Item 4(ii) LRB-2022-35
Perth and Kinross Council · 24 October 2022
Back to Local Review Body — 24 October 2022 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
4(ii) LRB-2022-35 LRB-2022-35 22/00714/IPL – Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle), Sunnybrae, Windsole, Auchterarder, PH3 1PB INDEX (a) Papers submitted by the Applicant (Pages 127-168) (b) Decision Notice (Pages 157-158) Report of Handling (Pages 147-155) Reference Documents (Pages 167-168) (c) Representations (Pages 171-182) 125
Page 2
126
Page 3
4(ii)(a) LRB-2022-35 LRB-2022-35 22/00714/IPL – Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle), Sunnybrae, Windsole, Auchterarder, PH3 1PB PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 127
Page 4
128
Page 5
129
Page 6
130
Page 7
131
Page 8
132
Page 9
133
Page 10
134
Page 11
135
Page 12
136
Page 13
137
Page 14
138
Page 15
139
Page 16
140
Page 17
141
Page 18
142
Page 19
143
Page 20
144
Page 21
145
Page 22
146
Page 23
REPORT OF HANDLING DELEGATED REPORT Ref No 22/00714/IPL Ward No P7- Strathallan Due Determination Date 8th July 2022 Draft Report Date 13th June 2022 Report Issued by DN Date 13/06/2022 PROPOSAL: Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle) LOCATION: Sunnybrae Windsole Auchterarder PH3 1PB 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. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 147
Page 24
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL This application relates to a paddock of land located immediately adjacent to but out with the settlement of Auchterarder. The site extends to the approximately 760sqm and is positioned to the north of a linear grouping of three dwellinghouse. The site presently contains two chicken huts and is entirely laid in grass. The south, east and west boundaries are defined by established hedgerow and trees, whereas the northern boundary is largely delineated with a post and wire fence. The applicant previously sought permission in 2006 and 2010, albeit on a larger site, for the erection of a single dwellinghouse. On both occasions the applications were refused as being contrary to the Housing in the Countryside Policy and the subsequent appeals dismissed by the Reporters Unit. Then more recently in 2021 an application was again submitted for the erection of a house in the same location but on a smaller plot (Ref: 21/01744/IPL). This application was again refused as being contrary to Policy 6 ‘Settlement Boundaries’ of LDP2. Planning permission in principle is again sought of the erection of a house within same plot, as per the 2021 refusal. The reason of the resubmission is due to the applicant failing to seek an appeal against the refusal to the Local Review Body (LRB) within the specified timescales. Through this submission the applicant will presumably seek to appeal the refusal to the LRB. The plans submitted are exactly the same as the 2021 application, with an indicative plan submitted that proposes a 1.5 storey house of traditional design and finish positioned centrally within the site and taking access from the access road to the east. SITE HISTORY 03/00011/FUL Erection of conservatory at 25 March 2003 Application Approved 91/01503/FUL ERECTION OF 2 HOUSES & GARAGES AT 31 October 1991 Application Refused 98/01065/FUL Alterations and extension to house at 10 September 1998 Application Approved 05/00504/FUL Extension to house 11 May 2005 Application Approved 06/01858/OUT Erection of a dwellinghouse (in outline) 30 January 2007 Application Refused 10/01090/IPL Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle) 15 November 2010 Application Refused 21/01744/IPL Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle) 30 November 2021 Application Refused 148
Page 25
PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION None 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 19: Housing in the Countryside Policy 32: Embedding Low & Zero Carbon Generating Technologies in New Development 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 149
Page 26
OTHER POLICIES National Roads Development Guide Developer Contributions and Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance CONSULTATION RESPONSES Scottish Water No objection Development Contributions Officer Conditions in relation Primary Education and Auchterarder A9 Junctions contributions are required. Transport Planning No objection subject to condition REPRESENTATIONS The following points were raised in the 1 representation received: • Impact of additional traffic on single track lane The above point is addressed in the report below. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS Screening Opinion EIA Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not applicable Appropriate Assessment 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 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. 150
Page 27
