Agenda Document Pack - Planning and Regulatory Services Committee - 05/03/2026
Moray Council · 5 March 2026
Back to Planning and Regulatory Services Committee — 5 March 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 Thursday, 05 March 2026 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee is to be held at Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX on Thursday, 05 March 2026 at 09:30. BUSINESS 1. Sederunt 2. Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests * 3. Minutes 3a) Minute of meeting dated 16 December 2025 7 - 16 3b) Minute of special meeting dated 14 January 2026 17 - 28 4. Written Questions ** Guidance Note 29 - 30 5. Planning Application 25/00916/APP Report by Appointed Officer Proposed variation of conditions 2 and 11 of planning consent 03/01286/MIN to extend the operational life of the existing permitted site until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with the proposed amended site design at Blackhillock Quarry, Keith, Moray AB55 5PA for Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd 31 - 52 6. Planning Application 2501457APP_Redacted 53 - 72 Page 1
Page 2
7. 25/01638/PAN Report by Executive Director Economy, Environment and Operations Proposed residential development with flexible retail/commercial floor space including associated roads, drainage and landscaping on Land West of A941 Lossiemouth Road, Findrassie, Elgin 73 - 78 8. Review of Enforcement Charter and update on Enforcement Report by Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations 79 - 102 9. Developer Obligations Planning Guidance and Update on Developer Obligations Report by Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations 103 - 202 10. Draft Hillside Farm (Dufftown) Masterplan Report by Executive Director Economy, Environment and Operations 203 - 306 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. 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
Page 3
Page 4
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. ** Written Questions - Any Member can put one written question about any relevant and competent business within the specified remits not already on the agenda, to the Chair provided it is received by the Proper Officer or Committee Services by 5pm three working days prior to the day of the meeting, please see Standing Order 36 for deadlines. A copy of any written answer provided by the Chair will be published on the Council’s committee management system by 12pm the day before the meeting. The Member who has put the question may, after the answer has been published, may ask one supplementary question directly related to the subject matter at the meeting, but no discussion will be allowed. No supplementary question can be put or answered more than 10 minutes after the Council has started on the relevant item of business, except with the consent of the Chair. If a Member does not have the opportunity to put a supplementary question because no time remains, then he or she can submit it in writing to the Proper Officer who will arrange for a written answer to be provided within 7 working days. Page 4
Page 5
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 5
Page 6
Page 6
Page 7
MORAY COUNCIL Minute of Meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Tuesday, 16 December 2025 Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX PRESENT Councillor Peter Bloomfield, Councillor Neil Cameron, Councillor Tracy Colyer, Councillor Theresa Coull, Councillor John Cowe, Councillor John Divers, Councillor Amber Dunbar, Councillor Jérémie Fernandes, Councillor David Gordon, Councillor Sandy Keith, Councillor Marc Macrae, Councillor Paul McBain, Councillor Sonya Warren APOLOGIES Councillor Draeyk van der Horn IN ATTENDANCE Head of Growth, Planning and Climate (Chief Planning Officer); A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer; D Anderson, Senior Engineer (Transportation); Service Manager Strategic Planning and Development, E Webster, Principal Planning Officer, R MacDougall, Senior Planning Officer, D Westmacott, Planning Officer, Service Manager Legal Services; L Rowan, Committee Services Officer. 1 Chair Councillor David Gordon chaired the meeting. 2 Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests In terms of Standing Orders 21 and 23 and the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, there were no declarations from Group Leaders or Spokespersons regarding any prior decisions taken on how Members will vote on any item on the agenda or any declarations of Member’s interests in respect of any item on the agenda. 3 Minutes The Minute of the Special meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services (P&RS) Committee dated 8 October 2025, and meeting of the P&RS Committee dated 21 October 2025 were submitted and approved. 4 Written Questions Item 3a) Page 7
Page 8
The Committee noted that no written questions had been submitted. 5 25/01364/S37 - Consultation response to Scottish Minsters for a proposed 186km overhead transmission line (400kV) and associated development between Beauly and Peterhead The meeting had before it a report by the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations asking the Committee to consider the consultation request received from the Energy Consents Unit (ECU) of the Scottish Government in relation to an application under section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989 for a new overheard electricity line running between Beauly and Peterhead, noting that this section of the Act relates to consent for onshore electricity transmission infrastructure. During his introduction, A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer asked the Committee to note an error in the report at condition 18 which should refer to condition 17 and not 16 as printed. This was noted. During discussion surrounding compensatory planting, Councillor Bloomfield sought clarification as to where this would take place. In response, A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer advised that details of where the compensatory planting would take place had not been provided however a condition had been added asking that a compensatory planting plan be agreed by the Council however, if the Committee were minded to agree the recommendation, this could be amended to reflect that compensatory planting should not take place on prime agricultural land. Councillor Macrae acknowledged the national need for improved electricity transmission however raised concern in relation to the severe and irreversible impacts on the Moray landscape, particularly within the Spey Valley. Councillor Macrae also noted the significant woodland loss, unresolved environmental and transport impacts, and clear conflicts with several policies within National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Local Development Plan (LDP). Councillor Macrae further noted that underground cabling options had been dismissed due to cost however was of the view that cost could not outweigh the permanent visual and landscape impact the proposal would have on the Moray landscape. Councillor Macrae stated that he was minded to object to the proposal however was keen to hear the views of other members of the Committee. During further discussion, Councillor Coull expressed concern in relation to the impact this proposal would have on local residents and queried whether the community would receive direct community benefit as compensation. In response, A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer advised that this information had not been provided however, if the Committee were minded to agree the recommendation, the question of direct community benefit could be put to the Applicant. Page 8
Page 9
In relation to the long term visual impact of the proposal, Councillor Warren queried whether the Applicant could consider underground cables at places most visually impacted. In response, A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer advised that using underground cables would cost four times more than constructing an overhead line and that the area would have to be kept clear for any future maintenance therefore this had been discounted by the Applicant however, if the Committee were minded to agree the recommendation, the question of underground cables at sensitive locations with significant visual impacts could be put to the ECU. At this point, the Service Manager Legal Services advised that all representations would be referred to the ECU, which may result in a public inquiry should the Council object to the proposal and that the Council would be expected to attend and present its case. The Service Manager Legal Services advised that, although financial implications are not a planning consideration, the Committee should be aware of potential costs associated with participation in an inquiry, which could include engaging external legal or planning representation as Planning Officers, having provided an independent professional judgement that an objection should not be lodged, are bound by the Royal Town Planning Institute’s code of conduct and cannot advocate an alternative position. If an objection is submitted, the Council must decide how best to represent its position, which may involve attendance by the mover and seconder of any motion put forward. Councillor Fernandes, having considered the report and listened to the debate and advice from the Service Manager Legal Services, moved that the Committee agree the recommendations as printed within the report with additional conditions to reflect consideration of direct community benefit and underground cables at places most visually impacted by the proposal. Councillor Warren seconded this. Councillor Colyer raised concern in relation to the proposal, which would span 186 km, involve over 500 towers up to 72m high and would create a permanent industrial corridor through sensitive rural landscapes, peatlands, and woodlands. In addition, the proposal poses significant and irreversible environmental impacts, including visual impact, wildlife disruption, and damage to carbon-rich soils which is contrary to NPF4 policies on climate, biodiversity, and natural places. She stated that the proposal risks harm to protected areas such as the River Spey and Moray Firth Special Areas of Conservation, fails to meet LDP requirements for safeguarding landscape and community wellbeing, offers no clear benefit to the local community and is incompatible with Scottish planning law and sustainable development principles. Councillor Macrae stated that the proposal does not provide any benefit to Scotland, noting that the Energy Minister had confirmed that the development is intended solely for electricity export rather than the transmission of electricity between customers in Scotland. He acknowledged the significant concerns raised by other Councillors within the meeting, with the proposal being described as detrimental to the countryside and contrary to several NPF4 policies. Councillor Macrae further noted that the proposal also faced objections from the Ministry of Defence, reinforcing the view that it is incompatible with planning and environmental principles and moved that the Committee object to the application as the proposal is contrary to NPF4 policies 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 whilst highlighting the widespread opposition along the Page 9
Page 10
proposed route either through a straightforward objection or by submitting a detailed amendment outlining specific grounds for refusal. During Councillor Macrae’s comments regarding the MOD objection, A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer advised that he had received an email stating that the MOD had removed its objection to the proposal as their issues had been resolved by the Applicant. This was noted. The Chair seconded Councillor Macrae’s motion also highlighting that the proposal is contrary to Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) 2020 policies EP1, EP3, EP7 and EP8. In response, the Service Manager Legal Services advised that the Committee could not simply object to the proposal and would have to provide detailed reasons for the objection based on relevant planning considerations. It was noted that Councillor Macrae had emailed reasons to support his objection to the Clerk during the meeting and sought a short adjournment, through the Chair, to consider these and to ensure that the Committee had sight of the reasons given. This was agreed. On resumption of the meeting, Councillor Macrae acknowledged that the Chair had identified several other policies where the proposal failed to comply and withdrew his amendment. The Chair moved an amendment, which had been circulated to the Committee in the following terms: That the Council submits a formal objection to the Section 37 application for the proposed 400kV overhead transmission line between Beauly, Blackhillock and New Deer, on the following grounds: 1. Significant Adverse Landscape and Visual Impacts The Council notes that the report identifies significant adverse landscape and visual impacts across multiple sensitive areas of Moray, including the Spey Valley SLA, Glen Rothes, Newmill, Keith, and the Dava Way and, given the acknowledged severity and permanence of these impacts, considers an objection necessary. 2. Conflict with National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) 2020 Policies The proposal is in conflict with NPF4 and MLDP 2020 policies, EP1 (Natural Heritage Designations), EP2 (Biodiversity), EP3 (Special Landscape Areas and Landscape Character), EP7 (Forestry, Woodlands and Trees), EP8 (Historic Environment) and NPF4 policy 1 (tackling the climate and nature crises), 2 (Climate mitigation and adaptation), 3 (Biodiversity), 4 (Natural places), 5 (Soils), 6 (Forestry, woodland and trees) and 7 (Historic assets and places). In particular: NPF4: • Policy 3 (biodiversity) - the development will not enhance biodiversity; Page 10
Page 11
• Policy 4 (natural places) - there will be significant adverse effects upon special landscape areas and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) across the whole region in Moray; • Policy 6 (forestry, woodland, and trees) - the loss of ancient woodland; • Policy 7 (historic assets and place) – heritage assets which will be compromised MLDP 2020 • EP1 (Natural Heritage Designations) - The Capercaillie at Darnaway is under threat; • EP3 (Special Landscape Areas) - significant adverse effects; • EP7 (Forestry, Woodlands, and Trees) - loss of one and a half hectares of ancient woodland; • EP8 (Historic Environment) - heritage assets which will be compromised 3. Unacceptable Woodland Loss The proposal results in the loss of 189.58 hectares of woodland, including native and ancient woodland, with no binding compensatory planting plan. In the context of a climate and biodiversity emergency, this level of unmitigated loss is unacceptable. 4. Insufficient Consideration of Undergrounding The report acknowledges that undergrounding would reduce severe landscape impacts at the River Spey crossing but dismisses it primarily on cost grounds. The Council considers that cost alone is not a sufficient justification for rejecting undergrounding in the most sensitive locations. 5. Unresolved Cumulative Impacts The alignment conflicts with the proposed Kellas Drum Wind Farm, and cumulative impacts remain unresolved. The Council cannot provide a definitive position until the interaction between these major energy proposals is clarified. 6. Failure to Demonstrate Biodiversity Net Gain NPF4 requires national developments to deliver a demonstrable biodiversity net gain. The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence or measurable commitments to meet this requirement. Councillor Macrae seconded this. Page 11
Page 12
On a division there voted: For the Motion (4): Councillors Fernandes, Warren, Coull and Cameron For the Amendment (9): Councillors Gordon, Macrae, Bloomfield, Colyer, Cowe, Divers, Dunbar, Keith, and McBain Abstentions (0): Nil Accordingly, the Amendment became the finding of the Meeting and the Committee agreed that the Council submits a formal objection to the Section 37 application for the proposed 400kV overhead transmission line between Beauly, Blackhillock and New Deer, on the following grounds: 1. Significant Adverse Landscape and Visual Impacts The Council notes that the report identifies significant adverse landscape and visual impacts across multiple sensitive areas of Moray, including the Spey Valley SLA, Glen Rothes, Newmill, Keith, and the Dava Way and, given the acknowledged severity and permanence of these impacts, considers an objection necessary. 2. Conflict with National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) 2020 Policies The proposal is in conflict with NPF4 and MLDP 2020 policies, EP1 (Natural Heritage Designations), EP2 (Biodiversity), EP3 (Special Landscape Areas and Landscape Character), EP7 (Forestry, Woodlands and Trees), EP8 (Historic Environment) and NPF4 policy 1 (tackling the climate and nature crises), 2 (Climate mitigation and adaptation), 3 (Biodiversity), 4 (Natural places), 5 (Soils), 6 (Forestry, woodland and trees) and 7 (Historic assets and places). In particular: NPF4: • Policy 3 (biodiversity) - the development will not enhance biodiversity; • Policy 4 (natural places) - there will be significant adverse effects upon special landscape areas and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) across the whole region in Moray; • Policy 6 (forestry, woodland, and trees) - the loss of ancient woodland; • Policy 7 (historic assets and place) – heritage assets which will be compromised MLDP 2020 • EP1 (Natural Heritage Designations) - The Capercaillie at Darnaway is under threat; • EP3 (Special Landscape Areas); significant adverse effects • EP7 (Forestry, Woodlands, and Trees) - loss of one and a half hectares of ancient woodland; Page 12
Page 13
• EP8 (Historic Environment) - heritage assets which will be compromised 3. Unacceptable Woodland Loss The proposal results in the loss of 189.58 hectares of woodland, including native and ancient woodland, with no binding compensatory planting plan. In the context of a climate and biodiversity emergency, this level of unmitigated loss is unacceptable. 4. Insufficient Consideration of Undergrounding The report acknowledges that undergrounding would reduce severe landscape impacts at the River Spey crossing but dismisses it primarily on cost grounds. The Council considers that cost alone is not a sufficient justification for rejecting undergrounding in the most sensitive locations. 5. Unresolved Cumulative Impacts The alignment conflicts with the proposed Kellas Drum Wind Farm, and cumulative impacts remain unresolved. The Council cannot provide a definitive position until the interaction between these major energy proposals is clarified. 6. Failure to Demonstrate Biodiversity Net Gain NPF4 requires national developments to deliver a demonstrable biodiversity net gain. The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence or measurable commitments to meet this requirement. 6 Performance Report (Economic Growth and Development - Planning) - Period to September 2025 The meeting had before it a report by the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations asking the Committee to scrutinise performance in areas of Service Planning, Service Performance, and other related data to the end of September 2025 and note actions being taken to improve performance where required. During her introduction, the Head of Growth, Planning and Climate (Chief Planning Officer) advised that the report on Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance had hoped to be presented to this Committee however this would be brought to the special meeting on 14 January 2026. She further advised that there was some blank performance data within the background papers and explained that this information is submitted to the Scottish Government and takes 6 months to be published and Page 13
Page 14
