crieff
PLANNING DECISION NOTICE
REPORT OF HANDLING
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (included in applicant’s
submission, pages 681-692 and 701)
703

Page 40

Page 41

Page 42

Page 43

4(vii)(c)
LRB-2022-33
LRB-2022-33
22/00532/FLL – Erection of a dwellinghouse, land 25
metres north east of No. 2 Laggan Road, Crieff
REPRESENTATIONS
707

Page 44

Page 45

Page 46

Page 47

Page 48

Page 49

Page 50

Page 51

Comments to the Development Quality Manager on a Planning Application
Planning
Application ref.
22/00532/FLL Comments
provided
by
Lucy Sumner
Service/Section Strategy & Policy Contact
Details
Development Contributions
Officer:
Lucy Sumner
Description of
Proposal
Erection of a dwellinghouse
Address of site Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank Laggan Road Crieff
Comments on the
proposal
NB: Should the planning application be successful and such permission
not be implemented within the time scale allowed and the applicant
subsequently requests to renew the original permission a reassessment
may be carried out in relation to the Council’s policies and mitigation
rates pertaining at the time.
THE FOLLOWING REPORT, SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE
SUCCESSFUL IN GAINING PLANNING APPROVAL, MAY FORM THE
BASIS OF A SECTION 75 PLANNING AGREEMENT WHICH MUST BE
AGREED AND SIGNED PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL ISSUING A PLANNING
CONSENT NOTICE.
Primary Education  
With reference to the above planning application 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 Crieff Primary School. 
Recommended
planning
condition(s)
Summary of Requirements
Education:  1 x £5,164
Total: £5,164
Phasing
It is advised that payment of the contribution should be made up front of
release of planning permission. The additional costs to the applicants and
time for processing legal agreements for single dwelling applications is not
considered to be cost effective to either the Council or applicant.
The contribution may be secured by way of a Section 75 Agreement. Please
be aware the applicant is liable for the Council’s legal expense in addition to
their own legal agreement option and the process may take months to
complete.
715

Page 52

If a Section 75 Agreement is entered into the full contribution should be
received 10 days prior to occupation.
Recommended
informative(s) for
applicant
Payment
Before remitting funds the applicant should satisfy themselves that the
payment of the Development Contributions is the only outstanding
matter relating to the issuing of the Planning Decision Notice. 
Methods of Payment
On no account should cash or cheques be remitted.
Scheduled within a legal agreement 
This will normally take the course of a Section 75 Agreement where either
there is a requirement for Affordable Housing on site which will necessitate a
Section 75 Agreement being put in place and into which a Development
Contribution payment schedule can be incorporated, and/or the amount of
Development Contribution is such that an upfront payment may be
considered prohibitive. The signed Agreement must be in place prior to the
issuing of the Planning Decision Notice. 
NB: The applicant is cautioned that the costs of preparing a Section 75
agreement from the applicant’s own Legal Agents may in some instances be
in excess of the total amount of contributions required. As well as their own
legal agents fees, Applicants will be liable for payment of the Council's legal
fees and outlays in connection with the preparation of the Section 75
Agreement.  The applicant is therefore encouraged to contact their own Legal
Agent who will liaise with the Council’s Legal Service to advise on this issue.
Other methods of payment
Providing that there is no requirement to enter into a Section 75 Legal
Agreement, eg: for the provision of Affordable Housing on or off site and or
other Planning matters, as advised by the Planning Service the
developer/applicant may opt to contribute the full amount prior to the release
of the Planning Decision Notice. 
Bank Transfers
All Bank Transfers should use the following account details;
Sort Code: 834700
Account Number: 11571138
Please quote the planning application reference. 
The Council operate an electronic direct debit system whereby payments may
be made over the phone.
To make such a payment please call 01738 475300 in the first instance. 
When calling please remember to have to hand:
a) Your card details.
b) Whether it is a Debit or Credit card. 
c) The full amount due.
d) The planning application to which the payment relates.
e) If you are the applicant or paying on behalf of the applicant. 
f)  Your e-mail address so that a receipt may be issued directly.
716

Page 53

Education Contributions
For Education contributions please quote the following ledger code: 
1-30-0060-0001-859136
Indexation
All contributions agreed through a Section 75 Legal Agreement will be linked
to the RICS Building Cost Information Service building Index. 
Accounting Procedures
Contributions from individual sites will be accountable through separate
accounts and a public record will be kept to identify how each contribution is
spent. Contributions will be recorded by the applicant’s name, the site
address and planning application reference number to ensure the individual
commuted sums can be accounted for. 
Date comments
returned
22 April 2022
717

Page 54

Page 55

Mrs Christine Senior (Objects)
Comment submitted date: Sat 23 Apr 2022
My objection is in relation to and in addition to reasons for comment;
Loss of visual amenity,
The proximity of proposed property to existing boundary fence,
Site elevation,
Loss of privacy
Disruption and noise associated with development,
Impact on on water and waste capacity.
719

Page 56

Page 57

Comments to the Development Quality Manager on a Planning Application
Planning
Application ref.
22/00532/FLL Comments
provided by
Dean Salman
Development Engineer
Service/Section Transport Planning Contact
Details
Description of
Proposal
Erection of a dwellinghouse
Address of site Land 25 Metres North East No 2 Oakbank
Laggan Road
Crieff
Comments on the
proposal
Insofar as the Roads matters are concerned, I have no objection to this
proposal on the following condition.
Recommended
planning
condition(s)
Prior to the development hereby approved being completed or brought into
use, the vehicular access shall be formed in accordance with Perth & Kinross
Council's Road Development Guide Type B Figure 5.6 access detail, of Type B
Road construction detail.  The Type B Road construction detail shall continue
into the entrance for a distance of 5 metres from the boundary of the public
road surface.
Recommended
informative(s) for
applicant
The applicant is advised that, in terms of Sections 56 of the Roads (Scotland)
Act 1984, he/she/they must obtain from the Council, as Roads Authority,
consent to open an existing road or footway prior to the commencement of
works.  Information on junction types, requirements for Vehicular Access
consents (VA1) and application forms are available at
www.pkc.gov.uk/vehicleaccess. Advice on the disposal of surface water
should be sought at the initial stages of design from Scottish Water and the
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency.
The applicant is advised to contact the Streetlighting Partnership to discuss
requirements and gain technical approval for lowering the existing
underground street light cable to a depth of 450mm across the proposed
new vehicle access.
Date comments
returned  10 May 2022
721

Page 58

Page 59

1
CDS Planning Local Review Body
From: chris senior <
Sent: 27 July 2022 13:19
To: CDS Planning Local Review Body
Subject: Application Ref:22/00532/FLL
CAUTION: This email originated from an external organisation. Do not follow guidance, click links, or open
attachments unless you have verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To whom it may concern,
I am grateful for the opportunity to comment on the Council's decision notice in relation to the above application.
The reasons for refusal are in accordance with my objection submitted previously.
Therefore I am still objecting to this planning application.
Yours Sincerely,
Mrs Christine Senior.
723