Policy Appraisal The local plan through Policy 6 ‘Settlement Boundaries’ specifies that development will not be permitted, except within the defined settlement boundaries which are defined by a settlement boundary in the Plan. It goes onto state that development which is located on sites which adjoining that boundary will only be accepted in certain circumstances. If the site lies out with a settlement boundary, the principle of development is normally considered under Policy 19 Housing in the Countryside and the associated Housing in the Countryside supplementary guidance. However, in this instance only Policy 6 ’Settlement Boundaries’ applies as the Housing in the Countryside Guide under "category 1 - building groups" and "category 2 - infill sites" makes it clear on pages 10 and 11 that: "proposals adjacent to and outwith a settlement which has a defined boundary in the Local Development Plan 2 will be assessed under Policy 6 Settlement Boundaries and not Policy 19 Housing in the Countryside". This particular fails to meet any of the categories within Policy 6 where development may be accepted adjacent to settlement boundaries. It is simply seeking to establish the principle of a single house and does not involve rural business or diversification, is not justified under operational need and no evidence of a shortfall in housing land supply has been provided. The purpose of Policy 6 is to specifically to prevent the unplanned and ad hoc expansion of those settlements which have a boundary identified in the Local Development Plan. This view is supported by other recent decisions where refusals have been issued in similar circumstances as being contrary to Policy 6. These decisions have also been backed by the Council's Local Review Body upon appeal. It is therefore the established view of the Council to refuse applications adjacent to settlement boundaries which is reflected in Policy 6 of LDP2. If the applicant does wish to pursue development on this site, the most appropriate means to do so would be seek for an alteration of the settlement boundary through review of the Local Development Plan. Given the information contained within the Housing in the Countryside Guide regarding sites adjacent to settlement boundaries, there is no requirement to assess this proposal against the Housing in the Countryside Guide 2020 (HiCG 2020) as the guide makes it clear that Policy 6 ‘Settlement Boundaries’ is the relevant policy in this instance. As outlined above, the proposal is contrary to Policy 6 ‘Settlement Boundaries’ and therefore the principle of residential development fails to comply with the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019. Design and Layout The applicant has submitted indicative elevational plans and a site layout plan. The proposed house is a relatively modest 1.5 storey property of traditional design which would not appear out of place within this rural context. The layout of the house within the plot also doesn’t raise any particular issues in relation to garden space or 151
Page 28
access. However, this plan is purely indicative at this stage, and it would be upon the submission of a detailed application that the design and layout of the proposed house would be assessed in any detail. Landscape and Visual Impact It is considered that, in isolation, the development of this plot of land would not necessarily result in a significant impact on the landscape character or visual amenity of the area. That said, if approved it could lead to further similar proposals for additional plots within the field to the north and beyond which would lead to ribbon development along the existing access and potentially lead to coalescence with the settlement of Auchterarder. This type of unplanned development would potentially impact on the character and amenity of area. As such, it is considered that the proposals are country to Policy 1A and 1B of LDP2. Residential Amenity The proposed development does not raise any concerns in relation to residential amenity. The proposed plot would provide sufficient private amenity space and would not introduce any significant levels of overlooking or overshadowing of the neighbouring property. Roads and Access The site is presently accessed by a 350m long private single-track access that is presently shared with the three existing houses adjacent to the site. It is noted that concerns have been expressed regarding the impact of additional traffic from the proposed house which could lead to difficulties in traffic passing on the existing narrow track. Whilst the level of additional traffic generated by one additional house is likely to be minimal, it is considered that additional passing places would be beneficial given the apparent lack of any provision at present. It is therefore recommended that should permission be granted; a condition is applied requiring the provision of passing places at suitable locations along the existing access. Drainage and Flooding There are no known issues in relation to the flooding or drainage within the site. The site is also not located within any areas at risk to a 1 in 200 year flood event, as per SEPAs indicative flood maps. In regard to drainage, as this application is only in principle, there is no requirement for this information at this early stage. However, the indicative site plan indicates that provision will be made on site for a septic tank and soakaway arrangement and the application forms indicate that surface water drainage will also be provided. As per the requirements of Policy 53B, the use of a private drainage system is unlikely to be acceptable and all foul drainage should be connected into the public drainage system that serves Auchterarder. 152