finalised therefore it is always provided retrospectively and that narrative would be provided to explain this in future reports. This was noted. The Head of Growth, Planning and Climate (Chief Planning Officer) further congratulated the Building Standards Team who had been presented with the National Performance Award for the first time from the Scottish Government in November 2025 highlighting the Team’s strong performance across all national indicators. The Team also received a further reward relating to community safety for work conducted a few years ago at the Poundland site in Elgin. The Committee joined the Chair in congratulating the Building Standards Service for their recent achievements and thereafter unanimously agreed to note: (i) performance in areas of Service Planning, Service Performance, and other related data to the end of September 2025; (ii) actions being taken to improve performance where required; (iii) that the report on Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance would be presented to the special meeting of the Committee on 14 January 2026; and (iv) that future reports would include narrative to explain blank performance data. 7 Moray Employment Land Audit 2025 The meeting had before it a report by the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations asking the Committee to note the employment land supply in Moray and agree the final version of the Moray Employment Land Audit 2025. During discussion surrounding the potential release of Long 2 land at March Road, Buckie, Councillor Warren queried whether this could be used for a lorry park to service the needs of HGV drivers and increase the use of Buckie Harbour. In response the Service Manager Strategic Planning and Development advised that this could be explored further with colleagues during future discussions when developing the next Local Development Plan. This was noted. Thereafter, the Committee unanimously agreed to: (i) note the employment land supply in Moray; (ii) approve the finalised Moray Employment Land Audit 2025, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report; and (iii) note that release of Long 2 land at March Road, Buckie to provide a lorry park would be considered during discussions when developing the next Local Development Plan. 8 Moray Town Centre Health Check 2025 Page 14
Page 15
The meeting had before it a report by the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations highlighting the key findings of the Moray Town Centre Health Check 2025 and recommended that the Moray Town Centre Health Check 2025 is adopted as a material consideration in future retail planning policy and planning application decision making. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: (i) to note the findings of the Moray Town Centre Health Check 2025; (ii) to adopt the Moray Town Centre Health Check 2025, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report, as a material consideration in future retail planning policy and planning application decision making; and (iii) the publication of the Town Centre Health Check 2025 on the Planning and Development website pages. 9 Housing Land Audit 2025-26 The meeting had before it a report by the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations asking the Committee to consider the housing land supply situation in Moray and agree the final version of the Moray Housing Land Audit (HLA) 2025/26. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: (i) to note the housing land supply in Moray; (ii) the Council's responses to the consultation on the draft Moray Housing Land Audit 2025/26, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report; and (iii) to approve the finalised Moray Housing Land Audit 2025/26, as set out in Appendix 2 of the report. Page 15
Page 16
Page 16
Page 17
MORAY COUNCIL Minute of Special Meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Wednesday, 14 January 2026 Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX PRESENT Councillor Peter Bloomfield, Councillor Neil Cameron, Councillor Tracy Colyer, Councillor John Cowe, Councillor John Divers, Councillor Amber Dunbar, Councillor Jérémie Fernandes, Councillor David Gordon, Councillor Sandy Keith, Councillor Marc Macrae, Councillor Draeyk van der Horn, Councillor Sonya Warren APOLOGIES Councillor Theresa Coull, Councillor Paul McBain ALSO PRESENT Councillor Kathleen Robertson IN ATTENDANCE Head of Growth, Planning and Climate (Chief Planning Officer); Head of Housing, Property and Communities, N MacPherson, Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards; E Mitchell, Senior Planning Officer; D Anderson, Senior Engineer (Transportation); W Burnish, Senior Engineer (Flood Risk Management); A Hall, Program Manager Education, Service Manager Legal Services; L Rowan, Committee Services Officer. 1 Chair The meeting was chaired by Councillor David Gordon. 2 Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests In terms of Standing Orders 21 and 23 and the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, there were no declarations from Group Leaders or Spokespersons regarding any prior decisions taken on how Members will vote on any item on the agenda or any declarations of Member’s interests in respect of any item on the agenda. 3 Planning Application 25/01203/APP 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 Item 3b) Page 17
Page 18
and bus drop-off to replace existing academy on Site of Forres Academy/Applegrove/Roysvale Forres, Moray for Moray Council The meeting had before it a report by the Appointed Officer recommending that, for reasons detailed in the report, planning permission be granted to 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. The Committee noted that the application had been referred to Committee as the application is a major application. Prior to consideration of the planning application, the Service Manager Legal Services advised that various officers were present to answer questions that members may have, one of which being A Hall, Program Manager Education who was present to answer any education related questions however was not present representing the Applicant. This was noted. Councillor Macrae welcomed the planning application and commended officers for their efforts in bringing the planning application to Committee and moved that the Committee grant planning permission in respect of Planning Application 25/01203/APP, as recommended. Councillor Warren seconded the motion however sought assurance that flood mitigations and road orders would be in place before irreversible stages of the project to avoid any potential delay. In response, N MacPherson, Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards assured the Committee that conditions 5, 6, 7 and 8 would ensure that the relevant orders are in place timeously. Councillor van der Horn noted the substantial number of objections to the proposal however noted that many were not objecting to the school but rather specific aspects of the planning application. In relation to the proposed 3G pitch, Councillor van der Horn sought assurance that environmentally safe materials would be used at the time when the pitch is installed. In response, N MacPherson, Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards advised that, if Members were minded to approve the planning application, a further condition could be added stating that cork or another similar environmentally acceptable product be used when the 3G pitch is being designed. This was agreed. Councillor van der Horn sought further assurance that the design would detail measures in place to filter any materials from the 3G pitch to protect the adjacent watercourse. In response, N MacPherson, Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards suggested, if the Committee were minded to approve the planning application, an additional condition specifically asking that the design detail how material will be intercepted when draining from the site. This was agreed. Page 18
Page 19
Councillor van der Horn noted that one common concern raised by members of the public was in relation to the bus drop-off and pick-up site and queried whether the street tree planting at Sanquhar Road could be improved to give additional privacy to the houses on that road. In response, N MacPherson, Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards advised that, if the Committee were minded to approve the planning application, Condition 14 could be amended to ensure more extensive and continuous tree planting along the edge of Sanquhar Road. This was agreed. The Chair sought clarification from Councillors Macrae and Warren, as mover and seconder of the motion to grant planning permission in respect of planning application 25/01203/APP, as to whether they were content to add the 2 additional conditions in relation to the material used for the 3G pitch and drainage from the pitch and the amendment to condition 14 in relation to additional tree planning on Sanquhar Road. In response, both Councillors Macrae and Warren agreed to include the 2 additional conditions and amendment to condition 14 with their motion. There being no-one otherwise minded, the Committee unanimously agreed to: (i) adopt the conclusions of Habitat Regulation Appropriate Assessment Appraisal as summarised in the Observations section of the report, where adequate mitigation is proposed; and (ii) grant planning permission, as recommended, in respect of Planning Application 25/01203/APP subjection to the following conditions and reasons including: • a further condition stating that the use of cork or another similar environmentally acceptable product be used when the 3G pitch is being designed; • an additional condition specifically asking that the design detail how material will be intercepted when draining from the site; and • an amendment to Condition 14 to ensure more extensive and continuous tree planting along the edge of Sanqhar Road. 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 in consultation with the Roads Authority. The Phasing Plan and Page 19
Page 20
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 20
Page 21
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 21
Page 22
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 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. Page 22
Page 23
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; • a comprehensive 30-year monitoring and maintenance plan, including details regarding funding sources and responsible parties; and • further to the planting proposed, additional tree planting must be provided along the east side of the bus layby on Sanquhar Road. 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 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. Page 23
Page 24
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 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 Page 24
Page 25
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. 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. Page 25
Page 26
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 ‘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. Page 26
Page 27
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. 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. Page 27
Page 28
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. 40. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council as Planning Authority, the infill crumb used for the 3G pitch must be selected from the most environmentally safe option, for the materials available for use at the time of construction prior to the construction of the 3G pitch. Reason: In order to ensure that any impact upon the environment is minimised. 41. Prior to the construction of the 3G pitch and in conjunction with condition 10 details must be submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority showing how any materials will be intercepted/filtrated from the 3G pitch and its enclosures to protect the adjacent water course. Reason: In order to ensure that any impact upon the environment is minimised. Page 28
Page 29
GUIDANCE NOTE PRODUCED FOR PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF 5 MARCH 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 29
Page 30
Page 30
Page 31
WARD 02_17 25/00916/APP 5 March 2026 Proposed variation of conditions 2 and 11 of planning consent 03/01286/MIN to extend the operational life of the existing permitted site until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with the proposed amended site design at Blackhillock Quarry, Keith, Moray AB55 5PA for Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd Comments: • No site visit required. • This application is a major application. • The proposal has been advertised for neighbour notification purposes and under schedule 3. • No representations received at the time of writing report. Procedure: • None. Recommendation Approve subject to conditions. Conditions/Reasons 1. The permission hereby granted shall be for a limited period only and shall cease on 31 October 2040 (the ‘cessation’ date). Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development having regard to the nature of the current proposal and enable the development to progress in accordance with the applicant's agent's submitted particulars to allow for full extraction of available resources (and for site restoration thereafter); in order that the Council, as Planning Authority may retain control over the use of the site and to ensure that further consideration can be given to the operation, effects and impact of the use hereby approved upon the amenity and character of the area; and furthermore, to ensure the requirements for implementation of the development are carried out in accordance with the earlier approved decision. Item 5. Page 31
Page 32
2. Operations must be carried out in accordance with the site design and cross sections, hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: In order to control the extent and appearance of the quarrying operations. 3. On expiry of the consent or completion of extraction, whichever is the sooner, all buildings, plant and machinery and other materials brought into the site during extraction shall be removed and the site shall be restored in accordance with the approved plans within a period of 6 months to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the proper reinstatement of the site. 4. Not later than 1 year prior to the date on which it is expected that condition 3 will be complied with, a Restoration Scheme for the site shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council (as Planning Authority). This restoration scheme shall illustrate the following requirements:- (i) final ground levels to allow for agricultural use of the site; (ii) the entire area to be grass-seeded and returned to agricultural use; (iii) details of the depth of topsoil to be used and detailed profiles of the restoration slopes together with details of the type and method of seeding. (iv) evidence of how the site restoration will maximise biodiversity gain as detailed in Appendix 3 - Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of the Planning Statement submitted in July 2025. The approved Restoration Scheme shall be implemented to the full satisfaction of the Council (as Planning Authority) within 6 months of the expiry of the planning consent or completion of the quarrying operations whichever is the sooner. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the proper reinstatement of the site. 5. Unless otherwise agreed with the Council (as Planning Authority) an aftercare scheme showing such steps as may be necessary to bring the site to the standard required for sustaining the approved restoration shall be submitted for the approval of the Council (as Planning Authority) not later than 1 year prior to the date on which it is expected that condition 3 will be complied with and the aftercare scheme shall show: (i) all proposed planting/landscaping works and finished levels within the site; (ii) all steps to be taken and the period during which they are to be taken; and (iii) that the aftercare of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the aftercare scheme. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the proper reinstatement of the site. Page 32
Page 33
6. The approved Restoration Scheme (Condition 4) shall be implemented to the full satisfaction of the Council (as Planning Authority) within 6 months of the expiry of the planning consent or completion of the quarrying operations whichever is the sooner. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the proper reinstatement of the site. 7. The existing visibility splay of 4.5m x 90 m in both directions at the access onto the Blackhillock Road (U43H) shall be maintained at all times free from any obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres above the level of the carriageway. Reason: To enable drivers of vehicles leaving the site to have a clear view over a length of road sufficient to allow safe exit, in the interests of road safety for the proposed development and other road users. 8. Unless otherwise agree in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority, the development must comply with condition 11 relating to vehicle routing of planning permission (reference number 99/00130/FUL) approved on the 21 October 1999 and Condition 9 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN approved on 12 February 2004. Reason: To ensure the provision of a safe and suitable access to the development in the interest of road safety during the operational period of the development 9. No water shall be permitted to drain or loose material be carried onto the public carriageway. Reason: To ensure acceptable development that does not create any hazard to road users in the interests of road safety. 10. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, all quarry operations shall be carried out and permitted between 0700 - 1900 hours, Monday to Friday, and 0700 - 1300 hours, Saturdays, not on local bank or Scottish National holidays and at no other times without the written consent of the Council, as Planning Authority, notwithstanding the separate time periods in condition 18 which specifically relate to blasting times. Reason: In order that the times of quarry operations are controlled to minimise disturbance to local residents. 11. During the normal daytime working hours defined in the above condition, the freefield Equivalent Continuous Sound Level (LAeq,1hr) for the period, excluding bund formation, soil and overburden handling activity, shall not exceed 50 dB (A), as determined at any existing noise sensitive property. Reason: In order that noise from the development is controlled so as not to cause noise nuisance to local residents. Page 33
Page 34
12. Noise from soil and overburden handling and bund formation shall not exceed the freefield Equivalent Continuous Sound Level ( LAeq,1hr) of 70 dB(A) at any existing noise sensitive property and be limited to a period not exceeding 8 weeks in a year at any one property. Reason: In order that noise from the bund formation and the soil and overburden phase of development is controlled and that the duration of this activity is limited in duration, so as not to cause noise nuisance to local residents. 13. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, broad spectrum white noise vehicle reversing alarms shall be installed on all vehicular quarry plant. Reason: In order that noise from the development is controlled so as not to cause noise nuisance to local residents. 14. At the reasonable request of the Planning Authority, following a complaint relating to noise from quarry operations at the development, the developer shall measure at its own expense noise emissions as they relate to the permitted consent limits, having regard to measurement locations and methodologies as detailed in Planning Advise Note 'PAN50, Annex A: The Control of Noise at Surface Mineral Workings'. The results of such monitoring shall thereafter be forwarded to the Planning Authority. In the event of a breach of noise limits a scheme of mitigation shall be brought into action and its implementation agreed with the Planning Authority. Reason: In order that noise from the development is controlled so as not to cause noise nuisance to local residents. 15. Prior to the development commencing, a written scheme to control blasting operations shall be submitted and agreed with the Planning Authority. The results of monitoring associated with the agreed scheme shall be made available in writing to the Planning Authority on request. Reason: In order that blasting operations are considered and managed, in order to protect local residents. 16. Prior to the development commencing, details of the methods employed to minimise air overpressure from blasting operations shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. All blasting operations shall take place only in accordance with the scheme as approved or with such subsequent amendments as may receive the written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: In order that air overpressure from blasting operations are considered and managed in order to protect local residents. 17. Ground vibration as a result of blasting operations at the development shall not exceed a peak particle velocity of 6 mms-1 (95% confidence level) at residential Page 34
