Agenda Document Pack - Planning and Regulatory Services Committee - 14/01/2026
Moray Council · 14 January 2026
Back to Planning and Regulatory Services Committee — 14 January 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Wednesday, 14 January 2026 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Special Meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee is to be held at Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX on Wednesday, 14 January 2026 at 09:30. BUSINESS 1. Sederunt 2. Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests * Guidance Note 5 - 6 3. Planning Application 2501203APP_Redacted Report by Appointed Officer 7 - 106 Summary of Planning and Regulatory Services Committee functions: Town and Country Planning; Building Standards; Environmental Health; Trading Standards; Weights & Measures, Tree Preservation Orders, and Contaminated Land issues. Page 1
Page 2
Watching the Meeting You can watch the webcast live by going to: http://www.moray.gov.uk/moray_standard/page_43661.html Webcasts are available to view for 1 year following the meeting. You can also attend the meeting in person. If you wish to attend in person, please come to the High Street entrance door and a member of staff will let you into the Chamber. Page 2
Page 3
GUIDANCE NOTES * Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests - The Chair of the meeting shall seek declarations from any individual or political group at the beginning of a meeting whether any prior decision has been reached on how the individual or members of the group will vote on any item(s) of business on the Agenda, and if so on which item(s). A prior decision shall be one that the individual or the group deems to be mandatory on the individual or the group members such that the individual or the group members will be subject to sanctions should they not vote in accordance with the prior decision. Any such prior decisions will be recorded in the Minute of the meeting. Page 3
Page 4
MORAY COUNCIL Planning and Regulatory Services Committee SEDERUNT Councillor David Gordon (Chair) Councillor Paul McBain (Depute Chair) Councillor Peter Bloomfield (Member) Councillor Neil Cameron (Member) Councillor Tracy Colyer (Member) Councillor Theresa Coull (Member) Councillor John Cowe (Member) Councillor John Divers (Member) Councillor Amber Dunbar (Member) Councillor Jérémie Fernandes (Member) Councillor Sandy Keith (Member) Councillor Marc Macrae (Member) Councillor Draeyk van der Horn (Member) Councillor Sonya Warren (Member) Clerk Name: Lissa Rowan Clerk Telephone: 07765 741754 Clerk Email: committee.services@moray.gov.uk Page 4
Page 5
GUIDANCE NOTE PRODUCED FOR PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF 14 JANUARY 2026 REPORT ON APPLICATION “Note for guidance of the Committee where the decision of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee is contrary to the recommendations of the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) in respect to a Planning Application.” Any Councillor putting forward a motion to refuse an application, contrary to recommendation, shall clearly state the reasons for refusal. These reasons should be based on policies contained in the approved National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), Local Development Plan or some other material consideration. Time should be allowed to ensure that these reasons are carefully noted for minuting purposes. Where Councillors put forward a motion to approve an application, contrary to recommendation, an indication should be given of any specific matters which should be subject of conditions along with reasons which should be based on policies in the approved Local Development Plan or some other appropriate consideration. Note for guidance where the decision of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee is to depart from the Development Plan (NFP4 and or Local Development Plan) Where a Councillor is convinced that there is reason to depart from Development Plan policy; then the Councillor’s reasons for making the motion should be clearly stated for minuting purposes. Any matters which should be subject to conditions drafted subsequently by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) should be indicated. If the Committee remains of a mind to approve such an application then the whole matter will be subject to statutory procedures as apply. In such cases, Councillors should be aware that the application may require to be advertised as a departure and any objections reported to the next available meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee. It also may be necessary to convene a hearing to consider the views of objectors. There are three potential consequences if Committee takes a decision where the proper procedures have not been followed in whole or in part. Firstly, the person aggrieved by a decision may apply to the Supreme Courts in Scotland for an Order either compelling the Council to act according to law, quashing the decision altogether or declaring a decision to be unlawful coupled with an order to prevent the decision being implemented. A referral to the Supreme Courts in these circumstances is known as applying for Judicial Review. Secondly, in addition to the application for Judicial Review when questions of alleged failure, negligence or misconduct by individuals or local authorities in the management of public funds arise and are raised either by or with the External Auditor of the Council and where an individual can be blamed the sanctions available are:- Censure of a Councillor or an Officer Suspension of a Councillor for up to one year Disqualification of a Councillor for up to five years In the case of the Council being to blame, recommendations may be made to the Scottish Ministers about rectification of the authority’s accounts. Ministers can make an order giving effect to these recommendations. Thirdly, whilst the Ombudsman accepts that Planning authorities have the freedom to determine planning applications as they wish procedural impropriety may be interpreted as maladministration. This can also lead to recommendations by the Ombudsman that compensation be paid. Consistent implementation of departure procedures maintains public confidence in the planning system and is consistent with the time and effort invested in preparing the NPF4 and Local Development Plan. Page 5
Page 6
Page 6
Page 7
WARD 08_17 25/01203/APP 14 January 2026 Erect a new three-storey building comprising of 1120 pupil secondary school and additional support needs teaching facilities and community facilities with associated hard and soft landscaping external sport provision and car parking and bus drop-off to replace existing academy on Site of Forres Academy/Applegrove/Roysvale Forres Moray for Moray Council Comments: • A site visit has been carried out. • This is a major application. • Advertised for neighbour notification and Schedule 3 purposes. • 134 representations have been received - 110 of which are objections, 23 supporting the proposal and 1 neutral. Procedure: • If minded to approve, first adopt the conclusions of Habitat Regulation Appropriate Assessment Appraisal summarised in the Observations section of the report, where adequate mitigation is proposed. Recommendation Grant Planning Permission - Subject to the following: Conditions/Reasons 1. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council as Planning Authority, the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. Reason: The time limit condition is imposed in order to comply with the requirements of section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended. 2. Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the commencement of any development, a detailed Phasing Plan and detailed Construction Programme for the development shall be submitted to and approved the Council, as Planning Authority Item 3. Page 7
Page 8
in consultation with the Roads Authority. The Phasing Plan and detailed Construction Programme shall include the details of all proposed works to deliver the new school and re-develop the existing school site, along with the timing of works at both the new school site and existing school site. Thereafter, all works shall be completed in accordance with the approved Phasing Plan and Construction Programme. Reason: In order to ensure that the matters specified can be fully considered prior to the commencement of development. 3. No development shall commence until evidence has been submitted in writing to confirm that the statutory process to promote the Stopping Up of the Sanquhar Road Cycle Track to enable the provision of the new bus lay-by has commenced. Reason: To ensure that the required statutory process for the relocation of the cycle track has commenced. 4. No development shall commence until evidence has been submitted in writing to confirm that the statutory process to promote new and amended waiting restrictions on Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road and Burdsyard Road has commenced. Reason: To ensure that the required statutory process for the relocation of the cycle track has commenced. 5. No development shall commence until details have been submitted for the approval in writing of the Planning Authority, in consultation with the Roads Authority, showing the proposed alterations and restorations to the existing road markings, and the provision of new road markings in the vicinity of the development along Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road, and Burdsyard Road, in accordance with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016; and thereafter the road markings shall be altered/reinstate in accordance with the approved details once the required changes to the Traffic Regulation Order have been made as per the above Condition 2. Reason: To ensure that the required statutory process for the relocation of the cycle track has commenced. 6. Notwithstanding the details submitted on Drawing 619428-JMA-00-ZZ_ZZ-D-A000005 P01, no development shall commence until details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority: a) Drawings (1:200 minimum) showing: i) the widening of the existing footway along the Orchard Road frontage of the site starting from the existing build-out at the Zebra Crossing and tying in at an appropriate location to the west of the proposed development access; ii) access radii and dropped kerb provision at the proposed vehicular access onto Orchard Road; Page 8
Page 9
iii) amendments to the proposed vehicular access onto Orchard Road to provide a pedestrian visibility splay of 2.4 metres by 5 metres in each direction clear of any obstruction above 0.6 metres in height; iv) the realignment of the existing dropped kerbs and tactile paving which provide a crossing point on Sanquhar Road to the south of the rear pedestrian access to Applegrove Primary School; v) the provision of a raised crossing on Burdsyard Road in lieu of the proposed Zebra crossing; vi) improvements to Castle Street to enhance the crossing of the Roysvale Terrace remote footpath; vii) the proposed bus lay-by and replacement cycle track on Sanquhar Road; and viii) the proposed new north-south active travel path connecting Core Path CPFR32 to the pupil entrance. b) A drawing (Scale 1:100 minimum) showing: i) Details of design and capacity of the proposed cycle parking facilities across the Forres Academy campus; and ii) Details of the number, 18 minimum, location, and rating (kW) of the proposed electric vehicle chargers. Thereafter, the works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and in accordance with the approved Phasing Plan and Construction Programme. Reason: To ensure an acceptable development in road safety and sustainable travel through the provision of details currently lacking from the submitted particulars to date. 7. No development shall commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed CTMP at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the CTMP shall include as a minimum the following information: i. duration of works; ii. construction programme; iii. number of vehicle movements (i.e. materials, plant, staff, components); iv. types and sizes of construction vehicles accessing the site during the construction period (Depending on the size of vehicle accessing the site, vehicle swept paths may be required to confirm that sufficient manoeuvring space would be available and to confirm that vehicles would be able to enter and exit the site in a forward gear); v. schedule for delivery of materials and plant; vi. parking provision, loading, and unloading areas for construction traffic; vii. full details of temporary arrangements to safeguard pedestrian movements in the vicinity of the development during the construction period; viii. full details of the management of deliveries and traffic movements to avoid school drop off and pick up times for the adjacent Primary School and the existing Secondary School; ix. full details of any temporary access; Page 9
Page 10
x. measures to be put in place to prevent material being deposited on the public road; xi. Traffic management measures to be put in place during works including any specific instructions to drivers; xii. full details of construction traffic routes from/to the site, including any proposals for temporary haul routes and routes to be used for the disposal of any materials from the site and xiii. a programme of monitoring for all routes identified within the CTMP during construction will be required. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage traffic during construction works at the site. 8. Prior to the opening of the development to the public, evidence of the development of a School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, in consultation with the Roads Authority, detailing how the options for travel to and from the school have been communicated to staff, pupils and parents. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage travel associated with the use of the development for secondary education purposes. 9. No development shall commence until a safeguarding scheme (protective fencing with defined access points) which will protect the existing pitch area at Roysvale Park during the construction period shall be submitted for the written approval of the planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The approved safeguarding scheme shall be implemented for the duration of the construction period. Reason: To ensure protection of the pitch area. 10. The new synthetic pitch will be designed and constructed by a recognised (e.g. SAPCA* registered) specialist pitch contractor(s). Details of contractor(s) and pitch specification shall be submitted for the written approval of the planning authority prior to the commencement of development. *SAPCA is The Sports and Play Construction Association (www.sapca.org.uk). The synthetic pitch shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory pitch is provided. 11. The new synthetic surfaced pitch as approved shall be fully operational and available for use no later than eighteen months after the opening of the new school, unless otherwise agreed in writing the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the pitch is provided timeously. 12. The proposed flood storage area and flood bund (Mitigation Option 4) outlined within Page 10
Page 11
the Flood Risk Assessment modelling report (Mott MacDonald, 2025) must be constructed and operational prior to commencement of demolition works at the existing Forres Academy Site. The storage area and flood bund must be maintained for the lifetime of the development. Reason: To ensure there is no increase in flood risk as a result of the development. 13. The proposed pedestrian footpath (as shown on the Landscape GA Plan drawing no. 619428-RYD-94-XX-XX-D-L-210000 P8) to the west of Roysvale Park shall be fully constructed and brought into operational use prior to the closure of the core path (CP-DA01) located on the east side of Roysvale Park, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure continuous pedestrian connectivity and maintain public access in the interest of public safety and convenience. 14. No development shall commence until a detailed Biodiversity Plan for the site edged red is submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in consultation with the Climate Change Strategy Officer, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt The Biodiversity Plan must include detail of: • the methodology and phasing for the plan's delivery; and • a comprehensive 30-year monitoring and maintenance plan, including details regarding funding sources and responsible parties. Reason: To ensure suitable enhancement provision within the proposal hereby approved, in the interests of the environment and character of the surrounding area. 15. Notwithstanding the submitted details in the Carbon Management Statement a further Carbon Statement is required to be submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in conjunction with the Climate Change Strategy Officer prior to the demolition of the existing Forres Academy. The following detail is required within the Carbon Statement: - • complete energy modelling; • demolition carbon calculations; • operational carbon details; and • developing a carbon reporting plan during detailed design phase. Thereafter the development shall be delivered and operated in accordance with the approved Carbon Statement, unless otherwise agree in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure carbon emissions are minimised during the delivery and lifetime of the development. 16. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority no development shall commence until a Community Wealth Building Plan prepared in Page 11
Page 12
accordance with the "Moray Local Development Plan - Community Wealth Building Planning Guidance" has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter the proposal shall be implemented in full accordance with the approved Community Wealth Building Plan. Reason: To ensure the development contributes to community wealth building aims in accordance with National Planning Framework 4 Policy 25 and the "Moray Local Development Plan - Community Wealth Building Planning Guidance. 17. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted particulars of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Forres Academy) dated 21st July 2025 and the identified measures to mitigate the impact and disturbance upon European Protected Species and nesting birds in section 4 Discussions and Recommendations, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development which will not adversely impact upon or disturb European Protected Species and nesting birds. 18. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted details set out in the Tree Survey (Forres Academy) dated 22 September 2025 and the identified Tree Protection Measures detailed on page 11, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the existing trees on the site are protected from the development in the interests of biodiversity, character and appearance of the area. 19. No existing trees other than those detailed for removal in the Tree Survey (Forres Academy) dated 22 September 2025 shall be lopped topped or felled, unless information from a qualified arboriculturalist is submitted justifying why the tree or part thereof should be removed, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the existing trees on the site are retained in the interests of the biodiversity, character and appearance of the area. 20. In relation to the approved landscaping scheme (Landscape GA Plan, drawing no. 619428-RYD-94-XX-XX-D-L-210000 P8) all new planting (where possible) must take place no later than the end of the planting season following the commencement of the new school. Any planting that cannot take place following commencement of the new school must take place as soon as practically possible in the next available planting season. Any trees shrubs and hedge plantings which within a period of 5 years from planting die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the following planting season with others of similar size, number and spacing unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure that the approved landscaping works are timeously Page 12
Page 13
carried out and properly maintained in a manner which will not adversely affect the development of the amenity, appearance, character and quality of the development and the surrounding area. 21. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority no development shall commence until detailed elevations of all the fencing shown on the Landscape GA Plan (drawing no. 619428-RYD-94-XX-XX-D-L-210000 P8) is submitted to and agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure all fencing harmonises with the surrounding area. 22. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the Drainage Strategy Report (Forres Academy) dated 22 September 2025, unless otherwise agreed in writing with Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that foul drainage and surface water drainage is provided timeously and complies with the principles of SUDs in order to protect the water environment. 23. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment (Forres Academy) dated 3 November 2025, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in full accordance with the flood protection and mitigation measures detailed in the approved Flood Risk Assessment. 24. No development shall commence until details have been submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority regarding samples and/or specifications and colouration of all external material finishes for all buildings/structures within the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in the interests of the appearance and amenity of the development and the surrounding area. 25. Construction works (including vehicle movements) associated with the development audible at any point on the boundary of any noise sensitive dwelling shall be permitted between 0800 - 1900 hours, Monday to Friday and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays only, and at no other times outwith these permitted hours (including National Holidays). The above construction hours shall apply, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and where so demonstrated exceptional operational constraints require limited periods of construction works to be undertaken outwith the permitted construction hours. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance in ensuring the construction phase is restricted within permitted hours. Page 13
Page 14
26. No development shall commence until a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. The plan shall detail best practicable measures to reduce the impact of construction noise (including vibration) at noise sensitive locations. It should also include measures to minimise and control, dust and artificial lighting. Thereafter the development will be carried out in accordance with the agreed plan. Reason: In order that environmental emissions are considered and managed at the construction phase, in order to protect local residents. 27. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the lighting on the approved 3G pitch shall be of the specification Siteco FL11-3 Blade-PL33T located on Masts M1 to M6, fitted at the mounting height and at the illuminance levels shows in the supporting drawing titled ‘Forres Academy Proposed Floodlighting. Drawing HLS10571, REV1, Dated 19/08/2025’. The agreed lighting details shall be maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To protect local residents from light nuisance at the site. 28. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the use of the lighting on the 3G pitch shall only be permitted between 0800 to 2100, Monday to Friday, and 0900 to 1700 hours on Saturdays and Sundays and only operational when the pitch is in use. Reason: To protect local residents from light nuisance at the site. 29. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the use of the 3G pitch shall be permitted between 0800 to 2100, Monday to Friday, and 0900 to 1700 hours on Saturdays and Sundays. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance by ensuring the development is restricted to permitted hours. 30. The use of the 3G pitch shall not commence until details have been submitted and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, regarding the design and materials of the “containment boards” as referred to in Section 4.9 and 7.4 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled ‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ- ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A’. The 3G pitch sports noise related activities shall not exceed the levels stated in Table 4.3 of the aforementioned Noise Impact Assessment. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance at the site. 31. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, weldmesh fencing shall be fixed using resilient fixings as referred to in Section 4.17 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled Page 14
Page 15
‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ- ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A.’ Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance at the site. 32. The use of the 3G sports pitch shall not commence until a Noise Management Plan has been submitted and agreed in writing with the Planning Authority as referred to in Section 7.7 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled ‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ-ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A.’. The agreed Noise Management Plan shall thereafter be implemented and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance due to the use of the development. 33. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the use of the dance and fitness studio within the approved school building shall be permitted between 0800 to 2200, Monday to Friday, and 0900 to 1700 hours on Saturdays and Sundays. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance by ensuring the development is restricted to permitted hours. 34. The use of the dance/fitness studio shall not commence until details has been submitted and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, regarding its design and building fabrication to ensure noise emissions arising from the studios do not exceed Noise Rating Curve (NR) 15 as determined within a living apartment of the nearest noise sensitive dwelling with the window moderately open as referred to in Section 7.5 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled ‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ-ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A.’ This limit would apply and be determined over a minimum of 5 minutes duration between the hours of 0700 to 2300 hours. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance from the development. 35. Prior to the installation of the building plant, further details of the potential noise impact and mitigation measures required must be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority as referred to in Section 6.5 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled ‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ- ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A.’. This mitigation should ensure noise emissions arising from the plant does not exceed Noise Rating Curve (NR) 25, as determined within a living apartment of the nearest noise sensitive dwelling with the window moderately open. This limit would apply and be determined over a minimum of 5 minutes duration between the hours of 0700 to 2300 hours. Page 15
Page 16
Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance at the development. 36. Prior to the installation of the building plant, further details of the potential noise impact and mitigation measures required must be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority as referred to in Section 6.5 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by RMP dated 8th December 2025 and titled ‘Noise Impact Assessment, New Forres Academy Forres, BIM No: 619428-RMP-ZZ- ZZ_ZZ-T-AE-10039A.’. This mitigation should ensure noise emissions arising from the plant does not exceed Noise Rating Curve (NR) 20, as determined within a bedroom of the nearest noise sensitive dwelling with the window moderately open. This limit would apply and be determined over a minimum of 5 minutes duration between the hours of 2300 to 0700 hours. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance from the development. 37. Prior to the development commencing, confirmed details of the proposed lighting shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, having regard to the supporting statement ‘Technical note, Light Pollution Planning Statement, Project Number 324.016.00, Issued by RYBKA, dated 28/08/2025’. Thereafter, the agreed lighting details shall be implemented and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To protect local residents from light nuisance from the site. 38. Prior to development commencing details of the measures/design features utilised to deter roosting and nesting gulls upon the roofs of all buildings must be submitted to and approved in writing by the council as Planning Authority. Thereafter the measures hereby approved must be adhered to and in place prior to any of the buildings coming into occupation/use and maintained for the lifetime of the development. Reason: In order to ensure the development does not attract seagull activity which would be to the detrimental amenity of the users and neighbouring properties. 39. Maintenance of the Sustainable urban Drainage (SuDs) scheme and flood mitigation measures will be carried in accordance with the maintenance plan provided within section 9 of the approved Landscape Maintenance Plan. Reason: To ensure that SuDs scheme and flood mitigation measures continue to operate as required. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are:- The proposal is to provide a new Forres Academy and additional support needs teaching facilities and community facilities with associated landscaping, external sport provision Page 16
Page 17
including a 3G sports pitch, car parking and bus drop-off to replace the existing academy on land at Applegrove Playing Field, Roysvale Park and the existing Forres Academy site, Forres. The new school is essential community infrastructure required to deliver a key objective of the Moray Council. The proposed development represents a significant and positive opportunity to replace the existing school with a modern, fit-for-purpose facility, while also enhancing sports and community facilities for the benefit of both students and the wider community. The site layout and building design incorporate green infrastructure, biodiversity enhancements, and sustainable drainage systems, all of which contribute to nature recovery and ecological resilience. The proposal demonstrates a clear commitment to climate action and will minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to Scotland’s net zero targets. Subject to conditions where recommended, the siting, design and servicing arrangements for the replacement school are considered acceptable with no unacceptable or significant adverse impact identified upon the appearance and amenity of the development plan and/or the surrounding area. The proposal is, in all respects, considered to be acceptable and accord with the provisions of the National Planning Framework 4 and Moray Local Development Plan 2020 and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. List of Informatives: THE TRANSPORTATION MANAGER, has commented that: - Planning consent does not carry with it the right to construct a new road or any part of road. In accordance with Section 21 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 Construction Consent for new roads (includes passing places, modified junctions and footpaths) that will form part of the public road will be required. Advice on this matter can be obtained by emailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk and reference to the following pages on the Council website. Checklist: http://www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file68812.pdf RCC and Specification: http://www.moray.gov.uk/moray_standard/page_65638.html Road Safety Audit of accesses and bus drop off/pick up zone. The detailed design required for the Road Construction Consent shall be informed by a Stage 2 Road Safety Audit, for the proposed bus lay-by, new vehicular access onto Orchard Road, widening of the footway along the Orchard Road site frontage, pedestrian crossing point on Burdsyard Road and the improvements to the Roysvale Terrace remote footway crossing of Castle Street. A Stage 3 Road Safety Audit shall be undertaken prior to the opening of the development to the public and a Stage 4 Road Safety Audit within 1 year of first opening of the development. The applicant shall act on all recommendations set out at each Stage of the Road Safety Audit process. Page 17
Page 18
Before commencing development, the applicant is obliged to apply for permission to modify the existing public road, in accordance with Section 56 of the Roads (Scotland) Act. The applicant will be required to provide technical information, including drawings and drainage calculations, a programme for the proposed works. Advice on the application process can be obtained by emailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk The applicant should also note that all costs associated with the preparation and promotion of a Road Traffic Regulation Order to facilitate the provision of any required waiting restrictions along with all costs associated with the provision of appropriate road markings to support the Road Traffic Regulation Order shall be met by the developer. The applicant is obliged to apply for road opening permit(s) in accordance with Section 85 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. Advice on this matter can be obtained by emailing roads.permits@moray.gov.uk and reference to the following page on the Council website. Road Opening: http://www.moray.gov.uk/moray_standard/page_79860.html Public utility apparatus may be affected by this proposal. Contact the appropriate utility service in respect of any necessary utility service alterations, which have to be carried out at the expense of the developer. Any street furniture, which will need to be repositioned to enable the development, including deliveries to the development, shall be at the expense of the developer. The developer shall be responsible for any necessary diversion of any utilities or drainage present at the locations where works are to be undertaken. The developer shall meet all costs of diverting any footpath or cycleway during the construction period, including signage. The developer shall be responsible for ensuring that surface/ground water does not run from the public road into the site. The developer shall free and relieve the Roads Authority from any claims arising out of his operations on the road or extension to the road. No retaining structures or embankments shall be constructed along the edge of the road, whether retaining the public road or ground adjoining the public road without prior consultation and agreement of the Roads Authority. Advice on the retaining structures/embankments can be obtained by emailing structures@moray.gov.uk The Transportation Manager must always be contacted before any works commence. This includes any temporary access, which should be agreed with the Roads Authority prior to work commencing on it. Page 18
Page 19
In the event of approval, the applicant should consider liaising with the funeral director on Orchard Road to see if the Construction Traffic Management Plan, could accommodate HGV movements from and to the site to avoid funeral events. THE SERVICE MANAGER – COMMUNITY PROTECTION, has commented that: - This development has been identified from Ordnance Survey Map data as having an Electricity Sub Station located in the southern section of the site. Moray Council does not have any further information as to whether the ground is contaminated. [Safe development is the responsibility of the developer.] You should consider investigating this matter further prior to proceeding with the proposed works. Should contamination be encountered, contact the Environmental Health section immediately (email contaminated.land@moray.gov.uk Tel 0300 1234561) to agree an appropriate course of action. The proposed development shall be suitably controlled so as not to give rise to a Statutory Nuisance in terms of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. External lighting shall be suitably maintained so as not to give rise to a Statutory Nuisance in terms of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Should Planning consent be attained, the food business is recommended to contact the Environmental Health Section to ensure the premises layout, equipment and facilities complies with the Food Hygiene (Scotland) Regulations 2006. The business operator will require to register the premises in terms of the Food Premises (Registration) Regulation 1991. The premises will require to comply with The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and associated regulations enforced by this Section. Noise from the indicative sounder equipment on the 3G pitch for bird protection should be suitably controlled so as not to give rise to a Statutory Nuisance in terms of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. THE SERVICE MANAGER, DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING STANDARDS, has commented that: - During construction work the applicant and/or the developer should remain vigilant for signs of bats, if they come across any bats or any signs of bats, all work in that area must cease immediately and Scottish Natural Heritage must be contacted for further advice. It should be noted that as bats are a European Protected Species, as listed in the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 it is illegal to: • Deliberately kill, injure, disturb or capture/take European Protected Species of Page 19
Page 20
animal. • Damage or destroy the breeding sites or resting places of such animals. Furthermore, where it is proposed to carry out works that will affect a European Protected Species or their shelter/breeding places, whether or not they are present, a licence is required from the appropriate licensing authority. A Building Warrant will be required for the proposals. Should you require further assistance please do not hesitate to contact Building Standards by telephoning 0300 1234561 or emailing buildngstandards@moray.gov.uk LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description 619428-JMA-00-01_ZZ-D-A-000027 P01 Site Sections 619428-JMA-00-01_00-D-A-000002 P01 Floor Level 00 619428-JMA-00-01_00-D-A-000002 P01 Floor Level 01 619428-JMA-00-01_02-D-A-000002 P01 Floor Level 02 619428-JMA-00-01_R2-D-A-000002 P01 Roof Plan 619428-RYD-94-XX_XX-D-L-211000P6 Hardworks 619428-RYD-94-XX_XX-D-L-700000P6 Planting Strategy HLS10571 REV1 Proposed Floodlighting 619428-JMA-00-ZZ_ZZ-D-A-000005P01 Proposed Site Plan 619428-RYB-96-00_ZZ-D-ME-00011P04 Proposed Site Services Layout - Sheet 1 Of 5 619428-RYB-96-00_ZZ-D-ME-00012P03 Proposed Site Services Layout - Sheet 2 Of 5 619428-RYB-96-00_ZZ-D-ME-00013P03 Proposed Site Services Layout - Sheet 3 Of 5 619428-RYB-96-00_ZZ-D-ME-00014P03 Proposed Site Services Layout - Sheet 4 Of 5 619428-RYB-96-00_ZZ-D-ME-00015P03 Proposed Site Services Layout - Sheet 5 Of 5 619428-RYB-90-02_00-D-A-000001P02 Sprinkler Compound FAF-2509-TPN Tree Protection North FAF-2509-TPS Tree Protection South 619428-RYD-94-XX_XX-D-L-213000 P06 Trees To Be Removed and Retained 619428-RYD-94-XXXX-D-L-480001P2 Soft Landscape Details 619428-JMA-00-ZZ_ZZ-D-A-000002P3 Location Plan 619428-RYD-94-XX_XX-D-L-212000P6 Fencing Plan 619428-JMA-90-04_00-D-A-000001P02 CDT Covered Yard Elevations and Floor Plan Page 20
Page 21
619428-JMA-90-03_00-D-A-000001P02 Bin Store and Substation Elevation and Floor Plan 619428-JMA-90-01_ZZ-D-A-000001P01 Bird Protection Measures - Main Building 619428-JMA-90-00_ZZ-D-A-000001P01 Bird Protection Site Plan 619428-JMA-90-13_00-D-A-000001P02 External Store Elevations and Floor Plans 619428-JMA-90-11_ZZ-D-A-000026P01 Building Sections 619428-JMA-00-01_ZZ-D-A-000013P01 Site Elevations 619428-RYD-94-XX-XX-D-L-210000P8 Landscape Plan Page 21
Page 22
Page 22
Page 23
Plans, drawings and other material submitted to the local authority are protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (section 47). You may only use material which is downloaded and/ or printed for consultation purposes, to compare current applications with previous schemes and to check whether developments have been completed in accordance with approved plans. Further copies must not be made without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Maps shown in the Planning Committee Report can only be used for the purposes of the Planning Committee. Any other use risks infringing Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Maps produced within this Planning Committee Report can only be reproduced with the express permission of the Moray Council and other Copyright holders. This permission must be granted in advance. PLANNING APPLICATION COMMITTEE SITE PLAN Site Address: Site Of Forres Academy/Applegrove/Roysvale Forres Planning Application Ref Number: 25/01203/APP Location Plan Applicant Name: Moray Council Page 23
Page 24
Location plan Page 24
Page 25
Site plan 16/01664/APP Page 25
Page 26
Elevations 16/ Page 26
Page 27
Landscaping 16/ Page 27
Page 28
16/ Page 28
Page 29
Photo 1 16/ Page 29
Page 30
Photo 2 16/ Page 30
Page 31
Photo 3 16/ Page 31
Page 32
Photo 4 16/ Page 32
Page 33
Photo 5 16/ Page 33
Page 34
Photo 6 16/ Page 34
Page 35
PLANNING APPLICATION: 25/01203/APP In the event that a recommendation on this planning application is overturned the Committee is reminded of the advice contained on the front page of the agenda for Reports on Applications 1. THE PROPOSAL • Planning permission is sought for the erection of a replacement secondary school, additional support needs teaching facilities, community facilities, associated hard and soft landscaping, sports provision, 3G pitch, car parking and bus drop-off on the site of Forres Academy, Applegrove and Roysvale Park. • The new school will be 3-storey in height with plant equipment on the roof which includes air source heat pumps and mechanical ventilation heat recovery systems. • The building would have a footprint of 6,500 sqm (total gross floorspace 13,032 sqm) with a roof height of 13.8m in height. The plant on the roof takes the overall height to 16.3m. • The new building can accommodate 1120 pupils (the same capacity as the existing Forres Academy). • External materials for the new school include facing brick in buff and grey, polyester powder coated (PPC) aluminium cladding and a polyester powder coated aluminium framed glazing system. • The proposal includes the following:- • Pedestrian footways, including at the front entrance of the school and footpaths at the west and east edges of Roysvale Park. • A cycle path at the east edge of Roysvale Park. • A vehicular access point off Orchard Road, with enhanced provision drop off at front of the school. • Abus layby parallel to Sanquhar Road and reconfigured bus layby on Burdsyard Road. • Car parking areas (within the southern part of the site for the school: 140 spaces and 14 EV charging spaces) (within the northern end of the site, for visitors 11 spaces and 8 accessible). • Cycle parking (total of 200 cycle spaces across the site). • External plant (sprinkler compound, substation). • Ground lowering works in respect of flood basin at the south end of the site. • A full-size synthetic grass pitch (3G astroturf) served by six 15m high flood lighting masts on the site of the existing Forres Academy. • External outdoor activity spaces, including playground, dining area, enhanced garden provision, food technology area and a craft and design technical covered area. • Drainage and Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs). Page 35
Page 36
• Flood mitigation measures. • Hard and soft landscaping. • The existing grass football pitch and athletics track within Roysvale Park will remain in use during and after construction. • The proposed school is for a ‘5-18 community shared campus’, which will be accessible to the public; it will be able to offer sports classes, recreation sessions, activity clubs, range of fitness classes, community group meetings and social activities. Opening times are as follows: - • School – 8am to 10pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 5pm Saturday and Sunday. • The use of the facilities will be managed by the school during school hours and outwith school hours it will be managed by the Councils Sports and Culture Department. • 3G pitch – School term time Monday to Friday is school use only until 4pm and 4pm to 9pm is for public bookings. Outside school term time public bookings are Monday to Friday between 9am and 9pm. Weekend use for public bookings is 9am to 5pm. • The existing Forres Academy is to be demolished; this will be undertaken following occupation of the new school building. • This planning application is accompanied by the following supporting information: • Arboricultural Impact Assessment • Carbon Management Statement • Construction Phase Plan • Construction Project Management Plan • Construction Susutainabilty Plan • Construction Traffic Management Plan • Design and Access Statement • Drainage Strategy Report • Ecological Appraisal • Ecological Summary • Geotechnical Design and Environmental Risk Assessment • Landscape Maintenance Plan • Noise Impact Assessment • Pre-Application Consultation Report • Sports Facility Note • Tree Suvey • Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment • Flood Risk Assessment • Transport Statement • Light Pollution Planning Statement • Planning Statement Page 36
Page 37
2. THE SITE • The site is located within the settlement boundary of Forres 250m south of the Town Centre on Applegrove Playing Field, Roysvale Park and the existing Forres Academy site. It extends to 8.9 (ha). Land to the south west of the existing Forres Academy, across the Mosset Burn, is also included within the site. This is used by the existing Forres Academy for sports. • The site is located in a mixed-use area which is largely residential. Applegrove Primary School is adjacent to the north east of the site, Forres Tennis Club is located on the north west boundary of the site, the north east corner of the site is occupied by the existing Forres Academy building which includes the Forres Swimming Pool and Hydrotherapy pool and fitness centre (please note only the Forres Academy Building is to be demolished) and Sanquhar Woods are to the wider south of the site. • The existing Forres Academy site comprises two distinct areas. The main site, located adjacent to Roysvale Park, is split by the Mosset Burn and accommodates the school buildings, Forres Swimming and Hydrotherapy Pool, car parks, and a mix of hard and soft sports pitches. In addition, there is a satellite site to the south, connected by footpaths from the main campus, which provides additional grass playing fields. • The part of the site where the new school is proposed is covered by an ENV4 designation “Applegrove Primary School” (as defined in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP settlement Statement for Forres) South of this, there are four further ENV4 designations on the site, “Roysvale”, “Playing Field (Mosset Burn)”, “Playing Field (Burn of Mosset)” and “Lochview” and are all sports areas. Roysvale Park, currently has a grass football pitch and athletics pitch marked out on it. The bus drop-off lane with pavement and cycle path and a contractor’s compound (only required temporarily for phase 1 of the development) are to be located within Roysvale Park. 3. HISTORY 25/00672/PAN - Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) for the Erection of a new three-storey building comprising of 1120 pupil secondary school and additional support needs teaching facilities and community facilities with associated hard and soft landscaping, external sport provision and car parking and bus drop-off to replace existing academy at Forres Academy, Burdsyard Road, Forres – response issued 18 June 2025, confirms the requirements for consultation with the local community i.e. consultation with the local Community Council and other surrounding Community Councils and at least two public events. Following consideration of the PAN by the Planning & Regulatory Services Committee (on 12 August 2025) there were no provisional views/statements from any members. 25/00548/SCN – (Screening Opinion) Erect a new three-storey building comprising of 1120 pupil secondary school and additional support needs teaching facilities and community facilities with associated hard and soft landscaping, Page 37
Page 38
external sport provision and car parking to replace existing academy at Forres Academy Burdsyard Road, Forres. Decision issued on 27 May 2025 confirmed that no Environmental Impact Assessment is required. 25/00159/PEMAJ - Erection of new secondary school with community facilities and associated infrastructure on land west of Applegrove Primary School Forres. Following a pre-application meeting, response (24 March 2025) provides feedback on the proposal, including consultee responses and identification of information expected to accompany any formal application. 4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 NPF1 - Tackling the Climate NPF2 - Climate Mitigation and Adaptation NPF3 - Biodiversity NPF6 - Forestry, Woodland and Trees NPF7 - Historic Assets and Places NPF9 – Brownfield, Vacant, Derelict land NPF 12 – Zero Waste NPF13 - Sustainable Transport NPF14 - Design, Quality and Place NPF 15 Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods NPF18 - Infrastructure First NPF 19 - Heating and Cooling NPF21 - Play, Recreation and Sport NPF22 - Flood Risk NPF23 - Health and Safety NPF25 - Community Wealth Building Moray Local Development Plan 2020 PP1 - Placemaking PP2 - Sustainable Economic Growth PP3 - Infrastructure and Services DP1 - Development Principles EP2 - Biodiversity EP5 - Open Space EP7 - Forestry Woodland and Trees EP8 - Historic Environment EP12 - Management and Enhancement Water EP13 - Foul Drainage EP14 - Pollution Contamination Hazards Forres ENV4 – Sports Areas • ‘Roysvale’ • ‘Playing Field (Burn of Mosset)’ • ‘Academy Playing Fields’ • ‘Applegrove Primary School’ • ‘Lochview’ Page 38
Page 39
5. ADVERTISEMENTS 5.1 The application has been advertised for neighbour notification purposes and as development defined under Schedule 3 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. 6. CONSULTATIONS Strategic Planning and Development – No objection. Proposal complies with all relevant Moray Local Development 2020 and National Planning Framework policies subject to conditions relating to a detailed Biodiversity Plan, an updated Carbon Statement (once the additional design detail is available) and a Community Wealth Building Plan. Planning and Developer Obligations – No developer obligations sought. Moray Access Manager – No objection subject to the replacement cycle/ footpath adjacent to Sanquhar Road being constructed like for like in terms of a durable, smooth surface (as shown in the Landscape General Arrangement Plan and this path being opened as quickly as possible. A condition is attached to the consent requiring the proposed pedestrian footpath to the west of Roysvale Park being fully constructed and brought into operational use prior to the closure of the core path (CP-DA01) located on the east side of Roysvale Park. Moray Flood Risk Manager - No objection subject to a condition requiring the proposed flood storage area and bund being fully operational prior to the commencement of the demolition of the existing academy. SEPA – No objection subject to a condition requiring the proposed flood storage area and flood bund (Mitigation Option 4) outlined within the Flood Risk Assessment modelling report (Mott MacDonald, 2025) being constructed and operational prior to commencement of demolition works at the existing Forres Academy Site. Sportscotland – No objection subject to conditions relating to a safeguarding scheme which protects the existing pitch area at Roysvale Park during the construction period, the new synthetic pitch being surfaced with a synthetic pitch that will be designed and constructed by a recognised (e.g. SAPCA* registered) specialist pitch contractor(s) and the new synthetic surfaced pitch being fully operational and available for use not later than eighteen months after the opening of the new school, unless otherwise agreed in writing. Forres Community Council – Support proposal – for the new school as it is much needed in the area. Support on the provision that the drainage and flood alleviation shown in the plan are fully costed and all risks are fully mitigated. Moray Council Education – No objection. Page 39
Page 40
SSEN Transmissions – No comments. Environmental Health – No objection subject to conditions relating to construction works permitted hours, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), type of lighting on the 3G pitch and its permitted hours of use, the hours of permitted use of the 3G pitch, the design and materials of the containment boards for the 3G pitch, the type of fencing for the 3G pitch, a noise management plan for the 3G pitch, hours of operation of the dance and fitness studio, design and building fabrication details of the dance and fitness studio, noise impact and mitigation measures of the building plant and confirmation of the lighting. Informatives are also provided. Contaminated Land – No objection – an informative is recommended regarding an Electricity Sub Station located in the southern section of the site and that it should be considered investigating to establish whether the land is contaminated with mitigation if required. Transportation Manager – No objection subject to conditions relating to a Phasing and Construction Plan; evidence being submitted to confirm that the statutory process to promote the Stopping Up of the Sanquhar Road Cycle Track to enable the provision of the new bus lay-by has commenced; evidence being submitted to confirm that the statutory process to promote new and amended waiting restrictions on Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road and Burdsyard Road has commenced; the proposed alterations and restorations to the existing road markings; the provision of new road markings in the vicinity of the development along Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road, and Burdsyard Road, amendments and improvements to ensure acceptable development in road safety and sustainable travel; a Construction Traffic Management Plan and evidence of the development of a School Travel Plan being submitted. All of the conditions are required to be discharged prior to the commencement of development apart from the final condition that relates to a school Travel Plan, this is required to be submitted and agreed in writing prior to the opening of the development of the public. Informatives are also recommended. Scottish Water – No objection – Confirmed capacity for water and waste water connection and details provided on surface water requirements and asset impact assessment, drinking water protected areas and next steps for non-domestic / commercial properties and trade effluent discharge from non-domestic property. Aberdeenshire Archaeology – No objection. 7. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS NOTE: Following the determination of this application, name and address details will be/have been removed (i.e. redacted) in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulations (paragraph 3 of Minute, Planning & Regulatory Services Committee 16 September 2014). Page 40
Page 41
This application has attracted representations from 134 individuals, 110 of which are objections, 1 neutral and 23 in support. A list of names and addresses of persons/parties that submitted representations is in Appendix 1. Two neighbour notification periods have been run during the consideration of the application, and all representations have been read and where material given appropriate consideration prior to the recommendation being finalised. Given the number of representations, the material grounds for objection/representation are summarised below. Comments that are not material considerations have also been summarised. The grounds for objection/representations have been generally grouped into the topic heading below to aid reference. The main issues raised in the representations can be summarised as follows: Objection Loss of Privacy Parking Reduction of natural light Road Access Road Safety Traffic View affected Affecting natural light Drainage Litter Over-development of site Poor design Smell Inadequate Plans Dust Height of proposed development Noise Affecting natural environment Legal issues Loss of privacy (being overlooked) Poor design Procedures not followed correctly Activity at unsociable hours/behaviour Community Council / Association Consult Out of Time Objection Inappropriate materials / finishes Siting and Design • The school is shoehorned into the site and there is no room to expand it. • Lack of facilities due to size of site. • The proposed relocation would represent overdevelopment on a site that is ill-suited to a large institutional use and would significantly alter the character of the area. Page 41