Page 29
Conservation Considerations There are no issues or concerns in relation to conservation related matters. Natural Heritage and Biodiversity There are no issues or concerns in relation to natural heritage or conservation related matters. Developer Contributions Education 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 Auchterarder Primary School. As this application is only "in principle" it is not possible to provide a definitive answer at this stage however if this application were to be approved a condition should be applied to ensure that any future detailed development complies with the requirements of Policy 5 and its associated supplementary guidance. Transport Infrastructure – A9 With reference to the above planning application the Council Developer Contributions Supplementary Guidance requires a financial contribution from developments within Auchterarder and the wider Strathearn housing market area towards the cost of delivering the A9 junction improvements which are required in the interests of safety. The application falls within the identified A9 junction improvements boundary and a condition to reflect this should be attached to any planning application granted. Embedding Low & Zero Carbon Generating Technologies Policy 32 ‘Embedding Low & Zero Carbon Generating Technologies in New Development’ of the recently adopted LDP2 states that all new buildings will be required to demonstrate that at least 10% of the current carbon emissions reduction set by Scottish Building Standards will be met through the installation and operation of low and zero-carbon generating technologies. It further specifies that a statement must be submitted demonstrating compliance with this requirement. As this application is only in principle, there is no requirement for this information at this early stage. However, if permission were to be granted, a condition would be required to ensure that adequate measures are submitted as part of any detailed submission. 153
Page 30
Economic Impact The economic impact of the proposal is likely to be minimal and limited to the construction phase of the development. VARIATION OF APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 32A This application was not varied prior to determination. 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 The proposed development is contrary to Policy 6 'Settlement Boundaries' of the Perth and Kinross Council Local Development Plan 2019 which seeks to prevent the unplanned and ad hoc expansion of those settlements which have a boundary identified in the Local Development Plan. The proposed development is contrary to Policies 1A and 1B ‘Placemaking’ of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 as the proposed development would not contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding area in terms of character or amenity and could lead to ribbon development which would be to the detrimental of the visual amenity of the area and impact on the rural landscape character of this edge of settlement location. 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 154
Page 31
Procedural Notes Not Applicable. PLANS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THIS DECISION 01 02 155
Page 32
156
Page 33
157
Page 34
158
Page 35
159
Page 36
160
Page 37
161
Page 38
162
Page 39
163
Page 40
164
Page 41
165
Page 42
166
Page 43
167
Page 44
168
Page 45
4(ii)(b) LRB-2022-35 LRB-2022-35 22/00714/IPL – Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle), Sunnybrae, Windsole, Auchterarder, PH3 1PB PLANNING DECISION NOTICE (included in applicant’s submission, pages 157-158) REPORT OF HANDLING (included in applicant’s submission, pages 147-155) REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (included in applicant’s submission, pages 167-168) 169
Page 46
170
Page 47
4(ii)(c) LRB-2022-35 LRB-2022-35 22/00714/IPL – Erection of a dwellinghouse (in principle), Sunnybrae, Windsole, Auchterarder, PH3 1PB REPRESENTATIONS 171
Page 48
172
Page 49
173
Page 50
174
Page 51
175
Page 52
176
Page 53
177
Page 54
178
Page 55
Mr Les Smith (Neutral) Comment submitted date: Sat 21 May 2022 Since this planning application is similar to the last application submitted for this site (Ref No 21/01744/IPL) our previous comment, which was noted on that occasion, still applies. The access to the site is by a single lane track approximately 350 metres long, which currently serves three houses. Our concern is that the extra traffic on this track created by a fourth house might lead to an increased frequency of meeting on-coming vehicles, and having to back-up. 179
Page 56
180
Page 57
181
Page 58
182