Page 35
properties, with no individual blast exceeding a peak particle velocity of 12mms-1. The measurement shall be the maximum of 3 mutually perpendicular directions taken at the ground surface at any vibration sensitive building. Reason: In order that vibration associated with blasting from the development is controlled so as not to cause nuisance to local residents. 18. No blasting shall be carried out on the site except between the following times (1000 and 1200 hours) and (1400 and 1600 hours) Monday to Fridays and (1000 and 1200 hours) on Saturday. There shall be no blasting or drilling operations on Sundays, Bank Holidays or National Holidays. Reason: In order that the times of blasting operations are controlled to minimise disturbance to local residents. 19. The above condition 18 shall not apply in cases of emergency when it is considered necessary to carry out blasting operations in the interests of safety. The Planning Authority shall be notified in writing immediately of the nature and circumstances of any such event. Reason: In order that that the Planning Authority is informed of any emergency situation where the above condition cannot be met. 20. No development shall commence until details have been submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority, regarding a detailed dust management plan. Following its approval the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved dust management plan. Reason: To ensure the provision of an acceptable form of development and to protect the amenity of nearby residential premises. 21. In line with the Blackhillock Quarry Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) dated 17 April 2025 prepared by Echoes Ecology Ltd, pre-works checks prior to further vegetation removal and to carry out any further survey works/mitigation in the event that protected species are detected at that point must be undertaken. Reason: To ensure that the site is checked for any protected species at the appropriate stage in the development. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are:- The proposed variation to conditions 2 and 11 of planning consent 03/01286/MIN to extend the operational life of the existing permitted site until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with the proposed amended site design, subject to other updated conditions, is considered to comply with relevant policies of Page 35
Page 36
National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020, and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. List of Informatives: THE SERVICE MANAGER, TRANSPORTATION has commented that: - Planning consent does not carry with it the right to carry out works within the public road boundary. The applicant shall free and relieve the Roads Authority from any claims arising out of their operations on the road or extension to the road. THE SERVICE MANAGER COMMUNITY PROTECTION has commented that: - The donating borehole, Spey Bay Quarry, requires to be registered with Moray Council Private Water Supplies as a commercial borehole and confirmation that the additional supply to Blackhillock does not exceed the limit that requires a SEPA licence. Spey Bay Quarry must also have a procedure for closure or reduction in use during periods of water scarcity in the area. Should the circumstances change whereby donated water is no longer viable and a borehole is required for the Blackhillock site, it must be registered with Moray Council Private Water Supply and the British Geological Society to continue operations. LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description YG637-PA-F-01 Site location plan YG637-PA-F-03 Phase 1 site plan YG637-PA-F-04 Phase 2 site plan YG637-PA-F-05 Phase 3 site plan YG637-PA-F-06 Cross sections Page 36
Page 37
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: Blackhillock Quarry Keith Planning Application Ref Number: 25/00916/APP Location Plan Applicant Name: Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd Page 37
Page 38
Site location plan Page 38
Page 39
Site plan as existing Page 39
Page 40
Page 40
Page 41
PLANNING APPLICATION: 25/00916/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 • This application under section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 seeks to vary the terms of condition 2 and 11 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN, granted on 12 February 2004 for the expansion of working area of Blackhillock Quarry, Keith. • A 1.98-hectare extension to Blackhillock Quarry was granted planning consent in February 2026 (25/00917/APP). Conditions 2 and 11 are required to be varied to facilitate working to take place within the existing permitted site: for access and to leave a landform which would assist in supporting future restoration; the placement of overburden in existing facility in the north of the current site in landscaping; together with processing, stocking and despatch of quarry materials for the consented extension. • Condition 2 granted permission for a limited period expiring on 10 February 2029. The current application seeks to vary the condition by extending the duration of the planning permission until 31 October 2040. • Condition 11 provides that no extraction shall occur beyond 6 months of the date of the consent unless details showing the proposed extraction levels of the site have been submitted to and approved by the planning authority. The current application seeks to vary this condition to provide for working to take place in accordance with the proposed amended site design. • Further to the Section 42 application as submitted, and in order to achieve an acceptable form of development the applicants have proposed additional measures to improve the biodiversity gain of the previously approved landscape restoration measures. • The application is supported by a Planning Statement, appendices to the document include a Noise Impact Assessment, Blast Vibration Impact Assessment, Preliminary Ecology Appraisal, Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Extractive Waste Management Plan. 2. THE SITE • The site is a working quarry extending to approx. 10.33 hectares (including recently approved extension). • Areas of the original consent (03/01286/MIN) are now occupied by the Trunk Roads Depot or are part of the permission (22/00499/APP) for the adjacent Cairdshill Quarry. • The site is located approx. 1.6 km to the south of Keith. Page 41
Page 42
• The site is bounded by Cairdshill Quarry to the east, the Amey Keith Roads Depot to the northwest, a minor public road immediately to the north, and agricultural land to the south and southwest. The A96 lies further to the east and the Blackhillock substation further to the west. • The nearest dwellings to the site are Blackhillock Cottages, located approx. 20m from the site boundary. • The site primarily provides premium agricultural lime products, together with single sized aggregates and crush rock fines for construction projects across the North of Scotland. 3. HISTORY Application site - Blackhillock Quarry 25/00917/APP - Application for planning permission for extension to southern boundary of the existing quarry – granted planning permission recently under delegated powers. 05/0809/MIN – Application for planning permission for extension to southern boundary of the existing quarry at Blackhillock Quarry – granted planning permission 27 February 2006 under delegated powers. 03/01286/MIN – Application for planning permission for the expansion of working area of the existing property designated at Blackhillock Quarry, Keith – granted planning permission dated 12 February 2004 by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee. 99/00130/FUL – Application for planning permission for resumption of quarrying operations at Blackhillock Quarry, Keith – granted planning permission dated 21 October 1999 under delegated powers. Adjoining - Cairdshill Quarry 22/00499/APP – Application for planning permission for proposed quarry extension at Cairdshill Quarry – granted planning permission dated 27 October 2022 by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee. 21/00115/APP – Application under section 42 to vary condition 1 of planning permission ref 10/01801/MIN to extend duration of operations until 22 September 2026 at Cairdshill Quarry – granted planning permission dated 19 May 2021 by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee. 16/00402/MIN – Application for planning permission for minor extension at Cairdshill Quarry – granted planning permission dated 22 September 2016 under delegated powers. 10/01801/MIN – Application for planning permission for minor extension to mineral extraction area at Cairdshill Quarry – granted planning permission 9 February 2011 under delegated powers. Page 42
Page 43
06/02475/FUL – Renew planning permission 96/00262/FUL extension of the existing hard rock quarry at Cairdshill Quarry, Keith – granted planning permission dated 5 March 2007 under delegated powers. 4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 Policy 1 - Tackling the climate and nature crises Policy 2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation Policy 3 - Biodiversity Policy 4 - Natural places Policy 5 - Soils Policy 6 - Forestry, woodland and trees Policy 7 - Historic assets and places Policy 12 - Zero waste Policy 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 14 - Design, quality and place Policy 18 - Infrastructure first Policy 22 - Flood risk Policy 23 - Health and safety Policy 33 – Minerals Moray Local Development Plan 2020 PP3 - Infrastructure and Services DP1 - Development Principles DP10 - Minerals EP1 - Natural Heritage Designation EP2 - Biodiversity EP7 - Forestry Woodland and Trees EP12 - Management and Enhancement Water EP13 - Foul Drainage EP14 - Pollution Contamination Hazards EP16 - Geodiversity and Soil Resources 5. ADVERTISEMENTS • Advertised for neighbour notification purposes. • Advertised as a development specified in Schedule 3 of the Development Management Regulations 2013 (development that may impact neighbours beyond the immediate vicinity of the site). 6. CONSULTATIONS Moray Flood Risk Management – No objection. Page 43
Page 44
Environmental Health – No objection subject to conditions (if permitted) relating to permitted quarry operating hours, noise levels, blasting operations, ground vibrations and dust management. Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks – No objection. Scottish Environment Protection Agency – Refer to standing advice. Developer Obligations – None sought. Transport Scotland – No objection. Transportation Manager – No objection subject to conditions (if permitted) related to a visibility splay, vehicle routing and no water or loose material being carried onto the public road. Private Water – Informatives recommended. Health and Safety Executive (Quarries) - No response received at the time of writing this report. 7. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS None received 8. OBSERVATIONS 8.1 Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended allows applicants to apply to develop land without compliance with conditions previously attached to a planning consent. In determining such an application, the Council, as Planning Authority can only consider the conditions subject to which planning permission should be granted and may: • grant permission unconditionally (i.e. remove the conditions attached to the planning consent); • grant permission conditionally with differing conditions; or • refuse the application (i.e. keep the conditions attached to the planning consent). 8.2 The principle of the development as a whole cannot be reconsidered. 8.3 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: - Page 44
Page 45
8.4 Environmental Impact Assessment Requirements This application has been screened under regulations 6 - 9 of Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. The Council, as Planning Authority, has adopted an opinion where, in taking account of the characteristics and location of the development and characteristics of the potential impact associated with the continuing operation of this existing quarry (where no expansion is proposed), no significant environmental effects are considered likely to occur and the proposal does not require to be subject to EIA procedures. 8.5 Background and Current Operations Planning permission at Blackhillock Quarry for the resumption of quarrying operations was granted in October 1999 (99/00130/FUL). The quarry currently operates under planning permission 03/01286/MIN (expansion to working area of the existing quarry - granted planning consent in February 2004), which allows extraction to continue until 10 February 2029. An extension to the southern boundary of the quarry was granted in February 2006 (05/01809/MIN). The remaining accessible mineral reserves within the approved boundary are now limited. To sustain ongoing operations, the operator has proposed to extend the working area laterally to the south (approved recently under 25/00917/APP). The approved extension would cover an area of 1.98 hectares and provide access to additional mineral resources needed to maintain quarrying activities. 8.6 12 planning conditions are attached to planning consent (03/01286/MIN), including condition 2 which limits operations until 10 February 2029 and condition 11 which states no extraction shall occur beyond 6 months of the date of the consent unless details showing the proposed extraction levels of the site have been submitted to and approved by the planning authority. 8.7 This application seeks to vary the terms of conditions 2 and 11 attached to 03/01286/MIN to extend the operational life of the existing permitted site until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with the proposed amended site design. 8.8 Other planning conditions that apply to the existing permission relate to permitted operating hours, noise limits, all buildings, plant and machinery and other materials brought into the site during extraction shall be removed and the site shall be restored in accordance with the approved plans within a period of 6 months, restoration scheme, aftercare scheme, method statement and adherence with 2 conditions from planning permission 99/00130/FUL relating to vehicle routing and the blasting regime. 8.9 By varying conditions 2 and 11 of 03/01286/MIN it will provide for workings within the existing permitted site allowing access to the new area (subject of separate application) and to leave a landform which would assist in supporting future restoration via the placement of overburden in the existing quarry to the north of the current site in landscaping areas; together with processing, stocking and despatch of quarry materials. Page 45
Page 46
8.10 Overall, the extension (approved under 25/00917/APP) is expected to release approximately 750,000 tonnes of saleable aggregates (predominantly lime stone). At recent extraction rates of around 50,000 tonnes per year, this would enable the quarry to continue operating for a further 15 years, extending its lifespan until around October 2040 synchronising with the main quarry completion. 8.11 Relationship to Minerals Policy NPF4 Policy 33 (d) focuses on safeguarding and managing Scotland's mineral resources. It states that development proposals for mineral extraction will only be supported if they do not significantly adversely impact biodiversity, geodiversity, the natural environment, sensitive habitats and the historic environment. Proposals should also not result in an adverse landscape and visual impact. 8.12 MLDP Policy DP10 supports mineral extraction including extension of operation of existing sites in certain circumstances. It also requires proposals to avoid or mitigate impacts similar to NPF4 Policy 33, as well as comply with MLDP Policy DP1. Gedloch Quarry is identified as one of the safeguarded mineral resources in Moray under DP10. 8.13 The proposal seeks to extend the operational lifetime of the existing quarry within its currently approved footprint to allow for the approved extension to the quarry (25/00917/APP) to operate. There are no changes to the nature of operations or to the conditions under which the quarry currently operates. 8.14 As detailed in the assessment and set out in the accompanying report, the continuation of quarrying activities would not result in any unacceptable adverse impacts on either the natural or built environment. All potential effects associated with the development have previously been considered and are adequately controlled through the conditions attached to the existing planning permissions. These mitigation measures would remain in force for the extended duration of the consent. 8.15 The accompanying Planning Statement for this proposal notes that it aims to continue the supply of aggregate (via the approved extension) using existing infrastructure at a long-established quarry. 8.16 Taking account of these matters, the proposal is considered to satisfy policies 33, DP1 and DP10 and an extended period of permission until 31October 2040 as applied for is considered acceptable in principle under the terms of policies. 8.17 Landscape and Visual Impact (NPF 33 / MLDP DP1 & DP10) Policy 33 states that mineral extraction development will be supported only if it does not cause significant landscape or visual impacts. MLDP Policy DP1 requires proposals to preserve neighbouring property privacy, daylight, and amenity, integrating well with the landscape, whilst MLDP Policy DP10 mandates that mineral development must avoid or mitigate impacts satisfactorily, including landscape impacts. Page 46
Page 47
8.18 A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment was submitted with the proposal. 8.19 The site lies within the Upland Farmland Landscape Character Type (LCT). In Moray, this LCT comprises a single area of mid‑elevation coastal uplands located to the north‑east of the River Spey. Key characteristics include broad, shallow valleys, a large‑scale open landscape structure, and a simple vegetation pattern. The area is defined by extensive, rectilinear agricultural fields typical of central farmland, interspersed with smaller field parcels, peaty soils, marginal pasture, and occasional small woodland blocks. It is a relatively settled rural landscape, with farmsteads distributed evenly and connected by a network of minor roads. These farmsteads are often partially enclosed by small woodland groups, contributing to the area’s distinctive rural character. 8.20 Landscape sensitivity at the site is assessed as low. The magnitude of change during the establishment and extraction phases is assessed as very low, leading to a negligible landscape effect during operations. 8.21 Following restoration, the magnitude of change to the LCT is expected to be low, resulting in a minor but beneficial landscape effect. As the site transitions from an active quarry to restored habitat, the overall influence on the LCT is anticipated to be positive. 8.22 Six representative viewpoints were used to inform the visual assessment. Visual sensitivity across these locations ranges from high to low, with predicted visual effects ranging from moderate at a single viewpoint to negligible/none at others. As views move further from the assessed receptors, both visual sensitivity and magnitude of change reduce, with visual effects across most of the Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTVI) falling within the negligible category. 8.23 Potential cumulative effects have also been considered. When combined with the adjacent Cairdshill Quarry (operated by Tarmac), cumulative landscape and visual effects are assessed as being of minor to negligible significance. 8.24 All landscape and visual impacts associated with the proposal are therefore predicted to remain below the threshold of significance. The criteria of the above policies have been met. 8.25 Hydrology and Hydrogeology Moray Flood Risk Management following consultation and review of the application and associated documents, have raised no objection. The proposal therefore complies with NPF4 Policies 22 and 33, as well as MLDP Policy EP12 and DP1 with regard to surface water and flood risk management. 8.26 No surface water currently discharges from the site. Rainfall within the quarry void drains into the waterbody located inside the excavation, which is understood to fluctuate seasonally between approximately 161 m AOD and 163 m AOD. 8.27 The recently approved extension (25/00917/APP) would increase the overall quarry area by 1.38 hectares. The topography within this extension area slopes Page 47