Page 42
• It is being located in a primary school play area because it's the cheapest option. Extra money should be spent to have the academy at Lochyhill. • Roysvale Park is common good land. • There are better alternative sites such as Lochyhill. • The original survey done by Moray Council as to where the new Academy should be built, more than half suggested Lochyhill was best. • Building on an already built-up area makes no sense. • Disruption to residential area. • It is not a safe place for so many children considering there's another two schools in close proximity. • Building on Applegrove playing field is a loss for the community. • Brownfield sites or underutilized land nearby could be viable options. • Has there been a study on the pollution and general health conditions such as asthma in such proximity to a primary school. • With this new plan, in excess of 1000 academy pupils, approx. 300 primary pupils plus a large community of local residents who often use Roysvale Park common good land for recreation/dog walking etc will all be sharing this limited area. A step backwards and a real loss of green space with no replacement. • Regulations state secondary schools of the proposed size should have playing fields 3.6 hectares (36000 square metres). Roysvale park is (14600m2) and a new 3G football pitch (7000m2) so therefore it falls significantly short. • The principle of locating such a large school build on an existing primary playing field appears contrary to the objective of preserving existing educational outdoor facilities for younger children. • The inclusion of public facilities and library probably means that the functions of the existing community centre are likely to be transferred to the new building. The new location for this is much too far from the town centre. The current community centre should be retained and the new building reduced in size. • Would feel uncomfortable accessing community facilities within a secondary school. • Building a new school even closer to the centre of the town defies logic and goes against everything that is being done nationally to making inner city / town environments more friendly and healthy places to live in. • If it was in the Roysvale Park area it would not look as out of place next to the nearby villas. • The Council is trying to bill the Applegrove site as an ideal place for a 5-18 campus. There is no precedent for 5-18 campuses in Scotland, apart from enhanced provision schools which tend to be much smaller. The majority of 3-18 campuses in Scotland have been built on greenfield sites on the edge of town and there is no precedent for shoe-horning such a significant build into town centres. Page 42
Page 43
• A three-storey building of the type proposed would appear incongruous and overbearing, creating a visual impact that is entirely out of step with the established pattern of development. The form and scale of the proposal seem to result from an attempt to shoehorn a large structure into an unsuitable site rather than from a design that responds sympathetically to its setting. • Forres Academy will have bits and pieces of land making up their campus, split by busy roads, at a distance from the actual school. The feasibility study stated that the new school campus should not be a split campus. • The proposed site is outwith the Forres Conservation Area although there were previous proposals to extend the Conservation area boundary to include properties along Sanquhar Road which overlook Applegrove and Roysvale Park. • The simple 25 degree section is misleading for the pitch of sunlight during the winter months in Forres. An aerial photograph in the local press of Applegrove Playing Fields and Roysvale Park with the existing mature trees between the two green spaces shows a shadow of a great depth into Applegrove. With the proposed building being of a similar height it is difficult to see how the Veteran Cottages will not be in shade and how this is acceptable? • The drawing on page 50 of the design and access statement which seems to suggest there will be no impact to the war veteran cottages daylight but is entirely misleading in that regard. The 25° rule is a preliminary rule of thumb and not a substitute for a detailed daylight assessment. A context specific approach should be used here. The sun is below 25° in Forres from early October to the end of February. So, for roughly 4.5 months of the year, the veterans' cottages will be deprived of direct sunlight they once had. • The footpath to the west of Roysvale Park is also not required. There is a recently upgraded cycle / footpath next to Sanquhar Road. Removal of this would reduce the impact on the common good land. • There is little space within the site for the pupils to go at break and lunch. This will result in overspill into Roysvale Park or the High Street. • The building size could be significantly reduced if the community facility aspects were removed. This would also reduce build costs. • Placing a community facility at Applegrove Playing Field will likely result in the loss of facilities and economic decline on Forres High Street. Any community facilities moved to the Academy site will not be available to the community with the same flexibility and open access as they are now. This will result in loss of available amenities to the community, not gain. • The siting of the 3G pitch a good distance away from the main building will impact the time available for PE classes as pupils will take time to get to the site back again. • Potential for risk to health from the distance walked to the site from the 3G pitch in terms of weather conditions but also for first aid if a pupil becomes injured. Page 43
Page 44
• Should be built onsite of existing academy. Provision of temporary classroom facilities would cost more, but it would also solve the RAAC problems even sooner than the optimistic October 2028 date as proposed. • Classroom windows, and circulation zones will directly overlook veterans' gardens and windows. • The plan is an "eye-sore" and the design is unsuitable for the local traditional vernacular. • The use of buff brickwork and sheet metal cladding is considered out of character with the area's historic buildings. • The proposed 3-to-4 storey height is "out of keeping" with local amenity and will tower over single-storey homes in Cicely Place, Roysvale Place, Albert Street, and the Veterans' Cottages. • Comparisons to existing structures like Hainings Court are not relatable, the plant rooms' height is not adequately considered. • Concern raised about the negative impact on a well preserved quiet green area" and the "landscape of the lovely old town of Forres. • Concern regarding overshadowing, loss of light, and loss of openness for nearby properties and gardens, as well as for the adjacent Applegrove Primary School. • Privacy is a concern, with the upper levels of the new building likely to overlook neighbouring properties and gardens. • The reliance on trees for permanent screening is challenged, as trees can be removed. • The artist's impression of the view from Orchard Road is misleading and inaccurate. • The design does not respect local character or scale, contrary to the aims of the Moray Local Development Plan. • There is a lack of clarity, as there is no overall height of the building elevations shown in the plans. • The size of proposed outdoor learning spaces (outdoor classroom, garden) is considered too small and inadequate for a school of 1200 pupils. • The proposed roofs at 4-10 degrees are classified as flat. Adding a pitched roof would further increase the height however other applications for buildings with flat roofs are often refused. The flatness also requires protection from birds nesting. • The height and massing are out of keeping with nearby single and two-storey housing, breaching NPF Policy 14 and MLDP Policy PP1, which require design to respect existing scale and context. • Upper floors will overlook gardens and homes on Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road, and Albert Street, leading to loss of privacy contrary to MLDP Policy DP1 and NPF Policy 14(c) which protect residential amenity. The upper floors will have direct line of site into house. • The development's height and bulk will dominate views across Roysvale Park and the Forres skyline, harming visual amenity and townscape Page 44
Page 45
character. This is contrary to NPF Policy 14 and MLDP Policy PP1 (high- quality, context-sensitive design). • The proposal fails to comply with both NPF4 Policy 14(c) and Policy DP1(i)(a). It does not respect the scale, density, or character of the surrounding area, and its design is detrimental to local amenity. The development would introduce an overbearing and incongruous form into a setting of modest dwellings, undermining the qualities of a successful place. • Reference to the site elevations (drawing no. 000027) and the visual impact assessments contained in Part 8 of the Design & Access Statement confirms that the proposed building would dominate its surroundings, appearing as a bulky giant in comparison to neighbouring properties. • Serious concern for the quality of life for those who live in the War Veteran cottages. Their entire living space will be dominated by a large 3 storey building. • Natural light and gardens degraded with loss due to no direct sunlight in the winter months. • Neighbouring properties will have an increase in noise litter and boisterous teenagers. • Neighbouring properties will be overlooked, as well as losing light, privacy, being disturbed by noise. • Locating the new academy in Applegrove Playing Fields will seriously impact the residents in close proximity to the building in particular the Veterans and those living in Roysvale cottages. Comments (PO): The new school building replaces an outdated facility with a modern, purpose- built design on an adequately sized site. Its co-location with Applegrove Primary School establishes a central hub that strengthens both educational provision and community amenities. The development is sensitively integrated into its setting, featuring landscaped areas and outdoor sports facilities to complement the surrounding environment. There is not an unacceptable impact on amenity for neighbouring properties. The proposal complies with all siting and design policies of NPF and MLDP as detailed in the observation section of this report. It is not anticipated that future extensions to the school will be required given the new school can accommodate 1120 pupils. The current school role is less than 880. Three potential sites were jointly and collectively scored by Design Team members, and the outcome of the appraisal determined that Roysvale Park achieved the highest overall score and thus would be the preferred site. It is considered that a central site, still accessible to all neighbourhoods within the town, would serve the settlement better than one on its outskirts. As with any new build or re-development on a site, construction impacts including disturbance and disruption are somewhat inevitable but likely to be intermittent, occur over a short-term period and are temporary in duration. Attention to the on- Page 45
Page 46
site management of construction activity, including 'best practice' and adherence to requirements of other legislation can also address and mitigate the impact of such effects to ensure that any residual impacts, if any, are not significant. Noise, dust and vibration monitoring stations will be set up prior to commencement of works and this will be used as a baseline comparison for the regular monitoring that will take place during construction. It is acknowledged that the chosen site results in a reduction of play space for Applegrove Primary School. While this is regrettable, the broader benefits of utilising this location are considered to outweigh the loss of the play area. Sportscotland have returned their consultation response with no objection subject to conditions. The required playing areas sizes have been met. Balfour Beatty have mandated Considerate Contractor scheme compliance for all sites and will have regular meetings with both school management teams. There will be a robust construction and traffic management plan in place: these include restricted and allocated delivery and access / egress times to the site. The Vertical Sky Component method used to assess the daylight impact of a proposal on a window is sufficiently clear using the 25 degrees assessment. This method of assessing daylight impact to neighbouring properties is deemed acceptable. The public can still use Roysvale Park as they currently do. The facilities being provided in the school for the public are also required for use by pupils of the new school as well as nearby primary schools. It is unlikely that the new school offering some community facilities will result in the decline of the High Street, this is speculative. There is ample dining space for pupils internally and externally for the new school. There are a number of 5-18 campus schools already operational in Scotland and further schools are planned. In the case of the Applegrove/Roysvale site, it provides an opportunity to create a 5-18 community campus school by incorporating the existing Applegrove into the design consideration. Traffic • The area already experiences high traffic volume, illegal parking, road rage, and congestion during school hours, backing up to the High Street roundabout. Orchard Road and St Leonard's Road has heavy commercial traffic (vans, timber lorries, agricultural vehicles) using them. • Existing car parks in the area are frequently full. • Traffic is already an issue in school hours at the traffic lights and backing up to the roundabout at the bottom of the High Street. • The increased volume of cars, HGV construction vehicles, and buses poses a significant safety hazard for pupils, pedestrians, and cyclists. Hazards include blind junctions (bottom of Nelson Road), current Academy pupils Page 46
Page 47
spilling across roads, and a lack of monitored crossings. It is feared that a serious injury or fatality is only a matter of time. • Adding another 1000 secondary pupils into this area will exacerbate the existing situation. • There is no mention of road crossings, patrolled or otherwise or where the Applegrove parents can pick up and drop off when their usual areas are blocked by construction traffic and the new bus parking lanes. This will cause issues for all neighbouring residents who will be unable to access their properties by car. • The Victorian Street infrastructure is not designed for the volume or size of vehicles anticipated during construction. • Concern regarding use of the surrounding roads will be undermined by heavy construction traffic over three years, they are not fit for this. • The construction phase will add significant vehicle movements (up to 300 personnel movements, 500 delivery movements daily) competing with existing school traffic. • Delivery restrictions do not adequately cover the Applegrove Primary finish time. • The current traffic management plans are viewed as based on questionable or inadequate data, not accounting for "human nature" (e.g., illegal parking, speeding). • The Transport Statement focuses on parking occupancy rather than overall traffic flow. • Proposed new bus drop-off points may cause chaos with existing Applegrove school drop-offs. Buses should use tarred area at rear of school. • Using Roysvale Park for P.E. is considered unsafe due to proximity to the road. • A potential lack of court consent for using common good land for a bus layby could derail the entire plan. • The proposed development dramatically exacerbates documented existing, safety hazards and infrastructure deficiencies, which currently range from daily frustration and illegal parking to serious accident risks. • An in-depth study into the impact of increased traffic in the building phase and operating phase of the Applegrove/Lochyhill site does not appear to have taken place. • Can delivery restrictions be put in place when funerals are taking place at the funeral director across the street? • Existing roads (Sanquhar, Orchard, Burdsyard, and Albert) are narrow, already congested, and unsafe for heavy goods vehicles and increased traffic. The design fails MLDP Policy T2 (safe and suitable access). • Proposal is inconsistent with LDP Policy T2 (Provision of Access) and Policy T3 (Parking Standards), which require that developments ensure adequate parking and road-safety measures. It also fails NPF4 Policy 13 (Sustainable Transport), which seeks to improve conditions for active travel and local amenity. • The 20-minute neighbourhood in NPF Policy 15 is noted in the planning proposal however it is not appropriate to assess this proposal against it given the rural context and limited transport infrastructure in Forres. The Page 47
Page 48
proposal underestimates car dependency and risks creating parking shortfalls and congestion, contrary to NPF Policies 13 and 15 and MLDP Policies PP1 and T2. A balanced approach that reflects local realities and ensures adequate parking and safe access is essential. Comments (PO): The Transportation Service Manager has considered all these issues as part of the application but does not object to the proposal on road safety, traffic congestion or parking grounds subject to conditions and informatives being attached to the planning consent if permitted. The proposal complies with the policies of NPF and MLDP in terms of Transportation requirements as detailed in the observation section of this report. Policies T1 and T2 are from the MLDP 2015. This local plan has been replaced with the MLDP 2020. The relevant policies of the MLDP have been complied with, as detailed in the observation section of this report. The start of the school day at Forres Academy is earlier than for Applegrove Primary school and the end of the school day is later. Observations are that the timing of activity at both schools is separate and distinct. This means that the use of the bus lay-by will be before the drop off time for the primary school and after the pickup time at the end of the school day – except on Fridays when this will occur at lunchtime. The predicted number of additional pupils attending the new school is 15 in 2032. 8.4% percent of pupils are currently dropped off by parents which means there would only be a small increase in this by 2032. The provision of teacher parking will be at the same location. Bus movements will not be substantially different as they already use Castle Street, Burdsyard Road and Sanquhar Road to access the existing school. Traffic routing through the A940/Orchard Road traffic signals will remain unaltered by the relocation of the senior school. Parents choosing to park on existing waiting restrictions is a matter for Police Scotland. The Council’s Park Smart programme is a joint action between Police Scotland, Transportation and a school to educate and inform parents/carers about safe parking. If Applegrove is experiencing problems with indiscriminate parking, taking part in Park Smart can assist with educating parents/carers to address their behaviours. Transportation will be happy to liaise with Applegrove School to undertake this programme, should they wish to participate. There are existing 20mph speed limits in place around Applegrove, Andersons and Forres Academy. All roads surrounding the schools are to have a reduced speed limit of 20mph in the new year as part of the National Strategy for 20mph. Page 48
Page 49
A condition attached to the planning consent seeking road markings to be provided to protect property driveways and discourage parking is recommended. The school is a replacement school with access for pupils from the southern side of the building. This is only some 300m from the pupil access for the existing Forres Academy building. A condition requiring a construction traffic management plan (CTMP) to be agreed with the Council prior to works commencing on the site is to be attached to the consent. This will ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage traffic during construction works at the site. Deliveries out with school drop off and pick up times is standard practice for development near schools. Travel to and from school (excluding on a school bus/taxi) is the responsibility of parents/carers. A definitive study into the impact of construction traffic is not required at this stage and the Construction Traffic Management Plan is normally not finalised until a contractor has been appointed. Effects will be temporary and are dependent on construction techniques and programme. The CTMP will provide information and proposals for mitigation. Transportation advised that delivery restrictions could be written into the Construction Traffic Management Plan/Travel Plan for when funerals are taking place. The funeral director would be responsible for providing timings with an appropriate amount of notice so deliveries can be amended if need be. An informative is recommended to encourage the applicant to investigate this possible measure. Parking • The plan relies on staff and parents using distant car parks (High Street, other side of Roysvale Park). This ignores "human nature"; people will choose to park illegally or on nearby residential streets (Albert Street, etc.) for convenience, especially in bad weather or when carrying supplies. This displaces existing users of public car parks (library, dance classes, tennis courts, residents) and exacerbates existing Applegrove parking issues. • The split-site parking location (remote from the main building) is impractical and creates safety hazards with increased on-street parking that could block emergency vehicle access. The entrance/exit points on narrow roads will increase congestion at blind spots. • Using the existing tarred area/car park at the rear of the current academy site for bus drop-offs/staff parking or modifying the current bus stop area to be longer, removing the need to appropriate Common Good land in Roysvale Park for a new bus layby/parking area. • There is no designated parking close to the proposed site, this will cause chaos on Orchard Road which is already congested with traffic from Applegrove. Page 49
Page 50
• The proposed vehicle entrance to the new school is close to neighbouring properties traffic congestion will increase as cars turn into and emerge from the small car park proposed in the plan. • The Moray Council has stated in consultation that the current bus drop off cannot be used as children would have to cross the road when they get off the bus. The Moray Council, however, has canvassed for a town centre (20 minute neighbourhood) school so children can walk / cycle to school. Will children who walk or cycle not have to cross a road? The argument put forward by the Moray Council at consultation for this bus lane does not stack up. • Where will people park to use the community facilities. There are no bus stops nearby the new school therefore how are people supposed to access them such as the elderly. • Drawing more traffic into the town centre permanently counters government recommendations on pollution. Concerns were raised about bus drivers idling their engines and the impact of traffic fumes on public health (asthma, COPD). • The traffic survey was conducted on a single summer day (June 12th, 2025) which is likely unrepresentative of peak winter traffic flows. The data for community centre use figures is also questionable. • The local Victorian road infrastructure is already vulnerable (a section of Orchard Road recently collapsed). The high volume of construction HGV traffic poses an extreme risk, especially concerning access for emergency vehicles during an accident. • The council planning statement indicates increased demand for car/bus access, the local network and narrow streets may not be sufficient to cope without significant detrimental impact on residents. • There are not enough parking spaces outside the swimming pool/hydrotherapy pool/gym, so people are parking out on Burdsyard Road, and it is difficult to pass the cars when cars are coming from opposite direction. • During construction the number of vehicles anticipated does not match the size of the compound on Roysvale Park. The compound use requires court approval. To allow Roysvale Park to remain accessible as a football pitch and running track during the works the compound cannot increase so the result could be that these vehicles will fight for spaces in Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road and beyond. • It is not enforceable to make staff park in the main car park. • Parking spaces in a bus lane will inevitably lead to cars being parked in the bus lane at times when the buses want to be there, which will lead directly to further chaos and traffic dangers in the area. The Transport Statement indicates that cars stop in the bus lane of the current academy, so this is already an issue, without including formal parking spaces. • It has been suggested that parking issues will be managed via double yellow lines. Double yellow lines do not stop people parking in those areas at peak traffic times round the current academy and Applegrove. This is noted in the Page 50
Page 51
Transport Statement submitted by the Moray Council with this application, yet it is still mooted as a mitigation, in complete contradiction to the results of its own survey. It would be a shame to find ourselves with a town where our own planning is so bad we have to install double yellow lines everywhere to try and manage this. • Parking restrictions are stated to be in place around Sanquhar Road and Orchard Road for two years. This will prevent people parking outside their own homes and will lead to further issues for parking in other areas. How will parents drop their children at either school during this time? • If the planned 12 metre bus lane goes ahead, can the bus drivers be forced to switch off their engines while they're waiting instead of pumping fumes on to the pavement. • Using a 12-meter strip of Roysvale Park (Common Good land) for a bus lane/parking area would reduce valuable green space used for football pitches and running tracks. Court approval is required for this action. • Sanquhar Road was wrongly dismissed as residents parking in the traffic survey. There is significant congestion both before 0900 and around 1500 as the younger primary pupils are collected from Applegrove, either side of the junction with Nelson Road. This often coincides with the buses arriving for the Academy and the teachers are already there. Comments (PO): The Transportation Service Manager has considered all these issues as part of the application but does not object to the proposal on road safety, traffic congestion or parking grounds subject to conditions and informatives being attached to the planning consent if permitted. The provision and availability of on-site parking for this development is in accordance with current parking standards. The proposed bus layby is closer to the new school entrance than the existing bus layby used for Forres Academy. Temporary obstruction during deliveries is a matter for Police Scotland. A raised crossing is to be provided for pupils and staff crossing Burdsyard Road, this will be secured by condition. Safe crossing points are/will be located throughout the local road network. The pupil entrance is to the rear of building and not on Orchard Road. Therefore, school drop of by parents/carers will be directed to Burdsyard Road, as present. The new small car park at the front of the new school is for Enhanced Provision pupils only. Traffic using this car park will therefore be limited. Staff will be asked to park in the main car park. Parking for the community facilities will be located in the main car park out of school hours. A dial a bus service operates in the Forres area. Dial a bus is a door to door bookable bus service for those unable to use existing forms of transport or Page 51
Page 52