Page 48
from around 200 m AOD in the southeast to 185 m AOD in the northwest. At present, a substantial proportion of surface water from this area naturally drains into the quarry void, albeit at greenfield runoff rates. 8.28 As a result, only a modest increase in the volume of water entering the quarry will require management. It is considered that the existing water management arrangements can be suitably adapted to ensure effective ongoing control of surface water. 8.29 Moray Flood Risk Management were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it. The criteria in the above policies has been met. 8.30 Ecology and Protected Species NPF4 Policy 4 states that development proposals that are likely to have an adverse effect on species protected by legislation will only be supported where it can be demonstrated impacts can be suitably mitigated. MLDP Policy EP1 takes a similar position. 8.31 The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) includes a survey of the site for protected species has identified no protected species present on site. No evidence of badgers was identified within the survey area and there was no suitable habitat for red squirrel, hedgehog or other protected species within the survey area. 8.32 No further survey works are required other than pre-works checks to maintain and update baseline prior to further vegetation removal and to carry out any further survey works/mitigation should species be present at that point. 8.33 In light of the findings of the PEA, the proposal is not considered to adversely affect protected species, in line with NPF Policy 4 and MLDP Policy EP1. 8.34 Biodiversity Since granting of the most recent consent in 03/01286/MIN biodiversity has been given greater prominence within planning policy. NPF4 Policy 3 and MLDP Policy EP2 both require development proposals to enhance biodiversity. 8.35 The PEA details that a Biodiversity Statement should be prepared once all feasible biodiversity enhancement measures have been incorporated into the final site design. The Biodiversity Statement will assess the potential impacts of the development on biodiversity and set out how the proposed works and restoration measures will result in an overall enhancement, ensuring that nature is left in a better state than prior to development. 8.36 The opportunities for enhancement identified for the Site are as follows: • The invasive non-native species, Japanese knotweed, would be removed and disposed of appropriately, to enhance the Site’s biodiversity. • Areas of wildflower meadow could be created around the perimeter of the Site. This would involve sowing a wildflower-rich seed mix following the recommendations regarding soil preparation and cutting regime as outlined Page 48
Page 49
within the ‘Guidance - Pollinators in Planning and Construction guide’ (NatureScot, 2021). • Strips of tussocky grassland could also be created around the field edges, where the grassland is only cut every three years in phases, with no more than 50% of the grassland cut in one year. • Insect boxes and hotels could be placed in sheltered positions along field boundaries and adjacent to newly established wildflower meadows. • Woodcrete bird boxes of a range of sizes could also be installed on appropriate trees or structures to enhance the area for nesting birds. • A Habitat Management Plan would be created to outline the prescriptive long-term management of the habitats on Site, which would secure their long-term future and ensure the habitats reach their full potential in order to achieve the required biodiversity enhancement. 8.37 The overall aim is to mitigate the temporary loss of habitats during the extraction period by creating habitats of higher biodiversity value within and around the site perimeter as part of the restoration proposals. 8.38 The above biodiversity enhancements are welcomed and whilst this application is a Section 42 as described and there is limited scope for enhancements during the extraction phase, the conditions re restoration address this matter and have been amended (condition 4 of the current recommendation). Enhancements as part of the site restoration works now ensures compliance with Policy 3 of NPF4. 8.39 Cultural Heritage NPF4 Policy 33 states that development proposals for the extraction of minerals will only be supported where they do not result in significant adverse impacts on the historic environment. NPF4 Policy 7 Historic Assets and Places states development proposals with a potentially significant impact on historic assets or places must include an assessment based on an understanding of the cultural significance of the historic asset or place. At a local level, MLDP Policy EP8 Historic Environment takes a similar position. 8.40 There are no designated heritage assets, such as World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Historic Battlefields, or Gardens and Designed Landscapes, within 1.5 km of the proposal site. The area currently benefiting from planning permission has already been subject to quarrying. In April 2025, the land within the proposed extension area was in agricultural use and had recently been ploughed. Consequently, the likelihood of significant archaeological impacts is considered low. 8.41 No significant effects are therefore anticipated, and the proposal is regarded as being in accordance with policies 7, 33 and EP8. 8.42 Waste Management All extractive waste operators are required to comply with the Extractive Waste Management (Scotland) Regulations 2010. As required under DP10, an Extractive Waste Management Plan accompanies this application. Page 49
Page 50
8.43 The plan outlines the management of extractive waste, including soils, overburden, and unsaleable rock. It includes specific measures for handling and storing materials to ensure minimal environmental impact and facilitate site restoration. This plan is therefore considered to accord with the regulations as well as the requirements of MLDP Policy DP10. 8.44 Restoration Policy DP10 require minerals proposals to include schemes for a high standard of restoration and aftercare. 8.45 Conditions 5 and 6 of Planning Permission 03/01286/MIN require a restoration scheme to be submitted 1 year prior to the completion of extraction/the expiry of the consent with works completed within 6 months of expiry of the consent/completion of extraction. The anticipated restoration would be to agricultural grassland with biodiversity enhancement (as detailed in Biodiversity section). The measures proposed by the applicants in their planning statement have now been incorporated into the restoration conditions. 8.46 In principle, the concept approach to site restoration is acceptable, but in order to ensure full consideration can be given to restoration nearer the time, the existing conditions will remain. Subject to conditions, the restoration approach is considered acceptable. 8.47 Access The overall quarry facility is accessed via an existing access onto Blackhillock Road (U43H), which has a variable carriageway width between the A96 and the site access. Some sections of the road accommodate two-way traffic, while others include passing places to allow vehicles to pass safely. Blackhillock Road also serves several developments, including Cairdshill Quarry, Blackhillock Substation, and a small number of residential properties. Although this is an operational quarry, the original planning permission granted in 2003 does not include any significant transportation-related conditions that the operator must comply with. Condition 9 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN states: “Unless otherwise agreed with the Council (as Planning Authority), the approval hereby granted must also comply with Condition 11 relating to vehicle routing of planning permission (reference number 99/00130/FUL) approved on 21 October 1999.” 8.48 Condition 11 of planning permission 99/00130/FUL states: “No development shall take place on the site until an Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 is in force which controls the routing of vehicular traffic to and from the site, and in particular includes provisions which effectively prohibit vehicular traffic from entering or exiting the A96 Trunk Road other than via the junction at Ordnance Survey grid reference 344500 848100.” 8.49 These conditions ensure that vehicular traffic associated with the quarry facility uses only the section of Blackhillock Road (U43H) between the A96 and the site access point. Page 50
Page 51
8.50 Additionally, there is a restriction on Rosehall Road (U43aH) for HGVs, further limiting quarry traffic to the designated access route via Blackhillock Road (U43H). 8.51 Transportation and Transport Scotland were consulted on the proposal and have raised no objections. Transportation’s response is subject to conditions being imposed relating to the existing visibility splay onto the Blackhillock Road being maintained at all times free from any obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres above the level of the carriageway, compliance with condition 11 of 99/00130/FUL (vehicle routing) and no water being permitted to drain or loose material be carried onto the public carriageway. Subject to these conditions, the proposal complies with NPF4 Policy 13 and MLDP Policy PP3. 8.52 Amenity Blackhillock Quarry exists alongside nearby dwellings without raising any significant amenity issues. The existing planning permission is subject to conditions that control working hours, blasting hours and noise levels. 8.53 A Noise Impact Assessment was submitted as part of this proposal; it demonstrates that there are no significant impacts on nearby residential properties with suitable mitigation measures implemented. Environmental Health were consulted on the proposal and have no objections to it subject to conditions relating to permitted operating hours, noise levels, blasting and a dust mitigation plan. 8.54 Given the findings of the Noise Impact Assessment undertaken, along with the position of the Environmental Health service, there are no other material considerations suggesting that additional controls are required beyond those already in place to safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. The development continues to be acceptable in relation to the amenity of the surrounding area and as such accords with NPF4 Policy 23 and MLDP Policy EP14. 8.55 Conditions When granting a section 42 application it is good practice to “tidy up” conditions, on the basis any grant of consent acts as a new planning permission. In order to condense the conditions from the previous consent 03/01286/MIN, into one consent and for ease of reference, the recommended conditions have carried over all pertinent conditions. As a result, numbering has changed and in summary: • Condition 1 covers the time limit as requested by this application. • Condition 2 is variation of condition 11 as requested by this application, it ensures that operations are carried out in line with site design. • Conditions 3 to 6 have been carried forward from planning permission 03/01286/MIN, they relate to restoration. They were previously conditions 5 to 8. Condition 4 has been slightly amended to capture the proposed biodiversity enhancements to the restoration proposals. • Conditions 7 to 9 are Transportation conditions. Condition 8 reiterates condition 9 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN. Page 51
Page 52
• Conditions 10 to 20 are Environmental Health conditions. Condition 10 reiterates condition 3 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN. Condition 11 reiterates condition 4 of planning permission 03/01286/MIN. Condition 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 relate to blasting, these conditions replace condition 12 of 03/01286/MIN. Conclusion and Recommendation This application relates to the proposed extension of the duration of an existing permission and to provide for working to take place in accordance with proposed amended site design for Blackhillock Quarry. This is necessary for the recently approved extension (25/00917/APP) to Blackhillock Quarry. Subject to stipulated conditions, an amended condition in the previous permission relating to restoration as well as further conditions from Transportation and Environmental Health the principle of the development remains acceptable and aligns with current policy. It is recommended that planning permission is granted until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with proposed amended site design, subject to the recommended conditions. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposed variation to conditions 2 and 11 of planning consent 03/01286/MIN to extend the operational life of the existing permitted site until 31 October 2040 and to provide for working to take place in accordance with proposed amended site design, subject to other updated conditions, is considered to comply with relevant policies of National Planning Framework 4 and the 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, Development Management Section within Growth, Planning and Climate Service Page 52
Page 53
WARD 01_17 25/01457/APP 5th November 2025 Variation to condition 1 of planning permission 22/01673/EIA at Land West of Glenrothes Distillery, Burnside Street, Rothes, Moray Comments: • No site visit required. • This application is a major application. • The proposal has been advertised for neighbour notification purposes. • Two representations have been received. Procedure: • None. Recommendation Grant Planning Permission - Subject to the following: Conditions/Reasons 1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which 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. Prior to any development works commencing: a) Details (plans/written proposals) shall be submitted for road improvements to Burnside Street (lay-by parking or alternative scheme to be agreed with the Roads Authority). Thereafter, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority the road improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved details prior to completion or operational use of the first warehouse (whichever is soonest). b) Evidence that a Section 96 (S96) ‘Wear and Tear’ Agreement (covering the extents of Burnside Street (U179E) from the A941 to the end of the public road and including its junction with the A941 and the immediate approaches to it, Item 6. Page 53
Page 54
and any other roads to be agreed by the Roads Authority which are likely to be affected by the impact of the development construction traffic) has been completed and signed on behalf of the Developer and the Roads Authority. Reason: Provision of information currently lacking from the submission, to ensure acceptable infrastructure is provided on the route to/from the development to accommodate construction and operational traffic in the interests of road safety. 3. Notwithstanding the details submitted for electric vehicle (EV) charging (which do not show the number of charging units or their specifications), no development shall commence until the following details have been submitted for approval by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority: a) Details confirming the number (minimum of 1) type and specifications (22Kw minimum) of the proposed EV charging unit(s). Thereafter the EV charging facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to completion of the Filling Store and Disgoring Unit (FSDU) and offices and shall be maintained and made available for use thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of an acceptable form of development and the provision of infrastructure to support the use of low carbon transport, through the provision of details currently lacking from the submission. 4. No works shall commence on site until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. The CTMP shall include the following information: a) duration of works; b) construction programme; c) number of vehicle movements (i.e. materials, plant, staff, components); d) anticipated schedule for delivery of materials and plant; e) details for the volume of any materials to be removed from site and the destinations for this in order to consider any potential impact or mitigation required at other locations on the public road network; f) full details of any temporary construction access/routes including any traffic management measures to be put in place between the site and A941; g) specific measures to address issues identified by the Road Safety Assessment; h) measures to be put in place to prevent material being deposited on the public road; i) measures to be put in place to safeguard the movements of pedestrians; j) details for the management of deliveries to avoid peak periods during school arrival departure and break times; k) details of any specific instructions to drivers; and l) parking provision, loading and unloading areas for construction traffic. Page 54
Page 55
Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the arrangements to manage traffic during construction works at the site. 5. Prior to development commencing, a finalised landscaping plan scheme must be provided showing the phasing of the landscaping provision, and a breakdown of the specific tree species mix and numbers in each block of planting and the phasing delivery of the pedestrian path on the south side of the development. Prior to the development commencing an Access Management Plan must be submitted, developed in consultation with the Moray Access Manager and the Moray Local Outdoor Access Forum (MLOAF) detailing arrangements for access linking existing path routes west and east of the site. The landscaping, tree protection and proposed landscaping management arrangements must be carried out in accordance with the approved details and plans listed as part of this decision notice below. Prior to development, details will be provided and agreed in writing for the frequency of when the proposed path shall be mowed, strimmed and cleared of encroachment from trees, shrubs or other vegetation. Reason: In order that the phasing for the delivery of the landscaping and of the new informal path south of the warehouses is appropriately provided. 6. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority, the proposed build out rate of the warehouses shall follow the below build out rate as proposed in the applicants’ submissions. Phasing of the development;- • 2027/28: Preparatory works for phases 1 and 2, infrastructure installation • 2028-2029: Phase 1 – 2 Warehouses and associated infrastructure and landscaping • 2029-2030: Phase 2 – 2 Warehouses with associated infrastructure and landscaping • 2030-2031: Phase 3 – 2 Earthworks for Phase 3 to 5, landscaping for phases 3 to 5 and 2 Warehouses • 2030-2031: Phase 4 – 2 Warehouses with associated infrastructure • 2030-2031: Phase 5 – 2 Warehouses with associated infrastructure Reason: In order to control the rate of construction and its impact upon local amenity. 7. Prior to any of the warehouses coming into use, a specific post-construction lighting plan, showing measures to minimise light pollution and contain any light spill in the direction of the golf course must be submitted to and approved in writing by Moray Council, as planning authority (in consultation with the Environmental Health Page 55
Page 56