do not have a regular scheduled bus service. This service is available for everyone regardless of age or disability. It can be requested that bus engines are turned off whilst waiting in the proposed bus lay by. Overall there is sufficient capacity on the local road network in Forres, with limited congestion on the A940 during peak travel periods. The school site is remote enough from the A940 so as not to have any additional impact on the operation of that road. Additional parking is provided as part of the proposal; as it is close to the gym/swimming pool/hydrotherapy pool it can be utilised by the users of those facilities. A condition requiring a construction traffic management plan (CTMP) to be agreed with the Council prior to works commencing on the site is to be attached to the consent. This will ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage traffic during construction works at the site. The proposed bus layby will be dedicated for use by buses only during school drop off and pick up times. The existing bus lay-by on Burdsyard Road will be amended and made available for general parking. Parking restrictions (double yellow lines) can be introduced to deter indiscriminate parking behaviours e.g. parking too close to junctions and improve road safety. Park Smart to educate parents/carers on where to safely park. The CTMP will impose temporary restrictions on parking limited to locations where they are necessary for road safety reasons. Construction • Building an academy in the grounds of an existing primary school would cause years of noise, dust, traffic and danger for neighbouring properties including Applegrove. • Pupils education will suffer if they are forced to learn in the middle of a building site. It is not safe or healthy environment for children. • The impact on pupils and teaching staff while this work is underway will be unimaginable and the disruption to education is unquantifiable. Pupils and staff will be subjected to unprecedented levels of noise pollution, vibration and increased traffic flow. The retention and recruitment of teaching staff to the school at a time of such upheaval is likely to be adversely affected. • The construction work taking place during school hours will make noise distracting pupils from their education, the construction site itself will disrupt the parents dropping their children off (traffic control measures, construction vehicles and plant using the roads, etc) which has a knock on negative effect with their respective employers. Page 52
Page 53
• Construction sites are dangerous places that should not be that close to primary aged children. • No consideration given to local residents or Applegrove Primary pupils and teachers who will have to endure the noise and pollution of the build. The construction work will run from 7am until 7pm at least five days a week, perhaps six, every week for at least two years and then for longer, how many years unknown, as the old Academy is knocked down, a car park made and an all weather sports pitch installed. • Previous construction work at the Academy and swimming pool that work was allowed to go ahead outwith the time restrictions including the loading of scaffolding onto a vehicle at 01:30. • It is not suitable for there to be construction noise next to funeral home. • Noise will disturb those working from home. • Some of the pupils who attend this school already have special needs and such an environment will be hostile to them. • Piling to establish the foundations may well produce shock waves which can destabilise buildings as far away as the High Street where buildings are historic. Could also undermine Applegrove primary due to it being so close and the existing Forres Academy that has RAAC cement issues already rendering it structurally weak. • Has Moray Council factored in costs to compensate nearby buildings being made structurally unsound. • Many surrounding properties are older properties and are at high risk of structural damage due to the use of heavy plant machinery and also due to high and sustained levels of vibration during the construction phase. • Recording and monitoring conditions and making necessary repairs was indicated previously and this should be a condition of any approved build on this site. • Look at the construction site around the new academy in Nairn to see the space required for a construction site. That space simply isn't available at Applegrove Playing Field and the surrounding area. • Construction dust will have an impact on medical conditions, both children and local residents. • The project will bring years of heavy construction: piling, concrete work, vehicle movements, vibration and dust-all within metres of the cottages. • Do not give permission for my child/children depending on the time the building would start to be breathing in all the dust and fumes flying around in their air during play times and lunch times, or are they expected to stay inside and not have a play field. • During construction, neighbouring homes and Applegrove Primary School will be exposed to dust, debris, and potential contaminants without an adequate Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), contrary to MLDP Policy DP1. Page 53
Page 54
• The schools proposed operating hours and extended construction hours will cause unacceptable noise lighting and traffic disruption to neighbouring residential streets. • Balfour Beatty state that air monitors will be located at the edge of the site. The report does not, however, go on to say what will happen if these monitors are triggered. Installation of a monitor is not in itself a mitigation of the underlying problem. • Despite mitigation, the education of all children at Applegrove will be negatively impacted during construction due to noise, pollution, vibrations, limitations on play space and construction dangers. Comments (PO): As with any new build or re-development on a site, construction impacts including disturbance and disruption are somewhat inevitable but likely to be intermittent, occur over a short-term period and are temporary in duration. Attention to the on- site management of construction activity, including 'best practice' and adherence to requirements of other legislation can also address and mitigate the impact of such effects to ensure that any residual impacts, if any, are not significant. Environmental Health were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it subject to conditions being attached to the consent (if permitted), this includes a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) to be submitted and approved by the Council prior to the commencement of works. This is to ensure that environmental emissions are considered and managed at the construction phase, in order to protect local residents. This will be reviewed by Environmental Health. Transportation was consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it subject to conditions being attached to the consent (if permitted), this includes a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) to be submitted and approved by the Council prior to the commencement of works. This is to ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage traffic during construction works at the site. This will be reviewed by Transportation. Piling is not required to take place to construct the new school. The proposed construction compound is large enough for the development to take place. Noise • The increase in noise for the veterans who are housed nearby is terrifying for those that may have PTSD. The quiet, safe, low-traffic nature of this location is essential to mental health. • Noise will be an issue for the bereaved attending the much respected Funeral Director opposite the construction site. • Neighbouring properties already suffer from noise and litter, this will be exacerbated if the new school is to incorporate the community centre. Page 54
Page 55
• Long-term school activity will add an increase in daily noise from pupils, bells, PA systems, buses, and sports fields, and public. • No clear noise impact assessment or PTSD-specific mitigation measures are included in the proposal. • The Noise Assessment only relates to the proposed sports facilities and does not appear to address the overall noise impact. It also appears to lack detail, in that it does not identify specific types and qualities of noise. It does not take account of the nature of the surrounding topography, which is a natural valley and amphitheatre, and thus likely to amplify noise to a degree not currently experienced from the existing schools and facilities. • School-related development is likely to result in increased noise levels and other impacts, local residents cannot be certain that the impacts will, in the context, be suitably mitigated. Indeed, it is known that some veterans have already left their homes citing reasons such as noise and loss of privacy, and that others are considering the same. • A barrier comprising of 2.4m tall boards is to be erected during the build to mitigate noise. This will have minimal effect to erect a building that is 13m tall. • The impact and noise of over 1,000 high school children coming and going in such a small built-up area will be detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the close neighbours. • Neighbouring properties will have to put up with disruption that comes with living next to a school such as predawn deliveries, noise and detritus. • A funeral home provides a professional and dignified service to the bereaved, requiring a calm and respectful environment at all times. The level of noise and disruption anticipated during the construction phase- particularly from heavy machinery, deliveries, and general site activity-poses a significant risk of interference with funeral services. Such disturbance would be deeply distressing to grieving families and could cause reputational and operational harm to our business. • Should the development be approved, we strongly request that strict conditions are imposed to control construction noise and activity, including a requirement for all intrusive work to cease during funeral services taking place at our premises. • The Noise Assessment appears limited and does not reflect the natural topography which can amplify noise. The War Veteran Cottages would be significantly affected. Comments (PO): A noise impact assessment was submitted with the proposal. Environmental Health have reviewed the proposal and noise impact assessment (as amended) and have no objections to it subject to conditions (including a CEMP) and informatives being attached to the consent if the proposal is permitted. Attention to the on-site management of construction activity, including 'best practice' and adherence to requirements of other legislation can also address and Page 55
Page 56
mitigate the impact of such effects to ensure that any residual impacts, if any, are not significant. Biodiversity • The Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) does not provide a measurable enhancement of biodiversity, and MLDP 2020 Policy E2 (Biodiversity), obliges developers to conserve and enhance existing habitats. Comments (PO): A proactive approach in terms of Biodiversity has been undertaken, it has been demonstrated that it aligns with NPF’s requirement for developments to leave biodiversity in a demonstrably better state and meets MLDP Policy EP2’s emphasis on enhancement and protection, however a condition is required to be attached to the planning consent requiring a detailed biodiversity plan to be submitted and approved in writing prior to the commencement of works (if permitted). This will ensure that all proposed measures are implemented and monitored effectively throughout the development lifecycle. The Climate Change Strategy Officer advised that the BNG report and landscape plan contain enough information to provide initial comment. Open Space • Short sighted and will destroy existing green space, this is not in the Communities interest. • Applegrove’s playing field will be consumed by the new school. It is large well used school green space, currently used every day by primary pupils for outdoor playtime, PE, football, field sports, sports days, daily mile, informal recreation and social development. • The removal of Applegrove’s playing field will diminish opportunities for physical activity, informal play and most importantly all the mental- wellbeing benefits that green outdoor space provides for children. It will have a direct impact on pupils behaviour and mental health. • No regard for children of Applegrove primary by building on their playground. Outdoor learning would be reduced at Applegrove if they lose their playground. • The new school will take away a much-needed flat area for older people. • Forres children are being denied extensive outside spaces and playing fields, unlike Nairn. • Depriving primary pupils of their playground is not in line with Government policy and the legal framework concerning this is set to change. • It is important to have green spaces where children can play. To think the children from Applegrove will have the use of Grant Park to play is ridiculous. Comparing Applegrove with Andersons school who have no playing field is no excuse for stealing Applegrove field to build an Academy. • The proposal will have a detrimental effect on the whole town which prides itself on open green areas. • People live in rural areas so that their children are brought up and able to enjoy green space especially while attending school. Page 56
Page 57
• Applegrove is a hub for special needs pupils and losing part of their playground will be detrimental to their wellbeing. • Roysvale Park lies within designated greenbelt land and is one of the few remaining open green spaces accessible to the local community. It provides a vital area for recreation, walking, and outdoor activities, contributing to both physical and mental wellbeing for the wider community. • Roysvale park loses the cycle path and significant width for the bus area. • Roysvale park can no longer be used as multifunction pitch due to the reduction in size of park due to encroachment by bus access. • The high school does not need two sports fields when the primary school will not even have one. • All of Applegrove Primary’s outside space is eliminated. This is inconsistent with NPF4 Policy 14 (Placemaking) and PAN 65 (Open Space), which require adequate green and recreational provision. • The area already faces a shortage of recreational spaces. Removing this playing field would overburden existing facilities, leading to overcrowding and reduced opportunities for physical activity. • The joint use of Roysvale for Primary and Secondary activities will increase the competition for resources. • Applegrove playing fields and Roysvale Park are ENV4 and the development will result in a 90% loss of outdoor playing field for the primary school. • Increased school use of Roysvale Park could further restrict public access, and the timing of the application is premature given forthcoming updates to national standards on school outdoor space. The loss would also harm community groups, tourism, and event hosting, leading to a conclusion that the development is contrary to MLDP and NPF policies. • The primary has a large percentage of ASN pupils who constantly make use of this open area and will struggle without such a green breakout area. • The new secondary will not have much outdoor space. Reducing outdoor space for is not a positive move with the mental health and obesity problems already impacting a greater number of pupils. • If the new school uses this Applegrove’s Playing Field it would mean Applegrove pupils would only have the small concrete playground - too small and inadequate for outdoor learning activities - like the recent whole school celebration of the queen’s jubilee which took place on the enclosed green playing field. Celebrations like this would not be able to happen. • Roysvale is unfenced, bordered by roads, and shared by up to 1600 pupils, creating safeguarding risks. This is not comparable to Grant Park's much larger publicly shared space. • The proposed new academy will not have its own designated playing field. There is simply no room on the site to accommodate one. • The proposal that the Roysvale Park area will be used as a joint playing area / sports field for the pupils of the new academy and the pupils of Applegrove Primary School is unrealistic. Page 57
Page 58
• How are the needs of the academy pupils, primary school children and the general pupil going to be managed to avoid conflict of interests? • The new school building provides very little outdoor space and overall, many more school pupils (primary and secondary) will occupy a significantly reduced outdoor area. When obesity and mental health problems already affect children and young adults to a significant degree, the lack of outdoor space could have a very detrimental effect on the health and wellbeing of our young people. • Applegrove Primary will have no access to a grass playing field before school, at break times, and at lunch time. • The 3G is not in "close proximity" for the primary school as required by the Regulations. It is too far away to be practical for primary children and would require numerous staff to be able to walk the children to use it. • What use will the primary school ever get of the 3G pitch when competing with an academy with 1180 pupils? • Forres Academy will have fewer sports areas than at present, which contravenes Sportscotland recommendations that a replacement school cannot have less sport's area than the old school. • Roysvale is not suitable for a school playing field as balls could end up in people’s gardens, on surrounding roads among traffic, or in a bus/car park among traffic. It is use will be increased for ball sports. • The new facility is not replacing the loss of the Applegrove playing field and does not provide a better-quality facility. • The replacement facilities shown would not provide equivalent, accessible open space for younger children or the wider public, contrary to Policy EP5. Shared use with a much larger secondary school population is not a genuine replacement. • There are no toilets on Roysvale Park for the primary pupils to use and the park would need to be fenced off in order for young children to play safely which cannot happen as it is common good land. • The Regulations state that a secondary school designed for 1180 pupils should have a site of 6.5 acres (26,305m²). Moray Council states that these requirements have been met to the tune of 30,290m². - In order to reach 30,290m², Moray Council has included the bus drop off lane as part of the site. The bus lane is 2530m². The south site (less the 3G pitch) is 10,885m². Those 10,885m² are made up entirely of the car park. Including a bus lane and car park (particularly given the size of the car park!) within the calculation of site size available to the school is taking a very wide interpretation of what the 1967 Regulations would have intended to be comprised within a school site. Whilst the inclusion of bus lane and car park may be legal, it would be closer to the truth to state that the site size for the new academy in this proposal is 16,875m² which is 9,430m² short of the legal requirement. • The Regulations also state that a secondary school shall have playing fields of not less than, in this case, 9 acres which amounts to 36,422m². In the Page 58
Page 59
plans, the playing fields for the new academy are made up of Roysvale Park (14,600m²) and the 3G pitch (7000m²). This totals 21,600m² which seems to be 14,822m² short of the legal requirement. This is a significant shortage in the size requirement and this proposal should be rejected for failing to meet the Regulations by a significant margin. • What protections are in place for potential criminal activity relating to safeguarding children on Roysvale Park? • In any event Roysvale Park is now stated to provide playing fields for up to nearly 1600 pupils, from two different schools. How will this be managed? It is not appropriate for five year old children to be mixing with 16 year olds, these age groups have very different use of language and behaviour that will bring challenges. • Neither Applegrove Primary or the proposed academy will have dedicated playing fields of their own. Both schools currently have their own playing fields. Removal of dedicated playing fields is not a step forward for either school. • Applegrove pupils are the victims in this project. They will no longer have a grass playing field that they can access at break times and lunchtimes, and before school in the morning. • Condensing those c.300 children into a space a fraction of the size previously available will inevitably lead to issues, as frustration amongst the pupils grows. Applegrove primary is stated within the planning documents to have capacity for 460 pupils. If the school was to reach capacity, these issues would only be exacerbated. • Loss of green space and reduction of Common Good Land (CGL) at Roysvale Park which does not align with NPF4 Policy or the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967. • The proposed development is likely to result in issues that appear to be in direct contrast to the principles of Policy 14 of NPF, which recognise the importance of improving physical and mental health, and allowing people to live, play, work and stay in their area. • The proposed replacement sports facilities do not provide equivalent open space in terms of function, quality, or accessibility, particularly for Applegrove Primary pupils and the wider public. • It was suggested the loss of Applegrove playing fields could be mitigated by changing the use of CGL opposite the British Legion to include a fenced area of 'replacement playing field' for Applegrove. This would partially align with policy 21 of NPF. This was not taken forward by Learning Estates. Comments (PO): The project has been carefully designed to ensure that Applegrove pupils continue to enjoy high-quality outdoor environments both during construction and after completion. All pupils will benefit from access to the new 3G pitch. In addition, the project includes significant improvements to the drainage of Roysvale Park and surrounding land. These enhancements will increase the Page 59
Page 60
quality and year-round usability of green space, providing long-term benefits for both Applegrove Primary, the new school and wider community. All required policies of NPF and MLDP relating to open space are adhered to as detailed in the observation section of this report. Roysvale Park is flat and is to remain largely as is. The existing cycle path on the east of Roysvale Park is being replaced and relocated slightly to allow for the proposed bus layby. During and after construction of the new school Roysvale Park will remain in use providing the same facilities as it currently does, a football pitch and athletics track. The primary school will be able to use the new academy’s indoor and outdoor sports facilities including the sports pitches. A booking system for the use of the new sports facilities is to be put in place, this will be managed by the new academy. It will ensure that the facilities can be used by all. There will still be areas of open/grassed areas available for Applegrove pupils within its grounds. The existing playing field on the west of the Mosset Burn is to remain as is. The new 3G pitch is located in close proximity, approx. 300 metres, from both the new academy and Applegrove Primary School. Forres Academy will not have less sports facilities than it currently does. Sportscotland were consulted on the proposal and have no objection to it subject to condition being attached to the planning consent. Roysvale Park is currently used for ball sports. The new academy has toilets that can be used by the public. It is anticipated that children will be supervised by school whilst using Roysvale Park. The design is compliant with the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967. The Schools Premises Scotland Regs 1967 recommends a site area based on the school size and to have available and in close proximity playing fields sized accordingly. This area requirement is considered on a case-by-case basis and Page 60
Page 61
now takes account of all-weather surface pitches and multi-use games area (MUGA) provision. Common Good Land • Roysvale Park and the Applegrove Playing Fields were gifted to the Council’s predecessor for the benefit of the community and for recreational purposes. Since then, the inhabitants of Forres and visitors to the town have appreciated the park for its nature and tranquillity, and the many sporting and arts events it has accommodated over the years. Whilst access to its full extent was limited by the development of Applegrove Primary School, it remains an important public space and one that is much cherished and used by the local community. • Moray Council has yet to provide legal evidence to show that the Common Good Land status of Applegrove’s Playing Field has been lost. Given the way in which Applegrove Playing Fields are used by the public, everything would suggest that its Common Good Land status remains. If this is the case, Moray Council does not have the right to build at Applegrove Playing Field without appropriate consultation and obtaining court consent. • Common good land is not for Council use. • The issue of Common Good Land remains a legal challenge. The assumption that, because this proposal is for education, the fundamental principles of land ownership can be bulldozed does not sit well with the community in general. • There is a change of Common Good Land use beyond that of the bus lane and the temporary construction site. The red line around Roysvale Park in the school plans that this is the main playing field for the combined school capacity of circa 1600 pupils, which is way beyond current usage of the park (occasional use such as the annual sports day). This will reduce access for dog walkers and people exercising when the two schools will make so much use of it. • The Roysvale park area is common good land and as such the public is entitled to use it at any time. • The promise of the return of Roysvale Park to the public is not clear if this green area is to be shared with up to 1600 pupils from both the Academy and Applegrove. • The Common Good consultation only sought a temporary change for the construction space, and permanent change for the bus lane. This was justified by the Moray Council on the basis that the remainder of Roysvale Park would be returned 'as is' after completion of the build. Incidentally, 80% of those who commented were against any change of use of the Common Good Land. • Moray Council is yet to receive court approval for the use of Roysvale Park, this could be denied by the court. • It is clear from the plans that Roysvale Park will not be returned 'as is.' Rather, it is consumed within the Academy boundary in order to meet the Page 61
Page 62
requirements of the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 (the "Regulations"). The public was not informed of this at the time of consultation on the Common Good Land. • Taking Roysvale Park within the boundary of proposed academy is a change of use of that Common Good Land. Moray Council claims it is not, stating that Forres Academy has always used Roysvale Park in some way. That is not the case, as can be vouched for by many a former Forres Academy pupil and teachers. The use by Forres Academy of Roysvale Park is a relatively recent development. • What protections will be in place to ensure the public will still have use of Roysvale Park during school hours, as is the case now? The reality is that Roysvale Park is not being returned to the public 'as is' at all. • Moray Council should be carrying out a public consultation and seeking court consent for a change of use of the whole of Roysvale Park. Without court approval for this change full change of use of Roysvale Park, this build should not be able to proceed. • The design and access statement states that Applegrove Primary requires 1.5 acres of playing fields. This would increase to 3 acres if Applegrove reached maximum capacity. Moray Council proposes that this requirement will be met by the primary school using Roysvale Park. The space at Roysvale Park is therefore to accommodate both the primary and the academy and is 'double counted' in terms of determining available space. • The common good land should not be stripped from the community in order to push through an unpopular school build. This is unfair but also against the spirit of common good protections. • Loss of common good land which is consistently being used by local charities. • How can the planning application go in when the court has not yet ruled on the common good land. Comments (PO): Whilst referred to by various objectors, the legitimacy of use of the common good land for the new school is not a material planning consideration. This is because there is a separate consultation and legal process underway in relation to the proposed used of common good land. It is a separate matter from the planning application process and therefore not a material planning consideration or a determining factor. The planning process is to avoid duplication of other consenting or legal processes such as is currently underway for the use of the common good land. Trees • It will be impossible to protect the high value trees in the area as excavation for installation of tanks appear to run close to the root systems and the school building structure is also very close to the roots. Page 62