Manager). The permanent lighting design must incorporate the mitigation measures identified in para 8.6.42 of the “Ardcanny Maturation Warehousing EIA” submitted as part of the application. Reason: In order that more detailed consideration can be given to the proposed lighting arrangements for the development. 8. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority, the development shall be constructed and operated in accordance with Table 13.1 Schedule of Environmental Commitments contained within the “Ardcanny Maturation Warehousing EIA” Report submitted as part of the application. Reason: In order to ensure that construction operations are undertaken in accordance with the proposed mitigation measures and commitments to minimise or prevent environmental disruption and reduce the impact of the development. 9. 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 out with these permitted hours (including National Holidays). This limit shall include no waiting or stacking of HGV construction traffic approaching the site on Burnside Street outwith these times. 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 out with the permitted construction hours. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance in ensuring the construction phase is restricted within permitted hours. 10. No development shall commence until a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Environmental Health Manager. The plan shall include measures to minimise construction related noise (including vibration), 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. 11. During hours (0700 to 2300 hours), the rating level of noise associated with the development shall not exceed 30 dB at the nearest noise sensitive dwelling which has lawfully existing or has planning permission at the date of this permission. For the avoidance of doubt, the rating level associated with this condition is defined within BS 4142: 2014+ A1:2019 Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound. Page 56
Page 57
Reason: In order that noise from the development is controlled so as not to cause noise nuisance to local residents. 12. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council the development must adopt the measures detailed in the EIAR: Technical Appendix 8.4: Reptile Species Protection Plan Para 5.4 – 5.6 Ecology Mitigation and Compensation measures and associated Technical Appendix 8.4: Reptile Mitigation Plan. Reason: In order to ensure protected species are given the full range of protection cited within the Environmental Impact Assessment Report. 13. If the Ardnilly farmhouse is to be demolished any later that 1 year from the date of the planning approval a further pre-commencement bat survey (and habitat survey for other species) must be undertaken and the recommendation submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority in writing prior to the demolition being carried out. Reason: In order to ensure that an appropriately recent survey has been undertaken prior to any demolition of the dwelling. 14. No works in connection with the development hereby approved shall commence unless an Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority and a programme of archaeological works has been carried out in accordance with the approved WSI. The WSI shall include details of how the recording and recovery of archaeological resources found within the application site shall be undertaken, and how any updates, if required, to the written scheme of investigation will be provided throughout the implementation of the programme of archaeological works. Should the archaeological works reveal the need for post excavation analysis the development hereby approved shall not be brought into use unless a Post- Excavation Research Design (PERD) for the analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The PERD shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order to ensure that fuller consideration can be given to the potential presence of archaeological assets upon the site and to safeguard and record the archaeological potential of the area if present. 15. Unless otherwise approved in writing with the Council, as planning authority, all warehouses, other buildings, the pump house and switch room must be built in accordance with the most up to date submitted drawings (and specified materials and colours) hereby listed on this planning approval. Reason: In order to ensure that the development is built in accordance with the approved plans and colours as applied for. Page 57
Page 58
16. Unless otherwise agreed with the Council, as Planning Authority the development must be progressed in accordance with the approved Tree Protection Plan drawing number 1301.2 - TPP, and nine specific Tree Constraints Survey Plans drawing numbers 1301 – TCP to 1301.9 – TCP. Reason: In order to ensure that the various trees throughout the site to be retained are protected. 17. Prior to development commencing, a Community Wealth Building Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. The plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Moray Council’s adopted “Community Wealth Building Planning Guidance” and shall also be accompanied by a monitoring statement, which shall demonstrate how the development will contribute to local and regional economic resilience by maximising opportunities for local employment, procurement, skills development and other community wealth benefits. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure compliance with National Planning Framework 4 policy 25 with regard to community wealth building. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are:- The proposed variation to condition 1, extending the period of approval for the whisky maturation warehouses, associated works, landscaping, and woodland planting is considered acceptable and complies with the requirements of the development plan (i.e. National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020). There are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. List of Informatives: The DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT & BUILDING STANDARDS MANAGER has commented that:- A Building Warrant will be required for the proposals. Prior to demolition of the Ardcanny farmhouse, a possible need for a bat license from Naturescot and updated bat survey may be required. The TRANSPORTATION MANAGER has commented that:- 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, Page 58
Page 59
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 Prior to the commencement of deliveries or construction work a Section 96 Agreement under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 between the Developer and the Roads Authority must be confirmed in writing by the Roads Authority. This is to ensure that the costs to repair any damage to the public roads as a result of the construction work traffic are met by the applicant. Guidance on the form of the agreement can be provided on request by emailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk No site traffic shall be allowed to load/unload, wait or park on the U179E Burnside Street. If required, street furniture which needs to be repositioned will be at the expense of the developer. In addition, any existing roadside ditch may require a pipe or culvert. Advice on these matters can be obtained by e-mailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk The applicant shall ensure that their operations do not adversely affect any Public Utilities, which should be contacted prior to commencement of operations. The applicants shall free and relieve the Roads Authority from any claims arising out of his operations on the road or extension to the road. 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. The SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY has comments that:- Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 2015 (COMAH) The adjoining Glenrothes Distillery is presently a COMAH ‘Lower Tier’ site under The Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 2015. Due to the close proximity of the proposed new warehousing to the existing distillery, it is likely the COMAH Competent Authority (HSE & SEPA) will aggregate the increased storage afforded by the development to the distillery. Distilled spirit is a Section ‘P5c’ dangerous substance under Schedule 1 of the Regulations as it is classed as a flammable liquid. The combined site will eventually reach the 50,000 tonne threshold for an ‘Upper Tier’ premises and will be subject to more stringent requirements. Discussions will be necessary between the COMAH Competent Authority and the Applicant to determine the date on which the UT threshold may be reached, based upon the rate at which distilled product is storing up in the new warehousing, as constructed over a phased period. A new COMAH Safety Report will be required before the UT threshold is reached. Concurrently, an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) should be undertaken to determine the potential for a Major Page 59
Page 60
Accident to the Environment (‘MATTE’) from the enlarged premises, in accordance with recognised evaluation methodologies (eg Scotch Whisky Association, or CDOIF – Chemical and Downstream Oil Industries Forum). Due to the revised nature of this proposal, in terms of a plan for 10 warehouses instead of 19, any previous consent obtained under The Town and Country Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Scotland) Regulations 2015 for the increased warehousing capacity, will now require a fresh application to be made to the Local Authority under these Regulations. The application should be made now, if it has not already been done. Both SEPA and HSE are also statutory consultees in this separate but related process. The detailed design of the premises should follow recognised good practice as laid down by the Scotch Whisky Association and HSE and observe any further and relevant guidance as signposted under the COMAH Regulations which address technical elements as they relate to specific parts of the site, including the Warehousing, the Tank Farm, the FSDU, the Tanker Loading Bay, as well as the ancillary services (electrical, mechanical and chemical) which service these parts. Further details of COMAH requirements and contact details of the regulatory services team, if the applicant requires further COMAH advice, can be found on our website at: https://www.sepa.org.uk/regulations/control-of-major-accident- hazards-comah/ LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description EC22368:00:101 Location plan Page 60
Page 61
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: Land W est Of Glenrothes Distillery Burnside Street Rothes Planning Application Ref Number: 25/01457/APP Location Plan Applicant Name: Edrington Page 61
Page 62
Location plan Page 62
Page 63
Proposed site plan 16/01664/APP Page 63
Page 64
Page 64
Page 65
PLANNING APPLICATION: 25/01457/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 • Application under Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) to vary Condition 1 of planning permission 22/01673/EIA to extend the period for implementation. • Planning permission 22/01673/EIA was granted for the erection of 10 whisky maturation warehouses, together with associated works, landscaping, and woodland planting. The proposal was approved by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee at its meeting on 30 May 2023, with the decision notice issued on 31 May 2023. • Condition 1 of the consent specifies that the planning permission will expire on 31 May 2026 if not implemented. • The supporting information submitted with the Section 42 application explains that delivery of the approved development has been delayed due to recent economic challenges affecting the Scotch whisky industry. Notwithstanding this, the applicant confirms its continued commitment to the planned investment at Glenrothes Distillery and advises that commencement of the consented development has only been deferred. • Accordingly, the application seeks a variation of Condition 1 to extend the implementation period for a further three years. • The applicant proposes to commence preparatory works for Phases 1 and 2 in 2027/28, followed by construction of the first two warehouses during 2028/2029. 2. THE SITE • The application site is located to the west of the settlement of Rothes, occupying an elevated shoulder of land above the village. It lies between two valleys formed by the Back Burn and the Burn of Rothes, both of which flow eastwards through Rothes. • The site extends to approximately 50 hectares and comprises existing distillery laydown areas and barrel storage, together with land formerly associated with Ardcanny Farm. The site contains several stands of woodland, field margins, and farm tracks. The eastern extent of the site falls within the settlement boundary and includes areas designated as Rothes I2 (Distilleries) and ENV6 Natural / Semi-Natural Spaces. • The site is characterised by undulating land. However, notable earthworks have already been undertaken at the eastern portion of the site where Page 65
Page 66
existing barrel storage areas are located, resulting in levelled platforms with engineered embankments forming the margins of these operational areas. • Access to the site is solely via Glenrothes Distillery, with vehicles routing along Burnside Street to New Street (A941). Residential properties are situated along Burnside Street to the east of the distillery, through which site access is currently achieved. • There are no national or local environmental designations covering the site, with the exception of areas identified on the Woodland Inventory, where native and inventory woodland flanks the existing access track leading to Ardcanny Farm. The site does not contain any land classified as prime agricultural land. • The existing distillery is a registered Health and Safety Executive (HSE) site. The proposal lies immediately to the north of the distillery and falls within its associated consultation distance. 3. HISTORY For the site: 22/01673/EIA – Planning permission granted for the erection of 10 whisky maturation warehouse buildings, associated works (tank farm and tanker bay area, various plant and buildings including a filling store disgorging unit (FSDU), laydown areas, SuDS drainage, roads, services and fencing), landscaping, forestry paths and 15 hectares of structural woodland planting – approved 31 May 2023. Six phases of development were anticipated. 22/00057/PAN - Received in January 2022, a proposal of application notice was received for this site and a larger area proposing new maturation warehousing (21no 3-cell warehouses), FSDU, wetlands, SuDS ponds, tree nursery and associated roads and services. The subsequent application reduced this number and area back further east than was proposed at the PAN stage. 21/01010/SCO - Environmental Impact Scoping request for the proposed development comprises whisky maturation warehouses a tank farm tanker bay, FSDU office and welfare building at the same site subject of this application. The purpose of the scoping exercise was to assist in advising the developer as to what information should be included and brought within the scope of any supporting EIA Report. This exercise was carried out in late 2021. 00/02012/SUB - Deemed hazardous substances consent issued for the existing Glenrothes Distillery and cask storage area approved under planning application 00/01226/FUL. Deemed consent issued December 2000. 00/01226/FUL - Planning permission granted at Committee to form a cask storage compound at Glenrothes Distillery, Burnside Street, Rothes, Aberlour, Banffshire, AB38 7AA. Approved in October 2020, this area occupies the eastern end of the development on the area proposed for warehouses 1, 2 and 3. Page 66
Page 67
4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) NPF2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation NPF1 - Tackling the Climate NPF3 - Biodiversity NPF4 - Natural Places NPF5 - Soils NPF6 - Forestry, woodland and trees NPF7 - Historic assets and places NPF9 - Brownfield, vacant, derelict land NPF12 - Zero waste NPF14 - Design, quality and place NPF18 - Infrastructure first NPF20 - Blue and green infrastructure NPF22 - Flood risk NPF23 - Health and safety NPF25 - Community wealth building NPF26 - Business and industry NPF29 - Rural development Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) PP1 Placemaking PP2 Sustainable Economic Growth PP3 Infrastructure and Services DP1 Development Principles DP5 Business and Industry EP2 Biodiversity EP3 Special Landscape Areas EP5 Open Space EP6 Settlement Boundaries EP7 Forestry Woodland and Trees EP12 Management and Enhancement Water EP13 Foul Drainage EP14 Pollution Contamination Hazards Rothes - I2 The Distilleries Rothes ENV6 - Natural/Semi-Natural Rothes ENV9 - Cemeteries and Proposed Extensions 5. ADVERTISEMENTS Application advertised for neighbour notification purposes. Page 67
Page 68
6. CONSULTATIONS Moray Flood Risk Management – No objection. Strategic Planning and Development - No comments to make on requested variation to condition 1 as change relates solely to the time period of implementation of planning permission 22/01673/EIA. Planning and Development Obligations - No obligations sought. Environmental Health Manager – No objection. Transportation Manager – No objection to the proposed variation of condition 1 in respect of extension of time period for implementation. Contaminated Land - No objection. Private Water Supplies - No objection. Moray Access Manager - No objection. Aberdeenshire Council Archaeology Service – No objection, highlights that there remains work outstanding under condition 14 of 22/01673/EIA as archaeological post-excavation analysis has yet to be agreed and undertaken. Until such time as the Post-Excavation analysis is agreed, this condition must remain live and therefore requests that condition 14 of 22/01673/EIA is brought forward on any new decision notice relating to the current application. Scottish Water - No response received at time of writing report. Scottish Environment Protection Agency – No objection. Health And Safety Executive - Does not advise against granting of consent. Scottish & Southern Electricity Networks - No objection. Scotland Gas Networks Ltd – No response received at time of writing report. The Speyside Council - No response received at time of writing report. Grampian Fire Brigade - No response received at time of writing report. Spey Fishery Board - No response received at time of writing report. 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 Page 68
Page 69
Protection Regulations (paragraph 3 of Minute, Planning & Regulatory Services Committee 16 September 2014). Two representations have been received. All representations have been considered, and where material to planning given the appropriate weighting as part of the overall recommendation to Committee. Below is a summary of the representations received and officers’ response where necessary. Issue: Traffic and road safety concerns: • Concerns that once works are complete, traffic levels, particularly lorries, will increase along Burnside Street. A bend in the road outside the contributor’s property, compounded by a large tree opposite, means that when lorries meet, one is forced onto the pavement, creating a safety risk. • Any additional freight traffic associated with the application will worsen current conditions, exacerbating safety risks, parking difficulties, and access issues. • Existing parking problems are being worsened by distillery visitors parking outside the property. It is noted that the distillery owns adjacent land which could potentially be used as a dedicated car park to alleviate this issue. Comments (PO): • The Transportation Manager has been consulted and has raised no objection to the proposed variation of condition 1 to extend the time period for implementation. Conditions previously recommended requiring road improvements to Burnside Street, a signed section 96 Wear and Tear agreement and a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) shall be reattached to the decision notice. Subject to these being satisfied, the access road and surrounding road network are considered capable of accommodating the development traffic without resulting in unacceptable road safety impacts. • It is acknowledged that the construction activity will occur over a six year period, albeit at a rate of two warehouses per year once preparatory works for the first two phases are complete in 2027/28. In the long term, whisky from the distillery would be transported to the warehouses as and when they are constructed rather than to maturation storage elsewhere. • While the concerns raised are related to the operational distillery, rather than the proposed development traffic, the need to enhance the road where possible is reflected in the previous recommended condition requiring improvements, including lay-by parking (or an alternative scheme to be agreed) on Burnside Street. Conditions also seek to prevent construction HGV’s from waiting or ‘stacking’ on Burnside Street while waiting to enter the construction site. Issue: Noise and night‑time disturbance, and vibration: Page 69
Page 70
• Concerns that increased lorry movements, especially at night, will result in additional noise disturbance, as heavy vehicles already generate significant noise when passing close to properties on Burnside Street. • The lorries pose a danger to the houses and increase vibration experienced at the properties. Comments (PO): • Conditions recommended by the Environmental Health Section to ensure that construction traffic will not contribute to traffic activity during the evening or night shall be reiterated. Current distillery traffic is however outwith the remit of this application. • Subject to the recommended condition securing improvements to Burnside Street, the road is considered capable of accommodating the additional traffic associated with the development without giving rise to unacceptable vibration impacts. The Environmental Health Section has raised no objection to the proposal in this regard. Issue: Impact on property value and lack of engagement: • Ongoing traffic conditions have affected property value and raised fears of residents being forced to move, compounded by a lack of response from the applicant and authorities, and an apparent failure to engage directly with affected residents on site. Comments (PO): • Impact on private property value is not a material planning consideration and cannot be considered in the determination of a planning application. Similarly, while applicants are encouraged to engage constructively with neighbours, any dialogue, or concerns about communication, would be matters to be pursued directly between the parties involved. 8. OBSERVATIONS 8.1 Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended allows applicants to apply to develop land without compliance with conditions previous attached to a planning consent. In determining such an application, the Council, as Planning Authority can only consider the conditions subject to which planning permission should be granted and may: • grant permission unconditionally (i.e. remove the conditions attached to the planning consent); • grant permission conditionally with differing conditions; or • refuse the application (i.e. keep the conditions attached to the planning consent). 8.2 The principle of the development itself cannot be revisited under a Section 42 application. 8.3 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 Page 70
Page 71
Framework 4 (NPF4) and adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8.4 The main issues are considered below: 8.5 Policy Considerations In determining whether the proposed alternative condition is acceptable, consideration is limited to whether the variation of condition complies with relevant planning policy. The established planning principles of the wider development are not open to reconsideration. 8.6 Planning permission 22/01673/EIA was assessed against the development plan currently in force, namely National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Moray Local Development Plan. There has been no material change in planning policy in the intervening period and, no change in policy position in respect of the approved warehouse buildings. 8.7 The applicant’s supporting statement outlines that delivery of the consented development has been delayed as a result of recent economic challenges affecting the Scotch whisky industry. Notwithstanding these circumstances, the applicant has confirmed their continued commitment to the planned investment at Glenrothes Distillery and is therefore seeking an extension to the implementation period to allow sufficient time for the approved development to be delivered, in line with updated proposed build-out rates for the proposed warehousing. 8.8 In planning policy terms, the proposed variation of Condition 1 to extend the time period of implementation is considered acceptable. 8.9 It is noted that a Community Wealth Building Plan was not submitted in support of the original application, as this requirement pre‑dated the adoption of the Community Wealth Building Planning Policy Guidance (associated with NPF4 Policy 25), which came into effect after May 2023. Policy 25 seeks to support development which contributes to local and regional economic resilience by maximising opportunities for local employment, procurement, skills development and other community wealth benefits. 8.10 Given that this guidance is now in place, it is considered reasonable and necessary to attach an additional suspensive condition requiring the submission and approval of a Community Wealth Building Plan. This will ensure that the development accords with current policy expectations, including NPF4 Policy 25. The applicant has confirmed that they are content with this approach. 8.11 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations This application has been screened under regulations 6 – 9 of Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. The Council, as Planning Authority, has adopted an opinion that no EIA is required (over and above that already undertaken as part of planning application 22/01673/EIA). Page 71
Page 72
8.12 The Environmental Impact Assessment Report accompanying application 22/01673/EIA remains valid for the purposes of assessing the current proposal. That assessment concluded that, with embedded design measures and mitigation applied, the maturation development would not result in any significant residual environmental effects. Specifically, landscape and visual impacts were assessed as non‑significant following layout refinement, landform bunding and extensive native woodland planting. Hydrological and hydrogeological risks were found to be effectively managed through SuDS design, watercourse buffers and construction‑phase controls. Ecological impacts on protected species, including bats, badger, barn owl and reptiles, were mitigated through licensed protection measures, habitat creation (within an Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Plan) and sensitive lighting. Air quality, odour, noise, climate‑related (greenhouse gas emission) and accident‑risk effects were also assessed as negligible or minor. 8.13 Consultees have raised no objections to this application, subject to reiteration of conditions applied to 22/01673/EIA, covering matters such as drainage, ecology, landscape implementation, construction management, traffic and operational controls to ensure continued compliance with the mitigation measures identified through the original EIA process. Conclusion and Recommendation The proposed variation is consistent with planning policies in place (noting there has been no change to policy since the original grant of consent). The findings of the EIA report also remain relevant and there is no requirement for further supporting information over and above that already approved. Approval of this request variation would support the whisky industry, and accordingly it is recommended that condition 1 applied to planning permission 22/01673/EIA is varied as per the request. The other conditions are to be reiterated or updated to reflect new proposed build-out rates of the warehousing as part of this recommendation, along with the additional condition to address the requirement for a Community Wealth Building Plan. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposed variation to condition 1, extending the period of approval for the whisky maturation warehouses, associated works, landscaping, and woodland planting is considered acceptable and complies with the requirements of the development plan (i.e. National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020). There are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer: Richard Smith Principal Planning Officer Ext: 01343 563256 Neal MacPherson Acting Service Manager, Planning and Building Standards Page 72
Page 73
Report to: Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Meeting Date: 5 March 2026 Report by: Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations Author: Richard Smith Contact Email: Richard.smith@moray.gov.uk Subject: 25/01638/PAN - Proposed residential development with flexible retail/commercial floor space including associated roads, drainage and landscaping on Land West of A941 Lossiemouth Road, Findrassie, Elgin. 1. PURPOSE ☒ For Decision ☐ For Information 1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform the Committee that a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted on 19 December 2025 on behalf of Barratt North Scotland and to invite any comments from Elected Members. 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III (E) (1) of the Council’s Scheme of Administration relating to exercising the statutory functions of the Council as a Planning Authority. 2. SUMMARY 2.1 This report affords to Members the opportunity to give feedback (if desired) and contribute to the formal pre-planning application public consultation process for this prospective major planning application. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that i) in noting the terms of this report, the Committee advise upon any provisional views/relevant issues that Members of this Committee (or any other Member(s) of the Council) wish to raise about the proposed development so that these matters can be recorded and thereafter fed back to the prospective applicant in order to inform the development of their proposed formal application for planning permission: and Item 7. Page 73
Page 74
ii) the matters raised by the Committee also be forwarded to consultees likely to be involved in any formal application for planning permission for the proposal. Author Name: Richard Smith Job Title: Principal Planning Officer 4. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 4.1 The Scottish Government has published guidance which encourages Elected Members to highlight any issues with a proposed development at the pre-application stage which they would wish to see taken into account within any formal application for planning permission. This report gives the Committee and the Council, the opportunity to identify any key issues/provisional views about the proposed development and that these matters be reported back to applicant. 4.2 This report is not about the merits of the proposed development but rather, based on local knowledge of local issues and wider concerns, etc. Members are invited to identify any matters relevant to the proposal. These will be reported back to the prospective applicant for their information and attention, and to inform the development of the proposed application. It is also proposed that, for information, Members’ comments be forwarded to consultees likely to be involved in any formal application for planning permission for the proposal. 5. PROPOSALS 5.1 As described, this PAN relates to a proposal for a proposed residential development with flexible retail/commercial floor space including associated roads, drainage and landscaping on land to the west of A941 Lossiemouth Road, Findrassie, Elgin. The site extends to 39 hectares and forms the northern part of the Elgin R11 Findrassie residential designation and the wider Findrassie Masterplan area, as identified in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020. A plan is appended showing the location and extent of the site (Appendix 1). The southern part of the site, including Myreside Farm, its pond, and adjacent farmland, also lies within ‘Area 1’ land, with planning permission in principle (Refs: 17/00834/PPP and 19/01085/APP) for a mixed-use development and advanced woodland planting. This area was approved in principle for a central open space, community hub, woodland, housing, and commercial/employment land and is currently the subject of a separate application for approval of matters specified in conditions (25/01622/AMC). 5.2 Planning permission is required for this proposal. Relative to the current Hierarchy Regulations, the proposal would comprise a major development for planning purposes under Class 2 ‘Housing’ and 9 ‘Other Development (i.e. retail/commercial)’ as the site exceeds 2 hectares. As such, the proposal will be subject to PAN consultation procedures with the local community. Pre-application has been sought and provided on the development. The applicant(s) has been advised of the Council’s pre-application advice service to assist in identifying key issues and information that would be expected to accompany any formal application. Page 74
Page 75
5.3 A formal response has been issued to the applicant’s agent to confirm that the proposed arrangements for engaging with the local community are sufficient. The applicant has notified Elgin and Heldon Community Councils, ward councillors and the local MP and MSP. The applicant’s agent has been advised that no additional parties require to be notified with a copy of the PAN. 5.4 The PAN advised that two public events will be held at Bishopmill Hall, Elgin on 22 January and 16 February. The events required to be advertised locally in advance and to allow an opportunity for feedback on the proposal. For validation purposes for a major application, the applicant is required to submit a pre-application consultation report setting out the steps taken to consult with the local community together with details of comments made on the proposal and how the applicant has responded to all comments made on the proposal in the development of the application. 6. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS 6.1 The range of implications are limited at this stage in the process which relates to early consultation and engagement with the planning process. The table below shows whether risks and implications apply if the recommendations are agreed: SUBJECT YES NO Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcome Improvement Plan) X Policy and Legal X Financial X Risk X Staffing X Best Value and Transformation X Property X Information Communications Technology/Digital X Equalities. Social Inclusion and Economic Impact X Climate Change and Biodiversity Impact X 6.2 Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Improved Collaborative Leadership, as part of continuous improvement through Best Value, will better enable the Council to fulfil the ambitions set out in its strategic plans. a) Links to Council Corporate Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Council Plan strategic priorities: ☐ Tackle Poverty and Inequality. ☐ Build Stronger Greener Vibrant Economy. ☒ Build Thriving, resilient, empowered Communities. b) Links to Local Outcomes Improvement Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Local Outcomes Improvement Plan priorities: ☐ Developing a diverse, inclusive, and sustainable economy ☐ Building a better future for our children and young people in Moray. ☒ Empowering and connecting communities. Page 75
Page 76
☐ Improving wellbeing of our population. 6.3 Policy and Legal Scottish Government guidance on the role of elected members in pre-application procedures affords members the opportunity to offer general provisional views on forthcoming developments which are the subject of a PAN where the details of the development have yet to be finalised. 6.4 Financial None. 6.5 Risk None. 6.6 Staffing None. 6.7 Best Value and Transformation None. 6.8 Property None. 6.9 Information Communications/Technology/Digital None. 6.10 Equalities, Social Inclusion and Economic Impact None. 6.11 Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts As this is a Proposal of Application Notice no information is provided at this stage to consider the climate change and biodiversity impacts of this proposal. Nonetheless, all development will result in a degree of impact on climate change and biodiversity, and this will be considered as the proposal progresses through the planning process. 7. CONSULTATION 7.1 This report has been prepared in consultation with the Executive Director (Economy, Enterprise and Operations), the Head of Growth, Planning and Climate, Service Manager Legal Services, the Acting Service Manager Planning and Building Standards, the Equal Opportunities Officer, the Service Manager Strategic Planning and Development, and Lissa Rowan, Committee Services Officer and any comments made have been incorporated into the report. 8. BACKGROUND PAPERS 8.1 None. Page 76
Page 77
Page 77
Page 78
Page 78
Page 79
Report to: Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Meeting Date: 5 March 2026 Report by: Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations Author: Neal MacPherson Contact Email: neal.macpherson@moray.gov.uk Subject: Review of Enforcement Charter and update on Enforcement 1. PURPOSE ☒ For Decision ☐ For Information 1.1 The purpose of this report is to ask committee to approve the revised Enforcement Charter and provides an update on Planning Enforcement activity. 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III E (1) of the Council’s Scheme of Administration relating to the statutory functions of the Council as a Planning Authority. 2. SUMMARY 2.1 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 requires a planning authority within two years after publishing their last Enforcement Charter, to prepare an Enforcement Charter; That is to say, a document in which are set out a statement of the authority's policies as regards their taking enforcement action for the purposes of this Act, an account of how members of the public are to bring any ostensible breach of planning control to the attention of the authority, an account of how any complaint to the authority as regards the taking by them of enforcement action is to be made, and of their procedures for dealing with any such complaint. Item 8. Page 79
Page 80
3. RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that Committee i) note the contents of this report; and ii) agree the updated Enforcement Charter as set out in Appendix 1 Neal MacPherson – Acting Planning and Building Standards (job share) 4. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 4.1 The Planning Enforcement Charter was last reviewed by this Committee on the 19 December 2023. (para 13 of the minute refers) 4.2 The Development Management Planning function is assessed under the National Planning Improvement Framework (NPIF) which is the new way of assessing/improving the planning service replacing the former Planning Performance Framework (PPF). 4.3 Within NPIF, various actions are proposed to see performance and service maintained or improved. These actions include ensuring that all relevant advice is up to date and regularly reviewed. This includes ensuring the bi-annual update of the Planning Enforcement Charter. 5. CURRENT ENFORCEMENT POSITION 5.1 Planning Enforcement during 2025 was undertaken by one part time (0.5 FTE) Planning Enforcement Officer and two part time (0.5FTE) Condition Compliance Officers. The Planning Enforcement Officer deals primarily with breaches of planning control relating to unauthorised development, amenity and use of land, High Hedge enquiries and unauthorised works to trees protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The Condition Compliance Officers monitor approved planning applications to ensure that they are developed as per the approved conditions and plans. This monitoring includes both local and major applications. The current level of enforcement cases remains high, with the workload difficult to manage for the 0.5FTE Planning Enforcement Officer. This situation may necessitate the reduction of action relating to Tier 3 enforcement priorities contained on page 5 of the Enforcement Charter for domestic and other minor breaches. 5.2 Supervision of Enforcement is undertaken by the Service Manager who monitors workload and advises on actions along with input from other internal, and where appropriate, external consultees. 5.3 In 2025 there have been 303 enforcement cases/condition monitoring cases opened that have required investigation and/or research. This is compared to a total of 249 cases over the same period in 2024. Of the 303 enforcement cases opened in 2025, 84% cases have been closed with the average time taken to deal with these cases being 5.1 weeks. 5.4 One of the Enforcement targets is to close 75% of cases received within 10 weeks, the 84% achieved exceeds this. Page 80