Page 63
• The development will result in the loss of mature trees, green corridors, and sections of Roysvale Park. • Building on this green space would harm local biodiversity and ecosystems. Trees, wildlife habitats, and natural drainage systems would be disrupted, contributing to environmental degradation. • The trees around the Applegrove site not only enhance the area but provide effective carbon capture and water uptake. Damage to mature trees or removal of trees will make the risk of flooding more likely and remove their beneficial carbon capture. This is important as school traffic will continue to this site and increase over the years. • Tree protection zones are identified although there will be overlaps with installation of holding tanks and drainage pipework illustrated on Drainage Plan Part 7 therefore it is unclear how successful these protection zones to the retained mature trees will be. The size of the holding tanks on this plan appear to be the tanks themselves rather than clearly identifying a suitable excavated area to allow safe and suitable installation. Additionally, excavations for the foundations in this tight size will also cross into the zones. • 36 trees (many of which are mature) are to be lost to this build. • Trees 62-64 that are located next to the proposed sprint track are listed as some of the most important class A and B mature trees. Up to 26% of their root plate will be damaged, further to the damage already endured by those trees during construction of the relatively recent footpath. Despite thinning of their canopies by 20%, these trees will be put under significant stress and may be lost, yet they are the key trees in the illustrations to attempt to mask the building from Roysvale Park. • Despite a tree replacement scheme, it will take decades to grow to their current size. • It will take many years or decades to restore some of the trees lost or damaged due to the scale of this development in a relatively confined space. Comments (PO): A Tree Survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plans have been submitted with the proposal. These documents detail and show how the trees to be retained will be protected during construction of the new school. The Tree Survey details that some trees will be affected by construction activities, particularly along the western and Applegrove boundaries, where sycamores and cherries will experience significant root disturbance. However, these are considered capable of retention with appropriate mitigation, including canopy thinning to reduce stress and careful management during and after construction. To offset the trees that are required to be removed to primarily accommodate the 3G sports pitch, flood basin, bus access, turning area and elements of the car park and entrance plaza, the proposal includes a compensatory planting scheme on a 2 for 1 basis and a total of 90 trees will be planted using native species, which Page 63
Page 64
will strengthen biodiversity, enhance ecological connectivity, and contribute to long-term landscape quality. Wildlife • Concern regarding the very real seagull issue which will be exacerbated by the proposed site being in a central area with litter caused by pupils. This is already a major problem with the existing Forres Academy which also has a flat roof. • Seagulls are a real problem in Forres, as is the case in many parts of Morayshire. They already nest on the roof of Applegrove, which is sloped at >4°, and which has ineffective acoustic bird deterrence installed. • The proposals to use acoustic 'sirens' to scare the seagulls away will not work, as evidenced by the nests seen on steeper pitches of Applegrove roofing, next to such bird deterrence. • Biodiversity corridors are being lost. Comments (PO): A bird protection plan is included with the submission. A condition is attached to the consent requiring this to be updated to include final details of measures/design details to deter roosting and nesting gulls upon the roofs of all buildings prior to the commencement of development if the proposal is permitted. This is to ensure the development does not attract seagull activity which would be detrimental to the amenity of the users and neighbouring properties. The proposed Forres Urban Nature Network runs through the site, linking outwards in multiple directions using natural features such as the Mosset Burn and Sanquhar woods, as well as active travel routes. The site (particularly the old school) is therefore of strategic importance for nature connectivity, allowing species to safely move. The additional information required through the condition (attached to the planning consent if permitted) will support the development in strengthening existing nature networks. Flooding and Drainage • Existing playing fields act as a floodplain for surface water. • The proposed water storage system and a tarred bus stop is only going to aggravate the flooding issue. • Development will aggravate flooding issues despite the promise from the contractors. • Flat roof is impractical for flooding and drainage. • Neighbouring house has not flooded in 60 years but recently it has been difficult to get insurance as it is in a flood zone. • The land lying either side of Orchard Road from the British Legion to Castlehill Road was shaded purple, the highest flood risk zone on a recent SEPA report that was commissioned for a nearby property. Page 64
Page 65
• How is acceptable to cover a large natural drainage area of the town into concrete when insurance companies already won’t protect neighbouring properties and the SEPA has ranked the area as the highest flood risk. • Replacing natural drainage areas with more concrete will cause additional flooding and do not accept that the plans to deal with this are adequately thought through. • There has been a further Flood Risk Assessment from Goodson Associates and also a submission from Scottish Water. Believe there remains a significant adverse risk to properties and indeed to the proposed new academy and to Applegrove Primary School. This area already floods and Applegrove Playing Fields provide vital soakaway to surface water which runs down to this the lowest part of the town from the higher ground. • The culvert below the A96 has little flood capacity and already backs up and if blocked with debris will further increase flooding. The concerns about the A96 culvert and the river embankments are of course outside the scope of the new School project to resolve but the new School development could potentially make things worse. • There does appear to be a fundamental mismatch between the flood modelling, the capacity of the existing Burn of Mosset and the corresponding potential risk of flooding the whole of lower Forres! The quoted "significant amount of upfill across the whole site including the common good land" may also have the effect of surface rainwater runoff being directed to the existing lower areas and housing all around the site, during the construction period and afterwards. Water has to continue downstream and there are some embankments along the Mosset to protect the lower part of the town. However, if these embankments are overtopped flooding from combined sewers would back up into the town. • In particular, is there detailed information available on the likely volume of water to be discharged into the Mosset Burn through the proposed pipe under Albert Street, Castle Street and Orchard Road? • The infrastructure in this area of Victorian combined drains already has difficulty coping at times of heavy rainfall and overflows sewage into the surrounding streets, as evidenced by the flooding to the properties across the road from the school in Bank Lane and the garage. • It is likely that further stress on the system, despite the proposed new conduit, will result in contamination of the surface water with this sewage and be directed into the Mosset Burn. Why is it deemed acceptable to pollute our water ways in this manner? • Although certain new mitigation measures and new drainage systems can be successfully designed and constructed all this is based on the fundamental assumption that the Burn of Mosset is capable of accepting these design flows without itself breaking its banks and leading to flooding. • How much modelling has been done and how much do we know about the capacity of the Burn of Mosset and the contributions/flows that will be Page 65
Page 66
coming in from its own catchment areas, now and in the future (and including the projections for climate change increases of +42%)? • One possible worst-case scenario might be that despite all these measures, flooding still occurs and Moray Council taxpayers might have to fund extra work to implement improvements to the existing 'poor overall condition classification' of the Burn of Mosset (such as dredging, widening, raising the banks, providing concrete or steel linings to the banks etc.) to try to control the new flows and the risk of flooding ... but this might only push the problem further down the line of this particular watercourse (further into the town itself?), beyond the point were any improvements can be practically made. Any such works could also be very extensive and very expensive. • The concept of capturing and storing water in large tanks underground is fundamentally flawed. • The catchment area is too large and the calculations are questionable. Would like an independent survey carried out. • The land itself is at the bottom of multiple hills so rainwater collects there and the proposed area regularly floods and becomes waterlogged. • The field is currently flooded (4/10/2025). • There must be a risk of raw sewage on our streets with all the attendant disastrous public health consequences. • No consideration for future global warming of increased rainfall predictions. • Flooding may appear to be mitigated however the finer details are questionable especially as to their effectiveness further downstream. • Scottish Water are putting floor doors on surrounding houses due to flooding. • Money coming from the school build will have to be proportioned to support the inadequate drainage system in the area taking away from funds away from the main project. • Land is low lying. It is at the lowest point and covering the area will not improve it. • In heavy rain sewage bubbles up through the branders along Sanquhar road and on the ground and path to the east of Applegrove. All the construction traffic will probably damage it further. • The Applegrove / Orchard Road / Sanquhar Road area suffers flooding regularly from flash floods. Covering a large area of green field will increase the chances of flooding for Roysvale park and potentially of the surrounding houses. • If new Academy cannot be re-built on existing floodplain then why would it built on the same flood plain 600 yards away. • The site acts as a flood plain, building on it could cause local flooding especially during construction. • In heavy rains the Mosset Burn is already almost bursting its banks. • Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) has submitted a "holding objection" due to lack of information on flood-risk. Page 66
Page 67
• Concern whole water table will be disturbed, must be a concern for residents of Orchard Road. • The Applegrove playing field has a high water table and installation of attenuation tanks in the past to mitigate the flooding issues on the playing field has failed to fully resolve the flooding issues, probably because the attenuation tanks do not store a significant volume of water and that they are very shallow in depth. Building on a site with sandy / peaty soil which is prone to flooding will not be without risks which in turn could result in using up valuable funds that were originally ear marked for the school building project. • Neighbouring house already have issues with toilets backing up and houses being flooded. • Two major schools and a third under construction are feeding into already overloaded drainage systems and natural water courses. There is significant impact on surrounding drainage and downstream flooding especially during the construction phase. • Existing Mosset Flood Alleviation is designed to a 1:100 year event including climate change. The proposed flood parameters for application are 1:200 year plus climate change (42%) allowance. All flood defences including culvert below A96 do not meet the proposed flood parameters and SEPA guidance. The proposed development is at significant risk of creating substantial flooding between Orchard Road bridge and A96 Mosset Burn culvert. This is significantly increased during construction phase of development with a storm of return period greater than 1:100 years. Further extensive flooding would be generated through surcharging of known and unknown drainage systems feeding into Mosset Burn. • Transport Scotland have not been consulted of potential risk to A96 through impounding of water against elevated section of A96 where the Mosset Burn flows a culvert with less than 1:100 year capacity. • Surface and below ground water flows from Cluny hill and area known as Brae back catchments have not been considered within modelling. These areas have significant run off and flow directly to proposed development site. • There have been documented instances of the combined drains flooding, leading to sewage escaping where schoolchildren are walking. • Flooding will be highly disruptive to education and damaging to infrastructure, in particular to the proposed new school and undermine the investment in education. • It is welcomed that the Application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy Report but notes that SEPA has submitted a holding objection due to a lack of information in relation to flood risk. Our client reserves its right to respond further on these matters once SEPA has submitted its full assessment of the proposals. • If the mitigation and drainage proposals prove to be ineffective, extra work may be needed. Page 67
Page 68
• The proposal to install new drainage along Orchard Road would require the area to be dewatered. • New development should not be located in areas at flood risk or increase vulnerability to flooding (as per Policy EP12). Exceptions to this would only be considered in specific circumstances, e.g. extension to an existing building or change of use to an equal or less vulnerable use. • Unless Scottish Water are minded to replace the whole length of pipework this combined pipe will run at risk of backing up in front of Applegrove Primary School and the new proposed school. • A new 'clean water' sewer is to be installed. That sewer is shown to take a circuitous route to join the Mosset Burn. Any gradient of fall to take the water to the Mosset Burn will be reduced by the distance the sewer needs to travel. • The drainage reports deals with the drainage until the point it reaches the Mosset Burn. At the point ground water is at a height the water from the tanks needs to drain into the new sewer and the Mosset Burn, the Mosset Burn will also be up. Will this not cause the water to back up in the new sewer rather than drain into the Mosset? • Flooding mitigation costs are likely to be more than thought and therefore exceed the putative potential saving of £4 million. Comments (PO): As detailed in the observation section of the report all potential sources of flood risk, including rivers, surface water, sewers, groundwater, and artificial sources, have been assessed. The building has been positioned in the most suitable location on the site, outside any significant flood risk areas. The SEPA flood map and Mott MacDonald flood modelling identifies that the existing academy site is at risk of fluvial flooding from the Mosset Burn. Therefore, flood mitigation measures are to be implemented in accordance with recommendations of the flood modelling report. In its current undeveloped state, the site is susceptible to low (1-in-1000-year) and medium (1-in-200-year) likelihood pluvial flooding. SEPA flood mapping indicates these areas correspond to low points along the Orchard Road boundary, through the central playing fields, and around the hardstanding and footprint of the existing Forres Academy. Through site development and upgrades to the local surface water drainage system, any existing surface water flooding issues are expected to improve. In accordance with Moray Council flood risk requirements the development will be designed to ensure that it is not at risk of flooding from a 1 in 200-year plus 42% climate change event. Although the new school is a like-for-like replacement, foul flows from the development are expected to be significantly reduced due to the installation of modern low-flow fittings and appliances. Importantly, the only flows entering the combined sewer from the new facility and Applegrove Primary will be foul water, which will substantially reduce overall discharge and relieve pressure on the combined sewer network, historically associated with flooding issues. Page 68
Page 69
Surface water runoff from new external hardstanding areas will incorporate SuDS measures for treatment and attenuation, designed to meet agreed discharge limits. Attenuation features have been tested for 1-in-200-year rainfall events with an additional 42% uplift for climate change resilience. The northern site (main school) and Applegrove Primary will discharge via a new surface water sewer network to the Mosset Burn, significantly improving local drainage and providing future connection opportunities to this new public asset. All foul and surface water flows from the northern site will be removed from the combined sewer network, creating substantial additional capacity. Surface water will be treated and attenuated at source prior to discharge into the Mosset Burn at agreed flow rates. Source-control SuDS features will remove coarse solids and silts in accordance with CIRIA C753, with treatment provided through a combination of filter trenches, permeable paving in parking areas, and attenuation tanks before discharge. The proposed treatment strategy has been verified using SEPA’s Simple Index Tool. Moray Flood Risk Management (MFRM), SEPA and Scottish Water were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it. MFRM and SEPA require a condition to be attached to the consent (if permitted) regarding the proposed flood storage area and flood bund (Mitigation Option 4) outlined within the Flood Risk Assessment modelling report (Mott MacDonald, 2025) being constructed and operational prior to commencement of demolition works at the existing Forres Academy Site. The storage area and flood bund must be maintained in perpetuity. This is to ensure there is no increase in flood risk as a result of the development. A further condition is to be attached to the consent (if permitted) requiring adherence with the submitted drainage arrangements. It is speculative to assume that the development will aggravate flooding issues given the level of detail the accompanying documents with submission provide regarding flood mitigation. Moray Flood Risk Management confirmed that the culvert at the A96 will not need upgraded or work done on it as a result of the flood and drainage mitigation proposed for the development. Transport Scotland are not required to be consulted on the proposal. View • Outlook from neighbouring properties will be affected by this proposal as the open views across trees and stone and slate properties to surrounding countryside will be replaced by the sports hall roofline and higher main school building; neither of which are in-keeping with the surroundings. • The bins and plant buildings are to be constructed to the rear of the Veteran Cottages gardens. These veterans who have served our country are to lose their view across Roysvale Park to be replaced by service buildings and live with the noise of those bins being used and emptied on a daily basis. Page 69
Page 70
Comment (PO): A view is not a material planning consideration. Consultation • At a public meeting, those attending were told they were not allowed to speak from the audience but had to submit written questions which were then filtered by the panel. • A petition against the proposed site, signed by over 600 people has been submitted to the council. See Face Book site " Forres New Academy Forum" for extensive objection to the site are raised. Officer Note – no petition has been submitted in relation to this planning application. • Shame in the council for so arrogantly forcing this site with such little regard or consultation to the people it affects the most. • The citizens of Forres have not been listened to by the Moray Council by councillors who were elected to represent them. Listen to the people and their grievances which are all too well known. • Residents of the War Veterans' Cottages and other immediately affected properties were not adequately consulted. • Noise, flood risk, traffic, and health studies are either missing, incomplete or unpublished. • Many of the appendix document referred to in the technical supporting documents are unavailable in the planning documents therefore correct scrutiny and informed comment is not possible either for or against these specific areas. Is this acceptable procedure. Until these are appended the window for comment should be extended. • It would seem that many of the younger population who are greatly going to be affected by this proposal may not have been properly consulted. Many will not be able to access online surveys. • Under article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and under the Planning (Scotland) Act, recently taken into Scots law, any planning application must honour this in detail and provide evidence that the process has been fulfilled. If not, Scottish Government would be entitled to withdraw funding. • Council has disregarded its own surveys that show the preference of those who answered these surveys in good faith was the Lochyhill site. • The Moray Council Learning Estates Department have not taken on board any of the ideas or technical suggestions that have been presented to them by experienced and informed members of the public during the consultation process. • The location survey released to the public seemed to show a persuasive argument in favour of one site over the other. The document introduced an intentional argument to favour one site. Do not know where this figure came from or if it was accurate. • It appears that some of the documents referred to in the Application form, such as the Planning Statement, have not been made available online and in Page 70
Page 71
hard copy, thereby potentially impacting on the ability of the public to fully understand, consider and comment on the proposals. • It has been a challenge to read and understand all the documents and absolutely necessary for the expiry date to be extended for comments and the Council to provide paper copies at Forres Library for those who are unable and/or struggle with online submissions. • One of the groups most affected are the Veterans who live in the neighbouring cottages. It would have been best practice for the engagement to have been carried out at a much earlier date and offer and discuss mitigation measures. This could have helped to ease stress levels to a certain degree. • The Mitigation document claims that additional information has been provided, this has largely been used to justify continuing with the original plans instead of making meaningful adjustments or implementing true mitigations. The process seems focused on defending predetermined outcomes rather than considering alternative approaches based on community input. This approach undermines the principles of participatory planning and democratic engagement, reducing consultation to a procedural exercise rather than a genuine dialogue. Comments (PO): All proposals falling within the categories of development defined as 'National development' and 'Major development' require pre-application consultation (PAC) to be carried out between developers and communities. The proposal is a major development, and PAC has been carried out complying with statutory requirements. Notification procedures were carried out in accordance with the requirements set out by the Scottish Government in the Development Management Regulations. Two neighbour notification periods have been run. The required documents have been available to the public to access. The pre-application consultation document details how views of the participants of the consultation events have been incorporated into the development. Inadequate Plans • Visualisations and massing diagrams understate the building's dominance and site constraints. • Missing information includes accurate cross-sections, verified viewpoints, and a complete drainage/FRA report, making assessment incomplete and inconsistent with LDP Policy DP1 requirements. • There is very poor information relating to shape, size of structure above ground. Comments (PO): Adequate plans and detailed information relating to drainage and the FRA were submitted and available to view by the public. Page 71
Page 72
Elevations and various artists impressions of the new school were included as part of the submission. Other • The most cost-effective site should not be the only consideration and majority of Forres do not think this is a good site. • Impact of local businesses. • Forres will become like a concrete jungle which impacts everyone’s wellbeing. • Relocate to a bigger site with the option to expand in the future if necessary. Building out with the town would be more beneficial for children and residents of Forres. Find a location that will give secondary pupils an area of space and outdoor learning opportunities. • The secondary school aged children should also not be that close to the primary school children. They have vulgar language and litter often as seen from the burn behind the current school. • Concern over proposed proximity of primary and secondary schools and resulting social impact. P1 & S6 age groups essentially occupying the same site. • Negative aspects of the proposal far outweigh the positives. • Potential devaluation of property value due to overdevelopment and construction traffic/noise. • Disagree with veterans losing their homes. • Disregard for certain key elements in particular in relation to the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child. • The electorate's faith in local democracy this whole procedure has seriously undermined what remaining goodwill and confidence we had in our elected representatives. • Project will go over budget. • The current Forres Academy car park site would represent a much more appropriate and practical location for the new school. This alternative site would minimise disruption to surrounding businesses and maintain the quiet and respectful environment essential to neighbouring businesses. • The addition of a walkway across Roysvale Park from the staff car park to the new site is not required. It will effectively remove a further chunk of usable field running between this proposed path and the parallel Roysvale Place hedge. • When we are suffering an obesity pandemic the council should be encouraging the use of green playing areas rather than trying to save a few pounds. • The argument that the other site is too remote is not sensible when it would still be well within the allowed walking distance for the vast majority of pupils and definitely good for cycling where there is already excellent infrastructure in place (enterprise park). Page 72
Page 73
• There are already statistics showing that where the council have amalgamated libraries with schools there is a huge drop off in usage especially in older members of the community. So, yet another loss of an amenity. • The best school for pupils but the benefits that could have been seen by siting elsewhere is what is wanted: - clean slate for development without loss of green space - room for expansion, including a new primary school or 6-18 campus - less issues for parking/traffic - less issues for drainage - less need to disrupt another school and local residents. • Wish to keep our library and community centre on existing site with footfall on our high street. • Any savings accrued by choosing this site will be inadequate to cover the extra costs which will inevitably be required to mitigate the flooding which will be created in the surrounding area. • The application is being pushed through purely on financial priorities, not the will of the Forres community nor consideration of the impact on learners at both Applegrove and the potential new academy. • Lack of respect and safeguarding and protection for the primary school children and their learning not being thought of is absolutely disgusting. • Is there any conflict of interest in Moray Councillors determining a planning application on a site which they have already selected as their preferred option. • Legal advice has been sought which indicates that the Application is contrary to Moray Council's own Local Development Plan 2020 (LDP)and therefore should be refused. • The community will be so much poorer losing the existing Community Centre. • Aware of the difficulties facing teaching staff with the rise in violence, mental health issues, obesity, and school refusers. It is well recognised that pupil behaviour and mental health improve with access to outdoor spaces. This is clearly stated in the Scottish Schools' Curriculum for Excellence. • The public stop using libraries when they move to schools. • Moray Council has golden opportunity to build a new school, but they are repeating their mistakes of the last school they built in the 1960s, location prone to flooding and not able to expand. • The MLDP identifies that Lochyhill is the preferred site for future development of a school. It is considered that the Lochyhill site is not bound by many of the issues identified. The reasons given by the Applicant for not selecting this site are somewhat opaque and lacking in detail. These include, for example, complex land ownership and higher overall costs. In any event, it is considered that such issues should not trump the interests of local residents and the sustainability of the development for schoolchildren and young adults in future. Page 73
Page 74
• If the Council decides the proposals accord with the Development Plan, there are clear material considerations which indicate that the Application should be refused. • The response from the council that schools have been built in school playing fields successfully before is naive and disingenuous, as Moray Council are building on a different primary school's playing field. • Dogs will have to be banned on Roysvale Park for health and safety reasons as they are in Grant Park for Anderson's school playing field. • Foresee the provision of a school library and sports centre as a 'green light' to close Forres House community centre at a later date. • Have serious doubts about the practicalities of sharing such facilities with a school, whilst preserving access to the public during school hours, and safeguarding of pupils. • The last school role forecast shows it peaking in 2028 at 941 before decreasing to 925 by 2031, within the planning criteria, however according to the Moray Development Plan 2020 future substantial residential housing is still planned for Lochyhill, Mannachie, Dallas Dhu and Pilmuir Road West which must put the school role under future pressure. Comments (PO): With respect, many of the comments above in this section of objections are based on inaccurate assumptions or speculate about what may arise as a result of the development. Some are commented upon below. Veterans will not lose their homes as a result of the development. There are a number of 5-18 campus schools already operational in Scotland and further schools are planned. In the case of the Applegrove/ Roysvale site, it provides an opportunity to create a 5-18 community campus school by incorporating the existing Applegrove into the design consideration. The benefit of 5-18 campuses is well evidenced in Scotland and elsewhere. Thers is no current plan to relocate the Community Centre or library to the new school. The figures given for the projected school roll are now out of date. Up to date figures are given in the observation section of this report. The Council is aware of designated housing sites within the local development plan. The site selection process involving Elected Members and the subsequent planning application being considered before committee are two separate processes, and no conflict for Elected Members arises who were involved in both. Support • The new school will be an amazing asset for the town and young people who attend. • Sooner it gets built the better for all the children within Forres. • Will be nice to have a safe, purpose built building. Page 74
Page 75
• Ideal location in the centre of town and close to the existing school. • No site is prefect. Forres needs a new school. • The chosen site is the only practical solution. • Money spent acquiring and developing an alternative site will almost certainly be money taken from the capital build monies available. As much money as possible needs to go into the school build to provide first class modern facilities and a build that will not need replacing in 50 year’s time. • Long overdue. • Central location means accessible for the majority. • Hate for there to be unnecessary delays. • In the event of a robust legal challenge from neighbouring residents I hope that there is a suitable "Plan B" waiting in the wings. • School location while not ideal is the best option for the majority of pupils. This will allow for sustainable transport to the school and reducing traffic, particularly at the Orchard Road /Grantown junction. • Schools sit at the heart of communities and Forres Academy has enjoyed a central location for centuries. This is clearly the most suitable available site, providing many safe routes for active travel to and from school. • The design of the building is sympathetic to the adjacent surroundings. The building is not a glass box, which I welcome. The design clearly seeks to limit the impact on the overall visual amenity in the area. • A number of comments about adjacent properties being overlooked, an examination of the plans, especially the north and west elevations, show that this has been considered within the design of the building and this concern has been mitigated. • The situation of the pupil entrance minimises disruption to neighbouring properties. • Long overdue. • The proposed site would be best for all of the community. • Central location near to the existing site. • As a parent fully agree with the new sit of the school. • Just get it built, it's the best location, don't let the unhappy neighbours stop you, it doesn't matter where you build it someone will still complain. • Should go ahead asap. • As a young person having gone through the 6 years at Forres Academy, it's not fair to push back the building any longer. • It is not fair to ask pupils to walk any further, and if not walk, relying on parents to drive (which has its own economical drawbacks like pollution and even more traffic than where already is on a school morning) or busses which will cost the council even more money due to the high intake of pupils who would need it. • Applegrove does not need that much field, and surely it's better for all of those children to want to come to a better school, nearby to them, when they eventually leave primary school, which they all will at some point. Page 75
Page 76
• Keeping it central to the town is key, and on that field is ideal, logical and practical. • As a member of Forres Area Forum I would like to add my support to the Forres and Moray Councillors who have advocated for building the new Forres Academy on the proposed site on the Applegrove Primary School Playing Fields. I feel that the position of the new Academy in the centre of Forres will continue to support the local economy and provide additional footfall to the High Street which would be lost if the new school was built further out of town. • From the plans it is clear that flooding in the area will be addressed by building additional drainage for surface water from the new as well as the existing Applegrove Primary School which will help to alleviate some of the issues when there is heavy rainfall and storms. • The playing field at Applegrove is not use for the majority of the time because it is water logged or not enough staff to supervise. The concrete playground could be changed to have some grass. • Support the building of a new Forres Academy on the site of the Applegrove Primary School Playing Field as it will improve the educational provision and the infrastructure in the Forres Area. Comments (PO): These comments are noted. 8. OBSERVATIONS 8.1 Section 25 of the 1997 Act as amended requires applications to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan i.e., the adopted National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The main issues are considered below: - 8.2 Environmental Impact Assessment As noted above under history, development of this site has been screened against the relevant 2017 EIA Regulations, and Moray Council adopted a screening opinion (25/00548/SCN) on 27 May 2025 stating that an Environment Impact Assessment was not required for this development. 8.3 Appropriate Assessment - Habitats Regulation Appraisal In this instance, Moray Council will adopt the appraisal as modelled by NatureScot and this appropriate assessment is detailed below. The Mosset Burn, which flows past the southern part of the site, flows into the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR Site and Culbin Sands, Culbin Forest and Findhorn Bay SSSI. A Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) is required to be carried out for the RAMSAR site. The site's status means that the requirements of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 as amended (the "Habitats Regulations") apply. Consequently, Moray Council is required to consider the effect of the Page 76
Page 77
proposal on the designations and their qualifying interests before it can be consented. 8.4 These measures are required because the Mosset Burn flows through the site. The Mosset Burn feeds into the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR site. Therefore, the proposal has the potential to result in the release of sediment and other pollutants into the Mosset Burn and affect qualifying interests of the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR site. 8.5 The proposal is not directly connected with or necessary for the conservation management of the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR site, hence further consideration is required. The proposal has the potential to result in the release of sediment and other pollutants during construction activities and subsequent discharge of surface/foul water which may adversely affect the water environment. 8.6 Suitable mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure the development does not adversely affect the interests of the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR site: • A Construction Sustainability Management Plan which detailed measures to be put in place to ensure no release of sediment and other pollutants into the Mosset Burn. • Suitable drainage arrangements for surface and foul water from the development, including good practices during construction as recommended by SEPA standing advice, previously forwarded to the developer. 8.7 These matters have been sufficiently addressed as part of this submission, offering suitable mitigation/pollution control measures with relevant consultees raising no objections to the proposal. In light of the foregoing assessment, the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the RAMSAR designation; including the conservation objectives of its qualifying interests. 8.8 Pre- Application consultation (PAC) The application is accompanied by a Pre-Application Consultation (PAC) Report, as required under section 35C of the 1997 Act. This outlines the statutory consultation that the applicant undertook with the local community in relation to this proposal. The form and scope of the pre-application consultation was considered suitable and agreed by the Council in response to Proposal of Application Notice 25/00672/PAN. 8.9 The PAC Report outlines the feedback received as part of the PAC process. The report details the format for consultation, this includes, two public events, an unstaffed public exhibition (at Forres Library) and online public exhibition (on Moray Council website), advertisements promoting the public events in local press, social media posts promoting the PAN and electronic communications sent to Forres Academy and feeder primary school families. Page 77
Page 78
8.10 A total of 183 people attended the two public events and a total of 121 comments were received. The PAC report details the feedback received as part of the PAC process. In summary, feedback received related to concerns about the design of the proposal, minimising disruption during construction, flood mitigation and surface water drainage, roads and transport, environmentally sustainability and ecology, the projects impact on property values, loss of Common Good Land, preference for the project to be located elsewhere in the town, the correct statutory process not being complied with, opening hours for the existing swimming pool, the school and wider community co-existing in the same building, internal layout and programme of accommodation and a request for a statue recognising local WW2 efforts. 8.11 The PAC Report reflects efforts to balance community input with project goals, with comments received incorporated into the scheme where feasible and relevant. As such the PAC undertaken is considered suitable. 8.12 Background Need for a new Forres Academy Moray Council agreed the Developing a Strategic Approach to the Learning Estate paper in March 2020, it details what is necessary to develop a long-term strategy for the Moray Learning Estate. Key priorities of this included addressing occupancy, suitability, and condition issues in schools, particularly in areas with growing school rolls like Buckie, Elgin, and Forres, or those with significant maintenance problems. 8.13 In October 2021 in line with the Scottish Government’s Condition Core Facts Survey criteria, Forres Academy was rated as Condition D – life-expired and/or at significant risk of imminent failure. The building shows a pattern of increasing reactive maintenance costs and a growing need for substantial investment to address essential fabric improvements. Despite considerable expenditure in recent years, these efforts have only sustained the low condition rating and have not prevented further deterioration. 8.14 Following updated UK Government guidance on reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) issued in late 2022, Moray Council undertook desktop reviews of its entire building estate, including 54 schools. This was followed by physical inspections during summer 2023, which confirmed the presence of RAAC within the flat roof structure at Forres Academy. 8.15 Subsequently, Moray Council announced that Forres Academy had been identified as its top priority school for Scottish Government Learning Estate Improvement Programme (LEIP) Phase 3 funding. 8.16 In September 2023, Moray Council’s Education, Children’s and Leisure Services Committee agreed to accelerate progress on Forres Academy by fast-tracking Outline Business Case approval. The Scottish Government confirmed in October 2023 that the funding bid for a replacement Forres Academy had been successful. Page 78
Page 79
8.17 Site Location (NPF 15 / MLDP DP1) The 8.9 (ha) site is located approx. 250m south of Forres town centre on a site covering Applegrove Playing Field, Roysvale Park and the existing Forres Academy site. Land to the south west of existing Forres Academy, across the Mosset Burn, is also included within the site. This is used by the existing Forres Academy for sports and will continue to do so. 8.18 The proposed development of the new Forres Academy demonstrates compliance with Policy DP1 of the MLDP, which sets out the core development principles for all development. The development of the new school building replaces an old facility and delivers a modern, purpose-built school. Its co-location with Applegrove Primary School creates a central hub, enhancing educational and community facilities. The development integrates well with its surroundings, incorporating landscaped areas and outdoor sports facilities. 8.19 Accessibility and connectivity are key strengths of the proposal. The site layout includes safe pedestrian and cycle routes, a dedicated bus drop-off area, and car parking, ensuring inclusive access for all users. 8.20 In addition, the proposal complies with Policy 15 of NPF, which promotes local living and the development of 20-minute neighbourhoods. By providing a new educational facility centrally within Forres, the new academy strengthens local infrastructure and reduces the need for travel to access education. The development supports active travel through the provision of safe and accessible walking and cycling routes, encouraging healthier lifestyles and reducing reliance on private vehicles. The co-location with Applegrove Primary School and proposed community use of facilities further enhance the school’s role as a local hub. The efficient use of land and integration with existing services support compact urban form and contribute to the creation of a vibrant, accessible, and sustainable facility. 8.21 The proposal is considered to meet the development principles set out in DP1 and its location and design support local living as required by Policy 15. 8.22 Design (NPF 14 / MLDP PP1 & DP1) Policy PP1 of the MLDP sets out the overarching placemaking principles that all development in Moray must adhere to. It emphasises the creation of successful, healthy, and sustainable places that reflect local character and meet the needs of communities. Policy DP1 of the MLDP sets out detailed criteria to ensure that proposals meet siting and design requirements, this includes developments scale, density and character being appropriate to the surrounding area and proposals not adversely impacting on neighbouring properties in terms of privacy, daylight or overbearing loss of amenity. Policy 14 of NPF requires all development to be designed to a high standard, contributing to the creation of successful, sustainable, and inclusive places. 8.23 The new school building is 3 storeys in height with plant equipment and bird protection measures on the roof. The ground floor comprises a sports hall, Page 79
Page 80
gymnasium, dance studio, fitness suite, drama studio, community parent room, learning resource centre, library, kitchen, dining area, pupil support facilities, classrooms for food technology, technical studies, stores, cupboards changing rooms, a first aid room, offices, WCs and a changing places facility. Access to the building for the community is on the north elevation facing Orchard Road and access for pupils is on the south elevation accessed primarily via Sanquhar Road. The second floor includes classrooms for music, art, science, IT and business education and as well as guidance, staff rooms and toilets. The third floor contains classrooms for maths, social subjects and language and literature. 8.24 The Design & Access Statement (DAS) explains the design of the new school building is future proofed to allow for flexibility of use by the community over the lifespan of the building. The spaces to be used by the community are all located on the ground floor and carefully positioned. 8.25 Around the new school building there is landscaping, an ecology garden, a dining area, enhanced garden provision, food technology area and a craft and design technical covered area as well as parking provision and cycle storage. 8.26 The new building has been well designed to fit in with its surroundings in terms of massing and external materials. 8.27 The proposed building will predominantly rise to three storeys, aligning in height with several existing trees along the boundary with Forres Tennis Club. Its eastern and southern wings are designed to step down to two and one storeys. At roof level, clerestory glazing has been incorporated to bring natural light into the building’s central areas. This feature, together with the plant enclosure, is positioned away from the building’s perimeter to help minimize the visual impact of its overall height. 8.28 The choice and colour of materials are designed to complement and give visual coherence to the context of the building in its surroundings. External materials include facing brick in buff and polyester powder coated aluminium cladding and aluminium framed glazing systems. The (DAS) details the importance of selecting a material palette which compliments and responds to the wider town and immediate context of the new school, whilst also signifying a modern landmark to the townscape. The materials chosen reflect the building's status within the locality. Although the material finishes as described are acceptable, full specification of materials including their colouration will be addressed by planning condition. 8.29 The western elevation of the proposed building will not exceed the height of many existing trees along the boundary between the playing fields and Forres Tennis Club. To minimise overlooking to neighbouring properties to the north of the site (Veteran Cottages), the new school has been positioned 42m away. In addition, a hedge is proposed between the site and the cottages which will provide a buffer once established (with sizes and details to be conditioned). Typically, a boundary hedge would take it the region of a 5-10 years to fully establish, dependent upon the species. The DAS sets out that a Vertical Sky Component (25° method) Page 80
Page 81
assessment was undertaken, which shows and concludes that there is a tolerable impact on daylight to the Veteran Cottages. It should be noted that this does not exclude some shadows being cast to the north west, particularly when the sun in lower to the horizon in the winter, but while it is reasonable to expect access to acceptable levels of daylight, there should be no expectation of direct sunlight within the built environment. 8.30 The 3G sports pitch and main car park are to be located on the site of the existing Forres Academy. The majority of the new tree planting is to be located to the south end of the 3G sports pitch. A bund and flood basin are proposed to the far south of the site. The existing outdoor gym in the south section of the site is to remain and so is the sports pitches to the west of the 3G sports pitch. 8.31 Although elevations of all fencing has not been provided at this stage details of heights have been provided and a condition is recommended requiring elevations of the fencing to be agreed to ensure that this harmonises with the surroundings. 8.32 The proposal promotes health and wellbeing by providing access to green spaces, high-quality sports facilities, and a layout that supports both physical and mental health. The environment is pleasant and welcoming, with thoughtful landscaping and architectural design that enhance the visual quality of the site and its surroundings. Connectivity is a key strength of the proposal due to its central location. Furthermore, the site is well-integrated with the surrounding community, offering safe and convenient routes for walking, cycling, and public transport. This supports sustainable travel choices and strengthens the school’s role as a local hub. The design is distinctive, reflecting the character of Forres while introducing a contemporary community building that enhances the town’s identity. It is also sustainable, with the building expected to meet modern energy efficiency standards and contribute to Scotland’s net zero ambitions. Adaptability is built into the design through a shared campus model, which allows for future changes in educational delivery and community use. This ensures that the building remains relevant and functional over time. 8.33 The new school will be readily visible from the surrounding area particularly when viewed from Orchard Road and Roysvale Park. Despite this prominence, the intervening distances, building heights, and finished ground levels ensure that the proposed design is not out of scale with its surroundings. The new school will be set against existing buildings including Applegrove Primary School, this will assist to mitigate its visual impact and provide a sense of integration within the local context. 8.34 The proposal clearly demonstrates a place-based approach, responding to the specific needs and context of Forres. It aligns with NPF Policy 14 and MLDP PP1 and DP1. 8.35 Open Space, Play and Recreation (NPF 21 / MLDP EP5) Policy EP5 of the MLDP emphasises the importance of protecting and enhancing open space provision in all new developments. The current greenspace within this site is covered by an ENV4 designation in the MLDP. This reflects its current use as Page 81
Page 82
a sports area and a playground. Any proposal within an ENV must comply with Policy EP5 Open Space which seeks to protect open spaces from inappropriate development. 8.36 Policy EP5 states that “proposals that would result in a change of use of an ENV4 Sports Area to any other use (including other ENV categories) will be refused. The only exceptions are where the proposal is for essential community infrastructure required to deliver the key objectives of the Council and its Community Planning Partners, excluding housing, or for a site-specific opportunity identified within the settlement statement.” 8.37 Furthermore, in line with Policy EP5 the proposal also requires to meet the following: - • Be sited and designed to minimise adverse impacts on the principal function of the space and the key qualities and features identified in the Moray Open Space Strategy Supplementary Guidance. • Demonstrate that there is a clear excess of the type of ENV and the loss of the open space will not negatively impact upon the quality, accessibility and quantity of open space provision and does not fragment green networks (with reference to the Moray Open Space Strategy Supplementary Guidance, green network mapping and for ENV4 Sports Area in consultation with Sportscotland) or replacement open space provision of equivalent function, quality and accessibility is made.” 8.38 The part of the site where the new school is proposed is covered by an ENV4 designation (as defined in the MLDP) “Applegrove Primary School”. This reflects its current use as a playground and kick about area. The part of the site to the south of this also has an ENV4 designation on it, “Roysvale” given it is a sports area. “Roysvale Park”, currently has a grass football pitch and athletics pitch marked out on it. The bus drop off lane with pavement and cycle path and a contractor’s compound (only required temporarily for phase 1 of the development) is to be located within Roysvale Park. 8.39 The south parts of the site are also covered by ENV4 Designations (Playing Field (Burn of Mosset) and Lochview). Both will remain as functioning open space. The Playfield (Burn of Mosset) will remain as a sports pitch and Lochview with an outdoor gym. 8.40 The project to deliver a new high school is essential community infrastructure required to deliver a key objective of the Council. The proposal is therefore one of the acceptable exceptions to the policy subject to meeting the additional requirements in relation to minimising adverse impacts through siting and consideration of impacts on open space provision. 8.41 The proposal has been carefully sited and designed to minimise adverse impacts on the principal function of the existing open space and to respect the key qualities and features identified in the Moray Open Space Strategy Supplementary Guidance. The layout ensures that essential recreational and green network functions are retained, while enhancements such as improved landscaping and Page 82
Page 83