Page 81
5.5 Of the cases closed in 2025 that have been resolved it will be for one of the following reasons: i. through the submission of a retrospective planning application which is then approved; ii. the breach not requiring planning permission as it does not constitute development; iii. the development is considered Permitted Development; iv. a planning assessment being made that it is not expedient to pursue any formal enforcement action; v. Enforcement Action taken to remedy Breach. 5.6 In 2025, 37 retrospective planning applications were submitted and either approved with planning conditions or refused. The ones refused then became subject of enforcement reports (unless a local review was sought and granted). 5.7 During 2025 the following formal notices have been issued:- i. Enforcement Notice 4 ii. Temporary Stop Notice 0 iii. Stop Notice 0 iv. Breach of Condition Notice 0 v. S.179 Amenity Notice 0 vi. High Hedge Notice 0 vii. Direct Action 2 viii. 272 Notices 4 TOTAL NUMBER OF NOTICES ISSUED = 10 5.8 The Moray Planning Enforcement Charter (Appendix 1) has been reviewed and updated to make minor changes to sections for ease of reference and understanding. Where applicable it also updates any changes following the management restructure and resultant change in title of services and staff. 6. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS 6.1 The table below shows whether risks and implications apply if the recommendations are agreed: SUBJECT YES NO Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcome Improvement Plan) x Policy and Legal x Financial x Risk x Staffing x Best Value and Transformation x Property x Information Communications Technology/Digital x Equalities. Social Inclusion and Economic Impact x Climate Change and Biodiversity Impact x Page 81
Page 82
The legal and policy implications of not having an up-to-date Enforcement Charter is it should be reviewed on a bi-annual basis as required by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. This ensures it is up to date and relevant in relation to the Councils Planning Enforcement Priorities. 6.2 Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Improved Collaborative Leadership, as part of continuous improvement through Best Value, will better enable the Council to fulfil the ambitions set out in its strategic plans. a) Links to Council Corporate Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Council Plan strategic priorities: ☐ Tackle Poverty and Inequality. ☐ Build Stronger Greener Vibrant Economy. ☒ Build Thriving, resilient, empowered Communities. b) Links to Local Outcomes Improvement Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Local Outcomes Improvement Plan priorities: ☐ Developing a diverse, inclusive, and sustainable economy. ☐ Building a better future for our children and young people in Moray. ☒ Empowering and connecting communities. ☒ Improving wellbeing of our population. 6.3 Policy and Legal There would be a risk to the integrity of the Charter were it not updated within a two-year period in line with legislation. 6.4 Financial None 6.5 Risk None 6.6 Staffing None 6.7 Best Value and Transformation None 6.8 Property None 6.9 Information Communications/Technology/Digital None 6.10 Equalities, Social Inclusion and Economic Impact None 6.11 Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts None Page 82
Page 83
7. CONSULTATION 7.1 This report has been prepared in consultation with Head of Climate, Growth and Planning, Service Manager Planning and Building Standards Manager, the Service Manager Legal Services, the Finance Manager, the HR Manager and Lissa Rowan, Committee Services Officer and any comments made incorporated into the report. 8. BACKGROUND PAPERS 8.1 Appendix 1 Updated Planning Enforcement Charter 2026-28 Page 83
Page 84
GROWTH, PLANNING AND CLIMATE PLANNING ENFORCEMENT CHARTER Planning Enforcement, Monitoring Planning Conditions, High Hedges & Advertisements 2026 -2028 Appendix 1 Page 84
Page 85
Page 85
Page 86
–2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter Moray Council Planning Enforcement Charter Contents Planning Enforcement - Overview 1 Key Points on Planning Enforcement 2 Main Issues Is it a Planning matter? 3 Section 1 Priorities for Enforcement 5 Section 2 How to request an investigation into a 6 possible breach of planning control Section 3 Monitoring Planning Conditions 7 Section 4 High Hedges 8 Section 5 Advertisements 8 Section 6 How to make a suggestion or complain 10 about the lack of Planning Enforcement Section 7 Powers available to deal with breaches of 10 planning control Page 86
Page 87
. Page 87
Page 88
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 1 Planning Enforcement Overview Planning legislation requires the Council to prepare and publish a Planning Enforcement Charter. The Charter explains how the enforcement process works, the role of the Council, how we engage with developers and the service standards it sets itself. It also details what happens at each stage of what can be a lengthy process. Planning permission is required for the majority of development that takes place in Scotland, with the exception of development that is permitted under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992 and other subsequent amendments. Sometimes, however, developers or householders undertake work without planning permission or fail to implement the consent they have been granted in accordance with the approved plans and conditions. Councils have powers to enforce planning controls in such cases, if they consider it is expedient and in the public interest to do so. We monitor developments to ensure planning controls are being followed, but there is also a role for the public in alerting the Council to any breaches of planning control they become aware of. Enforcement can, in some cases, be one of the most complex parts of the planning system and can affect many members of the community. The aim of this charter is to ensure that adopted procedures are fair, reasonable, consistent and accountable, and that interested parties are fully aware of the procedures involved in the process, the powers available to the Council, and the limits of those powers. We hope you will find this enforcement charter helpful and let us know if you think we could improve the service further. Further copies of this Charter are available on the Council’s website at Enforcement Charter, in local Libraries, local Council offices and from the address below: Service Manager Planning and Building Standards Moray Council Council Offices Elgin IV30 1 BX Page 88
Page 89
2 Key points on planning enforcement Breaches of planning control do not, in most cases, constitute a criminal offence; however, unauthorised works to a listed building, or to a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order, both of which are investigated by the enforcement team, do. The purpose of planning enforcement is to try and resolve the breach of planning control in the first instance where appropriate. However, enforcement action will be taken when it is deemed necessary to control the breach and to prevent further breaches occurring. Any action taken has to be proportionate to the scale of the breach and to the effect that it has on local amenity. Not complying with any formal notice that is served will result in a criminal offence taking place. The Moray Council has statutory powers to investigate development carried out without planning permission, the breach of conditions attached to planning consents and other environmental matters which give rise to concern over general amenity. This can include land which has been allowed to deteriorate to such an extent that it affects the appearance of a wider area. We will take formal action where a satisfactory outcome cannot be achieved through negotiation. This means that the Council has to consider whether it is in the public interest to take enforcement action, and may decide that no action is necessary. Where development has taken place without the necessary planning consent the Council would in most circumstances seek a retrospective application to consider whether what has been undertaken complies with the National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development 2020 and associated guidance before considering formal enforcement action unless where it was considered expedient for the breach to cease more timeously (to prevent injury or harm to amenity or in the interests of road safety). The Council’s authority to take enforcement action comes from government legislation. Further information on the use of enforcement powers can be found in the Scottish Government publication Planning Circular 10/2009: Planning Enforcement. In relation to Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas guidance can be found in the Managing Change Series (Historic Environment Scotland): Intervention by Planning Authorities Page 89
Page 90
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 3 Main issues Is it a Planning Matter? It is a common perception that planning can intervene to resolve all environmental matters. Many issues that are raised are controlled through other regulatory bodies. The following are examples of issues that the Enforcement team cannot assist with: Civil disputes i.e. neighbour nuisance/boundary and land ownership disputes Enforcement of conditions on title deeds Noise and odour enquiries unless covered by a planning condition General land maintenance e.g. grass cutting Any wildlife Crime under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) If we receive an enquiry which requires the involvement of another Council service we will pass it to the relevant service and we will inform you who we have contacted on the matter. The main objective of planning enforcement is to remedy the undesirable effects of unauthorised development and to bring unauthorised activities under control, ensuring that the amenity of neighbours or a community is not adversely affected. A breach of planning control is: Operational development such as building or engineering works which; does not have planning permission or benefit from permitted development rights. Material change of use of land or buildings which has a different or tangible impact in terms of land use. Development which has not been carried out in accordance with an approved planning permission. Failure to comply with a condition attached to a planning permission. Other matters which also fall under the scope of planning control are; Demolition taking place in Conservation areas, without Conservation Areas consent. Works carried out to a Listed Building which effect the historic character or setting. Planning and related consents, any conditions and also the approved plans can be viewed on line at Public Access Page 90
Page 91
4 The Council follows guiding principles in relation to planning enforcement: Expediency: Planning enforcement is a discretionary power which requires the Council to consider whether it is in the public interest to take enforcement action. There is no requirement for the Council to take any particular action on a breach of planning control; in many circumstances it is considered that action is not necessary or would be disproportionate to the breach. This approach is in line with Scottish Government guidance which states that formal enforcement action should not normally be taken where the breach does not cause harm. Consistency: Each enquiry presents its own unique set of circumstances, we will endeavour to carry out our duties in a fair, equitable and consistent manner. Proportionality: To ensure that any enforcement action taken is proportionate to the scale and nature of the breach that has occurred. Negotiation: The enforcement powers provide leverage to resolve breaches and are not intended to be used as a punishment. In all but the most severe cases requiring immediate attention, we will seek to negotiate compliance in the first instance. However, negotiations will not be allowed to cause unreasonable and unjustified delay. Page 91
Page 92
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 5 Section 1 - Priorities for Enforcement Whilst all enquiries will be investigated we recognise that when an enquiry is made there is a high expectation for the matter to be resolved quickly and delays can be frustrating. Due to the large number of enforcement enquiries we receive it is necessary for them to be prioritised and the available resources allocated appropriately and proportionately. Below is the Council’s classes of prioritisation. What to Expect On receipt of a legitimate planning enforcement enquiry, it is standard procedure for Officers to: 1 Register the enquiry 2 Acknowledge the enquiry 3 Undertake a site history search 4 Visit the site 5 Assess if unauthorised development has been carried out or a planning condition has been breached 6 Consult with relevant consultees 7 Make recommendations on whether it is expedient and in the public interest to take enforcement action Enquiries that do not fall within the planning remit will not be investigated further and in such instances the enquirer will be advised. Where there is a suspected breach of planning control it may be necessary to utilise the notices described below to aid the enquiry process. 1 Priority 1 Breaches of planning conditions for major and local developments Demolition or alterations to Listed Buildings Unauthorised felling/inadequate protection measures of trees - either in a Conservation Area, covered by a TPO or protected by planning condition 2 Priority 2 Any development that obstructs visibility or is a danger to pedestrian and highway safety Change of use of land and buildings Demolition or alterations to buildings in a Conservation Area 3 Priority 3 Display of Advertisements Untidy land Householder (extensions, outbuildings boundary fences etc) Page 92
Page 93
6 Service Standards Service Standard - Acknowledging enquiries Service Standard - Replying to enquiries/keeping you informed Service Standard - Timescales for resolving enquires Section 2 - How to request an investigation into a possible breach of planning control Members of the public have a vital role in reporting breaches of planning control. Any concerns should be raised with us at the earliest opportunity. You can make enquiries by telephone on 0300 1234561. There is a Planning Enforcement enquiry form on the Council website which can be completed. This allows us to have a clear record of the enquiry and to keep you informed about any action we take. Full contact details are provided at the end of the Charter. We need the following information when a suspected breach is reported: The address of the property concerned; The name of the owner of the property, or of the person responsible for the suspected breach; (if known) Details of the suspected breach of planning control, with times and dates if relevant; Your name, telephone number and address and email address; Information on how the breach impacts on you. Email to: planning.enforcement@moray.gov.uk By telephone to: 03001234561 The support of complaints is important in determining then outcome of an enforcement investigation. We will treat your complaint as confidential during our enquiries. However, should the matter end in formal enforcement action your details may be required to be forwarded to the DPEA where an appeal is made against an enforcement notice. Should the matter end in court proceedings then you may be required as a witness. Before Court action is sought we will seek your permission to divulge your details to Court. Planning Enforcement enquiry form Or alternatively in writing to: Service Manager Planning and Building Standards Growth, Planning and Climate, Moray Council Office, High Street, Elgin, Moray IV30 1BX If you make an enforcement enquiry, you will be updated as regularly as resources allow. This will be done in writing, preferably by email. We will acknowledge an initial telephone, written or email enquiry within five working days of receipt and will include a reference number and contact details for the investigating officer. 75% of all new enquiries will be assessed within a period of 10 weeks up to the point of taking formal enforcement action or no further action. Page 93
Page 94
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 7 Section 3 - Monitoring of Planning Conditions Monitoring of planning conditions will be carried out as resources allow, however, our number one priority for enforcement is numbers of conditions on major planning applications. It is not, practical or proportionate for the Council to monitor all permissions/consents. It is the responsibility of the developer to inform us of when they intend to implement their planning permission. This is done through the submission and registration of a Notification of Initiation of Development (NID). The Condition Compliance Officer will then check to ensure that any requirements contained within the pre development conditions have been fulfilled before work begins. Initiating development without submitting a NID is a breach of planning control and the planning authority may consider enforcement action. On completion of development the developer is required to submit a Notification of Completion of Development (NCD) as soon as practicable. A collaborative approach to ensuring planning conditions are complied with is required to ensure our resources are used efficiently. A single point of contact will be given to all major developers to make contact regarding the monitoring of planning conditions and this will be added as a specific informative on all consents relating to major developments. Regular review meetings will be arranged with major developers to ensure that development is implemented timeously and in accordance with the agreed phasing/triggers imposed on planning conditions. Notification of Initiation and Completion of Development (NID/NOCD) and display of notices while development is carried out These are not enforcement powers. They are intended to improve planning enforcement by requiring landowners, householders and developers to confirm when development is due to commence or been completed, and in the case of on-site notices to raise community awareness of developments in the local area. The Moray Council will then be made aware of active development in their areas, enabling then to prioritise resources with a view to monitoring development. A Notice of Initiation of Development (NID) must be submitted to the Moray Council for any development which has been granted permission and state when development will start. It must be submitted after planning permission has been granted and before development has commenced. Starting development without submitting an NID is a breach of planning control and the Moray Council may consider enforcement action. The Notice of Completion of Development (NOCD) requires a developer to submit a further notice as soon as practicable after development has been completed. Depending on the nature and scale of a development, the developer may also be required to display on-site notices while development is taking place. These notices contain basic information about the site and the development. They also provide contact details where members of the public may find out more information or report alleged breaches of planning control. It is a breach of planning control to fail to display such a notice when it is required to do so. Page 94
Page 95