upgraded sports facilities strengthen the overall value of the site. 8.42 Policy EP5(b) sets standards that new open space is required to meet. The proposed new Forres Academy responds positively to this policy by delivering a well-considered and inclusive approach to open space. The development incorporates a variety of outdoor environments, including formal sports pitches, landscaped recreational areas, and informal gathering spaces. These areas are designed not only to support the physical and mental wellbeing of pupils but also to enhance the visual and environmental quality of the site. The open spaces are designed to be multi-functional and adaptable, supporting a range of activities from structured physical education to informal play and social interaction. Furthermore, the integration of these spaces within the wider campus and their connection to the surrounding community contribute to a cohesive and connected green infrastructure network. 8.43 Policy 21 of NPF promotes the creation of high-quality, accessible, and inclusive spaces for play, recreation, and sport, particularly in developments that will be used by children and young people. Therefore, the proposal also has to demonstrate compliance with Policy 21 as an area identified as a play area will be lost adjoining the primary school. In particular, Policy 21 a) iii) states that where proposals result in the loss of a facility, they will only be supported where a facility is being replaced or upgraded to provide a better-quality one. Under Policy 21, any development involving the loss, reduction, or reconfiguration of outdoor sports pitches must be subject to formal consultation with Sportscotland. This requirement ensures that, the loss or replacement of playing fields is assessed by the national governing body for sport provision; replacement facilities meet current Sportscotland standards (pitch size, surface specification, lighting, etc.); impacts on community clubs, school use, and informal recreation are fully understood; and, any deficiencies or shortfalls in the proposed replacement facilities are identified early and addressed. 8.44 The supporting information provided shows that the proposal would seek to make enhancements to Roysvale Park and would retain space for a football pitch and a running track. In addition, a 3G pitch is proposed on the existing academy site. For a project of this scale and nature a Sportscotland consultation is essential to ensure compliance with NPF4 Policy 21 and MLDP EP5. 8.45 Sportscotland have been consulted on the proposal and have raised no objection subject to conditions being attached to the planning consent. The conditions relate to a safeguarding scheme which protects the existing pitch area at Roysvale Park during the construction period, the new synthetic pitch being designed and constructed by a recognised (e.g. SAPCA* registered) specialist pitch contractor(s) and being fully operational and available for use not later than eighteen months after the opening of the new school. 8.46 In summary, the school proposal meets the criteria set out under Policy EP5, with the applicant demonstrating that the siting minimises impacts and appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated. The proposal also meets the quality standards required by the policy and, given Sportscotland’s consultation Page 83
Page 84
response, is considered compliant with Policy 21. 8.47 Access, Parking and Sustainable Transport (NPF 13 /MLDP DP1 and PP3) NPF Policy 13 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate development that prioritises sustainable travel. MLDP Policies PP3 and DP1 require the provision of a safe entry/exit from new development, with appropriate infrastructure, parking, cycle parking and Electric Vehicle (EV) charging facilities. 8.48 The Transport Statement (TS) details that the site lies within Forres Town Centre and is therefore well located to take advantage of being within a short walking / cycling distance of a number of local facilities and attractions which fall within the recommend catchments for walking and cycling defined in the NPF. The existing Forres Academy site has been on the Burdsyard Road Campus for over 50 years and in that time a well-developed local active travel plan network has evolved. The TS explains this network operates well, offering a number of active travel routes to the campus. Several core paths pass nearby. Sanquhar Road, Burdsyard Road and Castle Street are all classified as roadside core paths (CP-DA01 and CP-FR32 respectively). Core Path CPFR33 is off road, cutting across Roysvale Park and through Roysvale Terrace. 8.49 A survey of baseline travel conditions in the vicinity of the campus was undertaken by Goodson Associates on the 12th of June 2025. The findings included that the nearby Orchard Road car park only reached around 50% capacity at the busiest time, parking on the streets surrounding the school (with the exception Orchard Road and Burdsyard Road) was generally observed to be low and largely attributed to long term residents’ parking - there was little evidence of additional parking activity associated with school drop off and pick up. On Orchard Road, parking remained stable, with short peaks in the 15 minutes before and after school times, and some vehicles were observed waiting on double yellow lines outside Applegrove Primary School, particularly between 15:00 and 15:30. Burdsyard Road showed occasional parking in bus laybys, most notably during the afternoon peak. At Applegrove Primary, drop-off and pick-up patterns were similar, though pick-up involved slightly longer waits and some parking on Sanquhar Road. Forres Academy displayed more variation, with very short drop-offs (under one minute), longer pick-up waits, and fewer pickups overall, suggesting many pupils travel home independently. 8.50 The new Forres Academy will replace the existing school with a facility designed for 1,120 pupils and 123 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff. However, the current roll is approximately 873 pupils with 100 FTE staff, and this reduced level is expected to continue when the new school opens. Moray Council forecasts indicate pupil numbers will remain broadly stable, with a slight increase to around 888 pupils by 2032. A number of surveys took place to determine how and when pupils and staff travel to the existing academy. Based on the results (and other collected data) from this and NPF and MLDP policy requirements a number of measures are proposed to support the proposed development in the TS: - Page 84
Page 85
8.51 Walking and Cycling • The pupil entrance will be on the south side of the proposed building accessed via Roysvale Park. • A network of new and upgraded footpaths is being provided to improve the connectivity of the campus for active travel users, including: - ▪ Core path CP-FR33 is being retained along the southern frontage of new building, as well as the existing north-south footpath linking to Albert Street along the western frontage. ▪ A new cycleway/footway is being provided alongside Sanquhar Road, adjacent to the new bus drop-off layby. This provides a direct connection between Burdsyard Road and the pupil entrance, replacing and upgrading Core Path CP-DA01. This core path will be shut off to allow for it be upgraded and for the construction compound. ▪ A new north-south pedestrian link is also being provided along the western edge of Roysvale Park, linking Core Path CP-FR32 to the new school building. This link will also serve the main school car park, and a new pedestrian crossing will be installed on Burdsyard Road. A condition is attached to the consent requiring this new path to be constructed and brought into operation use prior to the closure of core of CP-DA01. This is to ensure continuous pedestrian connectivity and maintain public access in the interest of public safety and convenience. ▪ The existing crossing on Sanquhar Road to the south of Nelson Street will be moved approximately 15m northwards away from the egress of the bus drop-off layby. • 200 cycle parking spaces in 5 locations around the new building will be provided for pupils and staff inline Moray Councils standards. (60-space compound in the NE corner close to the main entrance and another 40- space compound in the SW corner adjacent to Roysvale Park. Parking shelters for a further 100 cycles are provided at a further 3 locations, as shown on the site plan. These shelters will have lockable sliding gates. • Parking for a further 30 cycles is being provided adjacent to the all- weather pitch, for use by players and spectators). 8.52 Car Parking • Car parking is in two locations:- • The main car park (for staff and also visitors) is located to the south of Burdsyard Road and will reuse the existing access off Sanquhar Road. • A smaller car park will be at the front of the new school building, accessed from Orchard Road. This is for visitor and accessible parking, enhanced provision drop-off and general servicing. • 157 standard spaces being provided in total (140 in main car park and 17 in front car park (6 spaces are allocated for enhanced provision parent drop- off); 11 accessible spaces (8 in front car park and 3 on Burdsyard Road); 8 power two wheeled spaces (2 in front car park and 6 in main car park); and 18 EV charging points (4 in front car park and 14 in main car park). 8.53 Bus Drop-Off and Pick-Up • There are two proposed bus drop-off and pick-up zones:- Page 85
Page 86
• One is to be provided at the front of the new school building next to the main entrance, this will provide 3 spaces for enhanced provision buses. • The main bus drop-off and pick-up layby is being provided on the west side of Sanquhar Road with capacity for 10 buses in total. It will be one way south to north, with buses entering at the southern end of the layby and exiting at the north. • Two bus spaces are also being retained within the existing bus layby on Burdsyard Road for the use of visiting teams. 8.54 General Pupil Drop-Off and Pick-Up • The main pupil entrance is on the south side of the building, closest to Sanquhar Road and Burdsyard Road. Therefore, it is likely that these roads will be attractive as pick up and drop off areas for the relocated campus. • On street parking is available on Burdsyard Road and Sanquhar Road. • Once the campus relocates existing waiting restrictions on Burdsyard Road are no longer required and it is proposed that these are lifted to allow drop- off and pick up to take place. • Introduction of the bus layby will restrict the opportunity for drop-off on the west side of Sanquhar Road, but this is largely compensated for by the increase in parking on Burdsyard Road. • During the initial inventory of parking restrictions, it was noted that the driveways at the north end of Sanquhar Road have access protection markings (single white line across the driveway) whereas the driveways at the southern end do not. Given the ample reserve capacity on Sanquhar Road, it is unlikely that vehicles picking up/dropping off will block the unmarked driveways. However, as a precaution access protection markings will be installed at these driveways to give an additional degree of protection. • Suitable waiting restrictions (double yellow lines and/or ‘School Keep Clear’ markings) will be placed on Orchard Road along the new school frontage to discourage vehicles stopping. • The parking surveys suggest that there is plenty of capacity in the Orchard Road car park at both the start and end of the school day. This offers a convenient alternative for drop-off and pick up close to the new school. 8.55 Servicing • Servicing of the school will take place from the front car park. A turning circle has been provided to allow vehicles to enter and exit in forward gear. 8.56 Travel Plan • The existing school handbook has very little information for pupils or staff wishing to access the campus by active travel modes. The opportunity should be taken to develop a travel plan for the new school, to encourage sustainable travel. 8.57 Transportation were consulted on the proposal and have raised no objections subject to conditions relating to a Phasing and Construction Plan; evidence being submitted to confirm that the statutory process to promote the Stopping Up of the Sanquhar Road Cycle Track to enable the provision of the new bus lay-by has Page 86
Page 87
commenced; evidence being submitted to confirm that the statutory process to promote new and amended waiting restrictions on Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road and Burdsyard Road has commenced; the proposed alterations and restorations to the existing road markings; the provision of new road markings in the vicinity of the development along Orchard Road, Sanquhar Road, and Burdsyard Road, amendments and improvements to ensure acceptable development in road safety and sustainable travel; a Construction Traffic Management Plan and evidence of the development of a School Travel Plan being submitted. 8.58 Overall, and subject to conditions where recommended, the proposed transport arrangements are acceptable and considered to satisfy relevant transport-related planning policy with no adverse impact on the surrounding environment. 8.59 Water Supply and Drainage (NPF 22 / MLDP DP1, EP12 & EP13) Policies 22, DP1 EP12 and EP13 together seek to ensure that acceptable water and drainage provision is made, including the use of sustainable urban drainage (SUDS). 8.60 Water Supply The new school will be provided with a public water supply. Following consultation, Scottish Water confirm that sufficient water capacity is available however, a connection is not guaranteed. Further discussion will be required with this consultee direct about both available capacity and connection arrangements. 8.61 Drainage Foul Drainage 8.62 The foul drainage from the re-developed site and the newly developed school area will be conveyed to the Scottish Water network via a new gravity fed foul drainage network within the site boundary, connecting to the existing combined sewer to the north of the site. 8.63 Throughout the development, all surface water (rainfall) will be diverted away from the combined sewer network. This approach applies to both the new Academy site and the adjacent Applegrove Primary, significantly reducing pressure and increasing capacity within the combined sewer system. Within the existing academy site and the proposed new car park and 3G pitch, all foul drainage connections will be removed, with the exception of the swimming pool. The removal of the existing building will release substantial capacity within the adopted drainage network, improving overall system efficiency in this area. 8.64 Surface Water Northern Site – New Academy Site 8.65 The northern site will incorporate a dedicated private surface water sewer network. This network will route west along Albert Street, then north via Castle Street, before continuing west along Orchard Road to discharge into the Mosset Burn, upstream of the vehicular road bridge. The sewer is currently undergoing technical approval with Scottish Water and once adopted, will form part of the Scottish Water infrastructure, providing capacity for future development. Page 87
Page 88
8.66 It will be served by a new gravity-fed surface water sewer system. Surface water will undergo treatment at source through sustainable urban drainage measures, including porous parking areas, filter trenches, and other SuDS features, before being stored within 692m³ of underground cellular storage crates. Discharge from this storage will occur at a controlled rate agreed with Scottish Water and SEPA via the new sewer. This provision will replace and enhance the existing storage serving Applegrove Primary, while connecting to the new surface water sewer and removing flows from the combined sewer network. Additionally, the existing drain line capturing rainwater from greenfield areas will be replaced with dedicated filter trenches to address historic water management issues. The maximum discharge rates, incorporating climate change allowances, are 10.7 l/s for the 1- in-30-year event and 20.6 l/s for the 1-in-200-year event. 8.67 Southern Site – New Car Park and 3G pitch The southern site will be served by a dedicated private surface water sewer network. Stormwater from the car park will be treated and attenuated through porous paving, while surface water from the sports pitch will be stored within the granular sub-base beneath the pitch, with discharge limited to 5 l/s. All surface water will be conveyed by gravity to a new dedicated headwall discharging into the Mosset Burn. Existing drainage infrastructure will be removed, except for that serving the retained swimming and hydrotherapy pool building. Importantly, all foul sewer connections within this section of the site will be removed. 8.68 The extent of hardstanding in this part of the site will be significantly reduced through the removal of the existing impermeable car park surface, which will be replaced with accessible green space. 8.69 Surface Water Treatment It is proposed that external parking areas will receive treatment through a permeable road system designed in accordance with CIRIA C753. Porous paving, filter trenches and attenuation tank storage for collection of rainwater prior to discharge to watercourses will be used. This includes areas for roofing, parking, and roads, which are to be treated prior to discharge. 8.70 Surface Water Attenuation Upon redevelopment, it is proposed that surface water run-off from the proposed site will be captured in a new urban drainage network. 8.71 The proposed drainage strategy incorporates Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) guidance and includes on-site water attenuation to manage surface water runoff. A cellular storage solution is proposed, utilising tanks buried beneath the new car parking areas and external hardstanding. 8.72 The required storage volume has been accurately modelled using ‘InfoDrainage’ software. The system is engineered to manage up to a 1 in 200-year storm event, incorporating a 42% allowance for climate change resilience. The post-development discharge is strictly controlled: flows up to the 1 in 30-year plus climate change event are limited to the 1 in 2-year pre- Page 88
Page 89
development runoff rate, while all storms up to the 1 in 200-year plus climate change event are limited to the 1 in 30-year pre-development runoff rate. 8.73 Summary Although the new school is a replacement, foul flows from the development are expected to be significantly reduced due to the installation of modern low-flow fittings and appliances. Importantly, the only flows entering the combined sewer from the new facility and Applegrove Primary will be foul water, which will substantially reduce overall discharge and relieve pressure on the combined sewer network, historically associated with flooding issues. 8.74 Surface water runoff from new external hardstanding areas will incorporate SuDS measures for treatment and attenuation, designed to meet agreed discharge limits. Attenuation features have been tested for 1-in-200-year rainfall events with an additional 42% uplift for climate change resilience. The northern site (main school) and Applegrove Primary will discharge via a new surface water sewer network to the Mosset Burn, significantly improving local drainage and providing future connection opportunities to this new public asset. 8.75 All foul and surface water flows from the northern site will be removed from the combined sewer network, creating substantial additional capacity. Surface water will be treated and attenuated at source prior to discharge into the Mosset Burn at agreed flow rates. Source-control SuDS features will remove coarse solids and silts in accordance with CIRIA C753, with treatment provided through a combination of filter trenches, permeable paving in parking areas, and attenuation tanks before discharge. The proposed treatment strategy has been verified using SEPA’s Simple Index Tool. 8.76 Moray Flood Risk Management, SEPA and Scottish Water were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it. The criteria in NPF Policy 22 and MLDP Policies DP1, EP12 and EP13 has been met. Conditions will be attached to ensure that proposals for surface water drainage treatment are delivered and maintained. 8.77 Flooding (NPF 22 / MLDP DP1 & EP12) These policies seek together to ensure development would not be at significant risk of flooding from any source or would materially increase the possibility of flooding elsewhere. Policy 22's intention is to strengthen resilience to flood risk by promoting avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing and future development to flooding. 8.78 A full stage 2 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was submitted with the proposal providing details of flood risk from all sources, results of hydrological and hydraulic studies and proposed mitigation. The aim of the Level 2 Flood Risk Assessment is to assess any potential flooding to the development site from all potential sources: coastal, fluvial (watercourse), pluvial (surface water) or groundwater. Page 89
Page 90
8.79 Historical Flooding in Forres Flooding has historically been a concern in Forres, evidenced by past events and the implementation of the Forres (Mosset Burn) Flood Alleviation Scheme. Introduced in 2007, the scheme, comprising a major storage reservoir at Chapelton Dam and two smaller upstream dams, has successfully reduced peak flows through Forres, with only two notable flood events recorded since its inception. Historic issues also include sewer flooding east of the site during extreme rainfall and surface ponding on Roysvale Park due to poor drainage. The FRA acknowledges these concerns and aligns with wider initiatives to reduce flood risk across Forres and Moray 8.80 Fluvial Flooding SEPA flood mapping indicates a low likelihood (1-in-1000-year) of fluvial flooding across part of the proposed site near Applegrove Primary. In comparison, the existing Forres Academy site is at greater risk, with this flood extent covering the entire school footprint. Additionally, there is a high likelihood (1-in-10-year) of river flooding south of the current school around the Mosset Burn, encroaching near the existing car park. Relocating the school to the proposed site therefore represents a positive step in reducing overall flood risk. 8.81 Mott MacDonald were commissioned by Moray Council to undertake a review of post-development impacts of the development in terms of fluvial flood risk using an existing model and based on the known risk/likelihood of flooding due to remaining fluvial flooding concerns. 8.82 The methodology for reviewing flood risk involved the comparison of the baseline model (existing conditions) versus the proposed development states, identifying potential concerns with respect to fluvial flooding which may impact the proposals. 8.83 On removal of the existing academy building there is a risk of increased flooding downstream as this structure essentially acts as a barrier, naturally conveying out of bank flow back to the watercourse. To alleviate any concerns, flood mitigation measures are proposed for the development. 8.84 Mott Macdonald recommended 5 options for mitigation and option 4 was deemed to be the most advantageous at eliminating the predicted increase of flood risk and reducing the general peak flood water levels. It is noted that detailed consideration was given regarding which option from the Mott MacDonald report was best for the development but also the town as a whole. Option 4 includes the reduction of existing levels in an area to the south of the existing school site, adjacent to the ‘outdoor gym’ along the Mosset Burn. The recommendations suggest a lowering to +16.3m AOD are 10 P15762 – Forres Academy required, requiring approximately 2500m3 of earthworks cut out of the existing area, and roughly 300 - 500m3 of earthworks fill for the bund. These flood protection measures including the lowered ground and earthworks bund will be protected from future development and will be maintained by Moray Council to ensure continual, effective operation. Page 90
Page 91
8.85 Based on the modelling of this option, it is anticipated that there are a number of locations where previous flooding is expected to be eradicated. This includes areas along Orchard Road and the residential properties to the north-west of the site, to the west of Burdsyard Road above the existing academy, and in a larger area immediately below the existing academy which are considered as ‘was wet now dry’ and negative changes in flood height. This is also indicated with reductions in flood height across various large locations in Forres when accounting for the proposed mitigation measures. 8.86 Sewer Flooding Scottish Water asset plans indicate the presence of adopted surface water drainage infrastructure within the site boundary. These assets are located in landscaped areas, and adequate space must be maintained for access and maintenance. Any flooding resulting from blockage or surcharge of this infrastructure is expected to be contained within low-lying landscaped areas, posing very low risk to proposed residential dwellings. 8.87 The town of Forres is served by a Scottish Water combined sewer network located north of the site along Orchard Road, west along Albert Street, and east along Sanquhar Road. In the event of a combined sewer surcharge, the site’s elevation and distance, along with kerb and wall separation, provide protection, resulting in a low risk of flooding. 8.88 Furthermore, the construction of a dedicated adopted Scottish Water surface water sewer as part of the development will significantly reduce historic sewer flooding in this area by returning capacity to the combined sewer network. 8.89 Ground Water Flooding The floodwater levels were monitored over the wettest period of the year and were found to be stable. All new features and structures have been designed to sit about this water table. As a result, the risk of ground water flooding can be considered low. 8.90 Pluvial Flooding (Surface Water) The site is susceptible to low (1-in-1000-year) and medium (1-in-200-year) likelihood surface water flooding, primarily in areas that correspond with fluvial flood zones previously identified. SEPA pluvial flood mapping indicates these areas occur within low points of the central playing fields, along the Orchard Road boundary, and around the hardstanding and footprint of the existing Forres Academy in the southern section. 8.91 The proposed surface water drainage network will be designed to accommodate flood flows up to and including the 1-in-200-year storm event plus climate change allowance, ensuring no damage to buildings, essential services, or adjacent properties. Through site development and upgrades to the local drainage system, combined with the installation of filter trenches, existing surface water flooding issues are expected to improve. On-site attenuation will be provided using Scottish Water-adoptable SuDS measures, with appropriate falls formed away from the proposed development. Page 91
Page 92
8.92 Climate Change The development will be designed to ensure it remains safe from flooding during a 1-in-200-year event, including a 42% climate change allowance in line with SEPA’s Climate Change Allowances for Flood Risk Assessment (Version 6, Feb 2025). For the North Highland River Basin Region, this equates to a 42% increase in peak rainfall intensity to 2080 and will be incorporated into the drainage design. The proposed surface water drainage network will contain flood flows for these design events within the site, preventing damage to buildings, essential services, or neighbouring properties. 8.93 Summary All potential sources of flood risk, including rivers, surface water, sewers, groundwater, and artificial sources, have been assessed. The building has been positioned in the most suitable location on the site, outside any significant flood risk areas. 8.94 The SEPA flood map and Mott MacDonald flood modelling identifies that the existing academy site is at risk of fluvial flooding from the Mosset Burn. Therefore, flood mitigation measures are to be implemented in accordance with recommendations of the flood modelling report. 8.95 In its current undeveloped state, the site is susceptible to low (1-in-1000-year) and medium (1-in-200-year) likelihood pluvial flooding. SEPA flood mapping indicates these areas correspond to low points along the Orchard Road boundary, through the central playing fields, and around the hardstanding and footprint of the existing Forres Academy. Through site development and upgrades to the local surface water drainage system, any existing surface water flooding issues are expected to improve. 8.96 In accordance with Moray Council flood risk requirements the development will be designed to ensure that it is not at risk of flooding from a 1 in 200-year plus 42% climate change event. 8.97 Moray Flood Risk Management, SEPA and Scottish Water were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it. MFRM and SEPA require a condition to be attached to the consent regarding the proposed flood storage area and flood bund (Mitigation Option 4) outlined within the Flood Risk Assessment modelling report (Mott MacDonald, 2025) being constructed and operational prior to commencement of demolition works at the existing Forres Academy Site. The storage area and flood bund must be maintained in perpetuity this is to ensure there is no increase in flood risk as a result of the development. The criteria in NPF Policy 22 and MLDP Policies DP1 EP12 and EP13 has been met. 8.98 Contaminated Land (NPF 9 & 23 / MLDP EP14) These policies seek to ensure that where land is known or suspected to be unstable or contaminated, development proposals will demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. Page 92
Page 93
8.99 Following consultation and in relation to potential pollution risks, the Council's Environmental Health Contaminated Land Service has no objections however an informative is required to be attached to the consent detailing that an Electricity Sub Station is located in the southern section of the site and that it should be considered investigating whether the land is contaminated prior to proceeding with the proposed works and the need for any resulting mitigation works. 8.100 Pollution (NPF 23 / MLDP EP14) Policies 23 and EP14 aim to ensure that new developments do not create pollution which could adversely affect the environment or local amenity. Pollution can take various forms including run off into watercourses, noise pollution, air pollution and light pollution. 8.101 Construction The Environmental Health Section following consultation and review of the application and construction information documents (Construction Phase Plan, Construction Project Management Plan and Construction Susutainabilty Plan), has raised no objection subject to conditions to ensure that the proposal does not adversely affect the environment or local amenity. These include controlling hours of construction works including vehicle movements, submission/approval of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to minimise construction related noise, dust and artificial lighting, controlling operational noise levels and submission/approval of details of all artificial lighting during operations to avoid light pollution. 8.102 External Lighting and Flood Lighting External lighting is to be located throughout the site. The Lighting Pollution Statement states that the current proposal for external lighting is for information only however, the standards and principles outlined in the report will be followed throughout the design. On review of the Light Pollution Planning Statement, Environmental Health have no objection to the external lighting subject to a condition requiring the final details to be approved in writing prior to commencement of the development. 8.103 Details of the floodlighting for the 3G Sports Pitch is provided in drawing – Proposed Forres Academy Floodlighting. Environmental Health have no objection to this subject to a condition that ensures the floodlighting is as proposed unless otherwise agreed in writing. 8.104 Noise A Noise Impact Assessment was undertaken for the 3G sports pitch, dance and fitness studios and building plant and specific mitigation is set out below: 8.105 3G Sports Pitch Th 3G Sports Pitch, to be located on the existing academy site once it is demolished is proposed to be open during school term time Monday to Friday 8am to 9pm (8am to 4pm for school use and beyond this for public bookings) and Saturday and Sunday 9am to 5pm. Outwith school term time it is proposed to be open Monday to Friday 9am to 9pm and Saturday and Sunday 9am to 5pm. The 3G Page 93
Page 94
Sports Pitch will be managed during school hours by the school and out of school hours by the Sports and Culture department. Noise mitigation measures for the pitch are detailed in the Noise Impact Assessment (NIA); these include containment boards, goal backboards for hockey and weldmesh fencing be fixed using resilient fixings. Subject to conditions Environmental Health have raised no objections to the proposed 3G Sports Pitch. The conditions relate to the hours of permitted use, the design and materials of the containment boards, the type of fencing and a noise management plan. 8.106 Fitness/Dance Studio A fitness suite and dance studio is proposed within the ground floor of the new school. The proposed opening times of the fitness suite and dance studio are 8am to 10pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 5pm Saturday and Sunday. The fitness suite and dance studio will be managed during school hours by the school and out of school hours by the Sports and Culture department. Environmental Health have no objection to it subject to conditions stating the hours of used (as above, unless otherwise agreed in writing) and details regarding its design and building fabrication to ensure noise emissions arising from the studios do not exceed Noise Rating Curve (NR) 15 as determined within a living apartment of the nearest noise sensitive dwelling with the window moderately open as referred to in the NIA. 8.107 Building Plant The plant associated with the school will predominantly be roof-mounted, comprising five larger mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR) units serving internal spaces and ten air source heat pumps (ASHP). Additionally, most external-facing classrooms will be equipped with individual MVHR units. The NIA notes the specific plant selection has not yet been finalised, and it therefore assesses the maximum permissible noise levels required to meet the relevant criteria. Environmental Health have no objection to it subject to a condition requiring further details of the potential noise impact and mitigation measures required for the plant equipment. The mitigation should ensure noise emissions arising from the plant does not exceed Noise Rating Curve (NR) 25 (between 0700 and 2300) and Noise Rating Curve (NR) 20 (between 2300 and 0700), as determined within a living apartment of the nearest noise sensitive dwelling with the window moderately open. Thie limit would apply and be determined over a minimum of 5 minutes duration between the hours of 0700 to 2300 hours. 8.108 Bird Control Measures to deter roosting and nesting gulls upon the roofs of buildings is proposed. This includes bird netting and sounder equipment. The number and positions of the sounder equipment shown on the Bird Protection Site Plan and Bird Protection Measures – Main Building Measures is indicative only therefore a condition is attached to the consent requiring the details of the measures/design features utilised to deter roosting and nesting gulls upon the roofs of all buildings to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. Thereafter the measures hereby approved must be adhered to and in place prior to any of the buildings coming into occupation/use. This is to ensure the development does not attract seagull Page 94
Page 95
activity which would be to the detrimental amenity of the users and neighbouring properties. 8.109 Subject to the conditions the proposal complies with the criteria in NPF Policy 23 and MLDP Policy EP14. 8.110 Biodiversity (NPF 3 / MLDP EP2) The proposed development of the new Forres Academy demonstrates compliance with NPF Policy 3 and MLDP Policy EP2, both of which require developments to deliver positive effects for biodiversity and contribute to nature recovery. These policies emphasise the application of the mitigation hierarchy, enhancement of habitats, and integration of nature-based solutions. 8.111 The design approach for the new academy prioritises biodiversity through the retention of existing green infrastructure and the introduction of new landscaping that incorporates native species planting. These measures will create habitats for pollinators and local wildlife, strengthen ecological connectivity, and improve the overall biodiversity value of the site. In addition, the development includes sustainable drainage features and outdoor learning spaces, which further support biodiversity. 8.112 To ensure compliance, the applicant has submitted a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) statement and a landscape plan. These documents set out the baseline of how the development will achieve measurable improvements in biodiversity, including habitat creation, species-rich planting, and long-term management commitments. 8.113 The following habitats are proposed to be created: • Ninety native individual trees will be planted across the Site, predominantly within the northern and southern areas of the Site. • Modified grassland will be created predominantly in the northern areas of the Site. This will be seeded with a suitable amenity grassland mix; • Additional lowland meadow, ‘other neutral grassland’ will be planted utilising a mix of amenity grasses and lowland wild flowers (of a similar type to Scotia Seeds ‘Urban Pollinator Mix’1 ) • A rain garden will be created within the northern area of the Site; • As stated on the Landscaping GA Plan (see appendix B), mixed scrub planting will be scattered throughout the Site; • Block paving, vehicle asphalt, cycle path colour tarmac, tactile pathing, 3G pitch, footpath, benches, sheds with canopies, hungry hut, free standing canopies, cycle shelters, cycle path, amphitheatre and greenhouses will be developed throughout the Site. 8.114 Further biodiversity enhancement will be provided through the addition of bird and bat boxes (providing nesting and roosting opportunities) installed on mature trees throughout the site. 8.115 The proposed development will deliver a net gain of +10.10% for habitats and +128.06% for hedgerows. Due to the nature of the scheme, it was not possible to Page 95
Page 96
completely avoid habitat impacts through re-siting. Every effort has been made to achieve the local policy target for biodiversity net gain on-site; however, the functional requirements of the development limit the scope for enhancements beyond the +10% target. The inclusion of fruit- and nut-bearing trees and shrub species within the planting scheme will provide additional biodiversity benefits by offering foraging opportunities for birds and small mammals, these benefits are not captured within the metric, which is based solely on habitat area. Furthermore, the creation of wildflower areas will support pollinators and other invertebrates, which in turn provide a food source for birds and bats. In addition, habitat piles of logs and brash will be retained within planted areas to create refugia for local wildlife. 8.116 While this proactive approach aligns with NPF’s requirement for developments to leave biodiversity in a demonstrably better state and meets MLDP Policy EP2’s emphasis on enhancement and protection, a condition is required to be attached to the planning consent requiring a detailed biodiversity plan to be submitted and approved in writing prior to the commencement of works. This will ensure that all proposed measures are implemented and monitored effectively throughout the development lifecycle. The Climate Change Strategy Officer advised that the BNG report and landscape plan contains sufficient information to provide comment, however the documents do not refer to NPF and biodiversity principles. The following suggestions were made to the applicant to be included within the Biodiversity Plan, swift bricks, bird boxes within the ecology garden, amphibian hibernacula, hedgehog holes in fences, showing habitat types, prioritising locally native trees, details of plants in ecology garden. This is in addition to the proposed enhancements. 8.117 The proposed Forres Urban Nature Network runs through the site, linking outwards in multiple directions using natural features such as the Mosset Burn and Sanquhar woods, as well as active travel routes. The site (particularly the old school site) is therefore of strategic importance for nature connectivity, allowing species to safely move. The inclusion of education and recreation spaces within this part of the network also increase the value of communicating that importance through interpretation (Policy 3 (b)(v.) The additional information required through the condition will support the development in meeting the Policy 3 outcome to strengthen nature networks. 8.118 Overall, subject to a condition requiring submission of a detailed biodiversity plan, the proposal is considered to meet the requirements of NPF4 Policy 3 and MLDP Policy EP2. These conditions include proposed condition 18 regarding protection of trees to be retained. 8.119 European Protected Species (NPF 3 / MLDP EP1) Nationally protected species are defined in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Under NPF Policy 3 and MLDP EP1 any development proposals that would have an adverse effect on a European Protected Species will not be approved. 8.120 A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) and Preliminary Ecological Assessment Summary were submitted with the proposal. The PEA details that there are no Page 96
Page 97
designated sites identified which overlap with or were adjacent to the proposed site boundary. Six statutory designated sites were identified within 5km of the site boundary. 8.121 None of the habitats recorded in the site are considered to be ‘priority habitat’ and presently offer limited significant biodiversity value. No evidence of protected species was recorded within the site. 8.122 The PEA makes various recommendations, including:- • The Mosset Burn, which flows through the site, flows into the Moray and Nairn Coast RAMSAR Site and Culbin Sands, Culbin Forest and Findhorn Bay SSSI. Without mitigation, it is considered likely that there is a risk of significant adverse effect to these sites from pollution during construction. A Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) should be carried out for the RAMSAR site (this has been undertaken). • The habitats on site are mainly urban and of low ecological value. The woodland habitats, while potentially being of greater ecological value, mainly consist of rows of trees, or the edges of larger woodland areas. It is recommended that trees are retained wherever possible or replaced if felling is required. 8.123 In terms of Protected Species various recommendations are made:- • Badgers - safe site mitigation measures should be followed for the duration of the works as follows, all efforts should be made to ensure a safe work site, which must include capping all exposed pipes / containers and covering all open excavations (if required for the works) or providing an adequate means of escape should any animals fall in (i.e., earth ramps or wooden planks). • Bats - further surveys are recommended to determine the presence or absence of roosting bats in any buildings to be demolished given the buildings on the site may be suitable for roosting bats – one potential entry point was recorded. Trees bordering the northern playing fields had potential for roosting bats. Should any work be required to take place within 30m of these trees, it is recommended that further bat surveys are carried out to determine the presence or absence of roosting bats on these trees. The habitats within the site may provide opportunity for foraging and commuting bats within the wider landscape. A lighting plan for the works is recommended to ensure that site lighting is restricted to the works area only with minimal light spill to the wider corridor and embankments. The works area should not be lit when site staff are not in attendance. • Birds – The woodland habitat, academy buildings and vegetation within the survey area provide suitable nesting habitat for birds. If works/demolition/any vegetation removal are to commence within the nesting bird season (March-August in Scotland, inclusive), it is recommended that a nesting bird check of all works areas is undertaken prior to the start of works, no more than 48 hours ahead of works, by a suitably qualified ecologist. If nesting birds are confirmed to be present, then all works in the vicinity of any nest must be delayed until the young have fledged, and an ecologist has confirmed the nest is no longer in use. An appropriate exclusion area will also be put in place. Page 97
Page 98
• Otters - The Mosset Burn which flows between the two southern parts of the site was identified as being suitable habitat for otter, although no otter signs were recorded. If any works are to disturb this area, or come within 50 m of the watercourse, it is recommended that a full otter survey is carried out. • Pine martens – although no pine marten signs were identified in the survey area given the woodland habitat bordering the Mosset Burn and the two southern parts of the site may provide suitable foraging habitat. As pine marten may utilise the Survey Area for commuting, the following general mitigation measures are recommended for the duration of the works an emergency stop works procedure should be implemented by site workers if pine martens or potential pine marten dens are unexpectedly encountered. All work within 50m will cease until a suitably qualified ecologist has inspected the site and determined the appropriate course of action. • Red squirrels - No squirrel signs were identified within the Survey Area. The presence of red squirrel cannot be ruled out by this PEA alone, as such the following precautionary mitigation measures are recommended for the duration of the works an emergency stop works procedure should be implemented by site workers if red squirrels or potential red squirrel dreys are unexpectedly encountered. All work within 50m will cease until a suitably qualified ecologist has inspected the site and determined the appropriate course of action. • Reptiles - may use rock piles and wood piles as refugia. Should it be necessary to remove these features, care should be taken to allow reptiles to disperse. This should not be undertaken from October – March when reptiles may be using the features as hibernacula and are sensitive to disturbance. 8.124 NatureScot confirmed that they did not require to be consulted on the proposal. A condition is attached to the consent to ensure adherence with the recommendations within the PEA. The criteria in NPF Policy 3 and MLDP Policy EP1 have been met. 8.125 Trees (NPF 6 / MLDP EP7) The proposed development of the new Forres Academy demonstrates a commitment to the principles set out in NPF Policy 6: Forestry, Woodland and Trees and MLDP Policy 7. Both policies emphasise the importance of protecting existing woodland, enhancing tree cover, and integrating green infrastructure into development to support biodiversity, climate resilience, and community wellbeing. 8.126 The design for the new academy respects the existing landscape by retaining mature and important trees wherever possible, ensuring that the character and ecological value of the site are preserved. This approach reflects the national and local policy requirement to safeguard established woodland and avoid unnecessary loss of tree cover. While some trees will inevitably be removed to accommodate the new building and associated infrastructure, this has been minimised through careful site planning and design. In total the felling of 44 trees (including Birch (Silver and Downy), Rowan, Elm, Cherry, Alder, Sycamore, Lime and Holly) across the site is required, primarily to accommodate the new football Page 98
Page 99
pitch, flood basin, bus access, turning area and elements of the car park and entrance plaza. Additional trees will be affected by construction activities, particularly along the western and Applegrove boundaries, where sycamores and cherries will experience significant root disturbance. These are considered capable of retention with appropriate mitigation, including canopy thinning to reduce stress and careful management during and after construction. 8.127 To offset this loss, the proposal includes a compensatory planting scheme on a 2 for 1 basis and a total of 90 trees will be planted using native species, which will strengthen biodiversity, enhance ecological connectivity, and contribute to long- term landscape quality. These measures not only enhance the visual quality of the development but also deliver significant environmental benefits, including carbon sequestration and improved habitat diversity. 8.128 A condition is attached to the consent to ensure adherence with the submitted Tree Protection measures. 8.129 Overall, the Forres Academy project demonstrates good practice in embedding forestry and woodland considerations into development. By retaining existing trees, introducing new native planting, and creating spaces that support biodiversity, the proposal meets the requirements of NPF4 Policy 6 and MLDP Policy 7, while contributing positively to Moray’s vision for a greener future. 8.130 Climate and Nature Crisis, Mitigation and Adaptation (NPF 1 & 2) Policy 1 of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) places significant weight on the global climate and nature crises in the assessment of all development proposals. It requires that planning decisions actively contribute to addressing these twin emergencies by promoting development that is nature-positive and supports the transition to net zero. 8.131 The proposed new Forres Academy complies with this policy. The development replaces an outdated building with a modern, energy-efficient facility that is designed to minimise environmental impact. The site layout and building design incorporate green infrastructure, biodiversity enhancements, and sustainable drainage systems, all of which contribute to nature recovery and ecological resilience. Landscaping proposals are expected to support habitat connectivity and improve the ecological value of the site, in line with the policy’s emphasis on restoring and enhancing nature networks. 8.132 Furthermore, the proposal demonstrates a clear commitment to climate action through the submission of a positive carbon statement. This document outlines how the development will reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to Scotland’s net zero targets. The inclusion of this statement reflects a proactive approach to climate responsibility and provides a transparent framework for assessing the development’s environmental performance. 8.133 Policy 2 of NPF4 requires that all development proposals are sited and designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to current and future risks from climate change. The new Forres Academy meets these requirements Page 99
Page 100
through a combination of design, construction, and operational strategies. 8.134 The carbon statement confirms that the development provides a comprehensive overview of whole-life carbon considerations, future climate adaptability, and net- zero operation plans. However, demolition carbon emissions and detailed operational carbon breakdown remain incomplete and will be addressed during the detailed design phase. While renewable energy and heat decarbonisation strategies are fully detailed, including capacity and integration, there is no carbon management and reporting plan or timeline for energy modelling completion. Sequestration opportunities are limited but integrated where possible, and barriers to net zero are primarily financial, with LEIP funding critical to delivery. 8.135 Next steps include completing energy modelling, demolition carbon calculations, operational carbon details, and developing a carbon reporting plan during detailed design. A planning condition would be attached to the consent to ensure these details are considered, when available. 8.136 In terms of adaptation, the development responds to the increasing risks associated with climate change, such as more intense rainfall and higher temperatures. The site includes sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to manage surface water and reduce flood risk. 8.137 The positive carbon statement submitted with the planning application provides a clear and measurable account of how the development addresses both mitigation and adaptation. It demonstrates that the project has been designed with a full understanding of its environmental responsibilities and aligns with national climate policy objectives. 8.138 The proposed new Forres Academy is an environmentally positive, sustainable development that fully supports the aims of NPF Policy 1 and Policy 2. Through its energy-efficient design, biodiversity enhancements, and climate resilience measures underpinned by a submitted positive carbon statement the project exemplifies best practice in tackling the climate and nature crises. 8.139 Heat Network (NPF 19) The proposed development of the new Forres Academy has been assessed against National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) Policy 19, which seeks to ensure that all new developments contribute to the decarbonisation of heat and cooling systems and support Scotland’s transition to net zero. 8.140 The submitted information confirms that the building design incorporates modern energy efficiency measures, including renewable energy integration and low- carbon heating solutions. These measures demonstrate compliance with Policy 19 by reducing lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and supporting sustainable energy use. 8.141 It is noted that there is no need for the development to connect to a Local Heat and Energy Efficiency Strategy (LHEES) network, as the building will be net zero on its own. Page 100
Page 101
8.142 In summary, the proposal meets the intent of NPF4 Policy 19 by prioritising heat decarbonisation and energy efficiency without reliance on LHEES connectivity. 8.143 Socio-economic (NPF 25) Policy 25 of NPF4 introduces a strategic shift in how development contributes to local economies, placing community wealth building (CWB) at the heart of planning decisions. This policy seeks to ensure that development proposals deliver tangible economic, social, and environmental benefits to local communities by supporting local employment, supply chains, and community ownership. 8.144 In line with emerging best practice and local planning guidance, the applicant has committed to the submission of a Community Wealth Building Plan (CWBP) through a planning condition. The supporting information provided confirms that the CWBP will set out clear measures to maximise community benefits, including the use of local labour, apprenticeships, and training opportunities, as well as prioritising local supply chains and support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Moray. The applicant has indicated that the plan will also detail mechanisms for community access to facilities and explore partnerships with local organisations, ensuring that the new Forres Academy becomes a focal point for social and economic development. These commitments align with the principles of Policy 25 by embedding community wealth building into the delivery of the project and creating tangible benefits for the local economy and residents. The CWBP will therefore provide a structured framework to monitor and secure these outcomes throughout the construction and operational phases of the development. 8.145 Overall, subject to a condition requiring submission of a detailed Community Wealth Building Plan (CWBP), the proposal is considered to meet the requirements of NPF4 Policy 25. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposal is to provide a new Forres Academy and additional support needs teaching facilities and community facilities with associated landscaping, external sport provision including a 3G sports pitch, car parking and bus drop-off to replace the existing academy on land at Applegrove Playing Field, Roysvale Park and the existing Forres Academy site, Forres. The new school is essential community infrastructure required to deliver a key objective of the Moray Council. The proposed development represents a significant and positive opportunity to replace the existing school with a modern, fit-for-purpose facility, while also enhancing sports and community facilities for the benefit of both students and the wider community. Page 101
Page 102
The site layout and building design incorporate green infrastructure, biodiversity enhancements, and sustainable drainage systems, all of which contribute to nature recovery and ecological resilience. The proposal demonstrates a clear commitment to climate action and will minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to Scotland’s net zero targets. Subject to conditions where recommended, the siting, design and servicing arrangements for the replacement school are considered acceptable with no unacceptable or significant adverse impact identified upon the appearance and amenity of the development plan and/or the surrounding area. The proposal is, in all respects, considered to be acceptable and accord with the provisions of the National Planning Framework 4 and Moray Local Development Plan 2020 and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer: Emma Mitchell Senior Planning Officer Ext: 01343 563326 Neal MacPherson Acting Service Manager, Planning and Building Standards Manager Page 102
Page 103
Appendix 1 – List of Persons/Parties Submitting Representations Page 103
Page 104
Page 104
Page 105
Page 105
Page 106
Page 106