8 Section 4 - High Hedges The High Hedges Act 2013 aims to provide a solution to the problem of high hedges, where neighbours have been unable to resolve the issue amicably. The Act gives home owners and occupiers a right to apply to the relevant Council for a High Hedge Notice but neighbours must attempt to resolve the dispute themselves first with recourse to the Council being a last resort. The Scottish Government has also issued guidance to all Local Authorities to assist with implementation of the Bill and legislation. Local Guidance (PDF) has also been prepared to help explain the process and give you guidance on all reasonable steps that must be taken prior to making a formal application under the Act. Section 5 - Control of Advertisements The display of advertisements is covered by the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984. Many advertisements are displayed with what is called ‘deemed consent’ which means they do not require advertisement consent if they meet the criteria and conditions set out in the regulations. One of these conditions is that the landowner has given permission for the advertisement to be displayed on their land. It should be noted however, that where an advertisement with ‚‘deemed consent‚‘ is considered to be affecting amenity or public safety then in these circumstances the Moray Council can serve a Discontinuance Notice to have the offending advert removed. Displaying an advertisement in contravention of the regulations is an offence and, if convicted in court, an offender can be fined. The court can impose further fines for each day the breach of the regulations continues. The Moray Council has the power to serve an advertisement enforcement notice. This specifies a time period (normally 28 days) for compliance with the notice. However, this period can be reduced to seven days if the Council believes there is an urgent need for the advertisement to be removed or altered in the interests of public safety, or if the advertisement can be removed without any other work being required. An advertisement enforcement notice can also require that a particular piece of land should not be used to display advertisements. This remains in force even if the original advertisement is removed. Any subsequent advertising on this site would amount to a breach of the notice. The Moray Council also has powers to remove or destroy placards and posters that do not have planning permission or deemed consent. If the person who put up the poster can be identified, they have to be given at least two days’ notice that the Council intends to take the poster down. If they cannot be readily identified, then the advert can be removed immediately. Page 95
Page 96
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 9 Council officials can enter unoccupied land, if necessary, to remove an advertisement. However they have no powers to remove advertisements displayed within a building to which there is no public access. Planning enforcement also covers the display of advertisements such as billboards and advertisement hoardings, although slightly different procedures apply. These are set out in a separate section at the end of this Charter. The actual text and images on an advertisement are not covered by planning control. Any enquiries about the content of an advertisement should be made to the: Advertising Standards Authority, Castle House, 37-45 Paul Street, London EC2A 4LS Tel: 020 7492 2222, e-mail: enquiries@asa.org.uk Advertisement Discontinuance Notice Where an advert enjoys deemed consent under the relevant advertisement regulations, but the Council require its removal for amenity or safety reasons, a discontinuance notice may be served. This can be appealed to the Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA). Page 96
Page 97
10 Section 6 - How to make a suggestion or complain about the lack of Planning Enforcement The Council tries hard to meet people’s expectations and we hope that you will be satisfied with the planning enforcement service. We are committed to improving our service and dealing promptly with any failures or shortcomings. However, if you have any concerns or difficulties, we want to hear from you. Planning Enforcement enquiry form We will respond to you within 5 working days of receiving a formal complaint about our Planning Enforcement Service where possible. If we feel that we need more time to investigate the matters raised you will receive an acknowledgement within five working days and a full response within 28 working days in accordance with the Council’s Complaints Procedure. A copy of this can be viewed on the Council’s website. Lastly, if you are dissatisfied with the Council’s Complaints process, you have the right to take your complaint to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, at: www.spso.org.uk/ SPSO, Bridgeside House, 99 MacDonald Road, Edinburgh EH3 0BR Telephone: 0800 377 7330, or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk Generally, you must contact the Ombudsman within 12 months of the date of the complaint. Attached to this charter for your information is Appendix 1 which explains the powers available to deal with breaches of planning control. Section 7 - Powers available to deal with breaches of planning control Enforcement powers The enforcement powers available to a planning authority are set out in Part VI of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Chapter IV of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 and Part IV of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. The Planning Acts are available from: The Stationary Office, 71 Lothian Road, Edinburgh EH3 9AZ Or can be viewed at: www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk Government policy on enforcement is set out in Planning Circular 10/2009: Planning Enforcement. Planning legislation is complex and therefore if you are served with a statutory notice from the Moray Council planning authority, we advise you seek legal or independent professional planning advice. Page 97
Page 98
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 11 Types of Notices Enforcement Notice (Section 123 & 127 - 129) This generally deals with unauthorised development, but can also apply to breach of planning conditions. This must be served on the current owner, occupier and anyone else with an interest in the property or land in question. There are similar notices and powers to deal with Listed Buildings (see below), and advertisements. An Enforcement Notice will specify a time period for the notice coming into effect (a minimum of 28 days), the steps that must be taken to remedy the breach and the time for this to be completed. There is a right of appeal to the Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA) up to the date the notice takes effect at which time the notice is suspended until a decision is reached. Failure to comply with an Enforcement Notice within time is an offence, and may lead to a fine of up to £50,000 in the Sheriff Court or the Moray Council considering direct action to remedy the breach. Breach of Condition Notice (Section 145) This enforces the conditions applied to any planning permission if they have not been complied with and is effective from the date it is served. It may be used as an alternative to Enforcement Notice (see above), and is served on anyone carrying out development and/or any person having control of the land. Anyone contravening a Breach of Condition Notice can be fined up to £5,000 in the Sheriff Court. There is no right of appeal to this notice. Listed Building Enforcement Notice This must be served on the current owner, occupier and anyone else with an interest in the property. The procedures are similar to those outlined above. The notice must specify the steps to be taken to remedy the breach and a final date for compliance. Failure to meet the terms of the notice by the date specified is an offence. There is the right of appeal to (DPEA) against the notice. Breaches of listed building control are a serious matter. It is a criminal offence to undertake unauthorised works to demolish, significantly alter, or extend a listed building. In certain circumstances, this can lead either to an unlimited fine or imprisonment. Stop Notice (Section 140) This is used in urgent or serious cases where unauthorised activity must be stopped, usually on grounds of public safety. When a Stop Notice is served, the planning authority must also issue an Enforcement Notice. There is no right of appeal against a Stop Notice and failure to comply is an offence. An appeal can be made against the accompanying Enforcement Notice. If a Stop Notice is served without due cause, or an appeal against the Enforcement Notice is successful, the Moray Council may face claims for compensation. Therefore, the use of Stop Notices needs to be carefully assessed by the Council. It should be noted that a Stop Notice cannot prohibit the use of a building as a dwelling house. Temporary Stop Notice (TSN) This requires the immediate halt of an activity which breaches planning control. The provisions make an exception in that a TSN cannot prohibit the use of a building or caravan as a dwelling house. TSNs are enforceable for 28 days, after which time, they expire. They may, however, be followed by further enforcement action such as an Enforcement Notice and associated Stop Notice. There is no provision to appeal against a TSN. Page 98
Page 99
12 Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) This provides the Moray Council with an alternative process, in addition to the option to seek prosecution, to address situations where a person has failed to comply with an Enforcement Notice (EN) or a Breach of Condition Notice (BCN). By paying the penalty imposed by the FPN, the person will discharge any liability for prosecution for the offence. They will not, however, discharge the obligation to comply with the terms of the EN or BCN, and the Moray Council will retain the power to take direct action to remedy the breach and recover the costs of such from that person. The Moray Council is not required to offer the option of a fixed penalty. Any decision to do so would be dependent on considerations such as the scale of the breach and its impact on local amenity. The fixed penalty amounts to £2,000 for each step not complied with in an Enforcement Notice and £300 for each step not complied with in a breach of condition notice. Notice requiring application for planning permission (Section 33A) Where the Moray Council considers that a development which does not have planning permission may be acceptable, i.e. the Council considers that it might be granted planning permission, the Council may issue a S33A Notice requiring the landowner or developer to submit a retrospective planning application. This application will be considered on its planning merits and handled in the same way as any other planning application. Issuing a S33A Notice does not guarantee that permission will be granted; the Moray Council may, on consideration of the application, decide instead to refuse planning permission, or grant permission subject to conditions or amendments to make the development acceptable. There is no right of appeal to this notice. Notice requiring information as to interests in land (Section 272 Notice) This provides limited powers for planning authorities to obtain information on interests in land and use of land. Failure to provide the information required is an offence. Planning Contravention Notice (PCN) Section 125 This is used to obtain information about activities on land where a breach of planning control is suspected. It is served on the owner or occupier, on a person with any other interest in the land or who is carrying out operations on the land. They are required to provide information about operations being carried out on the land and any conditions or limitations applied to any planning permission already granted. Failure to comply with the notice within 21 days of it being served is an offence and can lead to a fine in court. Amenity Notice (Section 179) This allows planning authorities to serve a notice on the owner, lessee or occupier of land which is adversely affecting the amenity of the area. This is also known as an Amenity Notice and sets out the action that needs to be taken to resolve the problem within a specified period. Interdict and Interim Interdict Planning authorities can apply to the courts to grant an interdict to stop or prevent a breach of planning control. Court proceedings can be expensive and the Moray Council would normally only seek interdicts in serious cases or where Enforcement Notices or Amenity Notices have previously been ignored. However, the Council can seek an interdict in relation to any breach without having to use other powers first. Breaching an interdict is treated as a contempt of court and carries heavy penalties. Page 99
Page 100
2026 - 2028 Planning Enforcement Charter 13 Direct Action (Section 135) Failure to comply with the terms of an Enforcement Notice or Amenity Notice within the time specified can result in the Moray Council carrying out the specified work. The Moray Council can recover any costs it incurs from the landowner. All planning authorities are required to keep an Enforcement Register of all notices issued by that planning authority. The Moray Council Enforcement Register can be accessed online through the Planning Portal on the Moray Council website. Please Note This Charter does not comprise of an authoritative interpretation of the Planning Acts. Planning legislation is complex and if you receive any notice from Moray Council, you are advised to seek legal or independent professional planning advice. Page 100
Page 101
Designed and Produced by Moray Council 2026 Page 101
Page 102
Page 102
Page 103
Report to: Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Meeting Date: 5 March 2026 Report by: Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations Author: Rebecca Morrison Contact Email: Rebecca.morrison@moray.gov.uk Subject: Developer Obligations Planning Guidance and Update on Developer Obligations 1. PURPOSE ☒ For Decision ☐ For Information 1.1 The purpose of this report is to update the pre-existing Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance with an updated Developer Obligations Planning Guidance document as set out in Appendix 2 and provide an update on developer obligations. 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III (E) (2) of the Council’s Scheme of Administration relating to the review and preparation of strategic and local plans. 2. SUMMARY 2.1 The updated Developer Obligations Planning Guidance went out for a six-week consultation in August 2024, during which seven responses were received raising issues relating to exemptions, governance, viability, education, transportation, healthcare, and city and town centres, with detailed responses provided in Appendix 1. This report asks the Committee to approve those responses and the final Guidance, and to agree that it becomes a material consideration in determining planning applications. It also asks the Committee to note the findings of an independent review by Aberdeenshire Council into Moray Council’s school roll forecasting methodology, school capacities, and developer obligation assumptions, which have been incorporated into the updated Guidance. In addition, the Committee is asked to note the update on developer obligations received and spent during 2024/25, with the Strategic Planning and Development (SP and D) Team continuing to work closely with other Council services and NHS Grampian (NHSG) to monitor spending. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Item 9. Page 103
Page 104
3.1 It is recommended that Committee: i) notes the representations received to the updated Developer Obligations Planning Guidance consultation; ii) agrees the responses provided to the representations, as set out in Appendix 1; iii) agrees the updated Planning Guidance as set out in Appendix 2 is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications when approved; iv) notes the findings of the independent review of Moray’s School Roll Forecast Methodology, School Capacities and Developer Obligation Assumptions, as set out in Appendix 3; and v) notes the update on developer obligations received and secured set out in Appendix 4. Rebecca Morrison Senior Infrastructure Growth/Obligations Officer 4. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 4.1 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) came into operation on 13 February 2023. Policy 18 Infrastructure First sets out that infrastructure is integral to development planning and that Local Development Plans (LDPs) are to indicate the type, level (or method of calculation) and location of financial or in-kind contributions. This reflects the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (LDP2020) Policy PP3 and Developer Obligations Planning Guidance (PG). 4.2 Section 9 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 repeals section 22 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, removing the ability to prepare supplementary guidance in connection with an LDP. Transitional arrangements allowed supplementary guidance to continue to be prepared and adopted in association with LDPs until 31 March 2025. This deadline has now passed, and guidance associated with the LDP2020 will be adopted as Planning Guidance (PG) rather than Supplementary Guidance (SG). 4.3 Moray Council’s current Supplementary Guidance on Developer Obligations was approved by the Moray Council Emergency Cabinet on 14 May 2020 (para 6 of the Minute refers) and then by the Scottish Government, coming into effect on 30 September 2020. The LDP2020 sets out the location and type of infrastructure that is likely to be sought to facilitate development with SG setting out the detail on methodologies and rates for calculating developer obligations. The current update to the SG and transition to PG will address updates to infrastructure requirements that change throughout the life of the LDP2020. 4.4 The LDP 2020 Policy PP3 Infrastructure and Services sets out a commitment to prepare Supplementary Guidance on Developer Obligations. Developer Obligations must meet all of the five tests set out in the Scottish Government Circular 4/2025: • Necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms; • Serve a planning purpose; • Relate to the proposed development; • Fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development; and, • Be reasonable in all other respects. Review Of Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance Page 104
Page 105
4.5 At its meeting on 13 August 2024 this Committee agreed the draft Supplementary Guidance for public consultation (para 14 of the Minute refers). A 6-week consultation period on the draft Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance commenced on 29 August and ended on 11 October 2024. The public consultation was advertised in local newspapers, on the Council’s website and via social media. Letters/emails were issued to all Community Councils, Associations and Groups, Charities and Trusts, Developers and Agents, Housing Associations and Key Agencies. 4.6 At its meeting on 15 August 2023 this Committee approved the appointment of external consultants to carry out a third-party review of the education methodology (para 14 of the Minute refers). It was felt that this review was needed prior to the adoption of the Guidance. Two separate Quick Quote Procurement exercises were carried out, and no external consultants quoted on the proposed works. Aberdeenshire Council indicated they could undertake the review. This led to a delay in finalising the Developer Obligations Planning Guidance. 4.7 Seven representations were received from NHS Grampian (NHSG), Scottish Forestry, Homes for Scotland (HfS), Moray Estates, Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE), the Scottish Government, and Moray Chamber of Commerce. A summary of these and the proposed Council response is provided in APPENDIX 1. 4.8 An independent review of the updated methodology for calculating education obligations has been undertaken by Aberdeenshire Council and is provided in APPENDIX 3. This review recommended that Moray Council proceed with the adoption of a higher threshold of 90% for education obligations and concluded that the proposed new education methodology offered more nuance than the approach previously used. The previous approach to education obligations sought obligations where a primary school reached 80% planning capacity, or a secondary school reached 90% capacity. The new education methodology calculates obligations based on the average number of pupils that the school(s) are over capacity over the 5-year period following submission of a planning application. The average number of pupils over 90% capacity will be expressed as a percentage of the number of houses proposed by the development against the total number of houses built within the school catchment during the 5-year period. This new approach only seeks obligations for the pupils the development is responsible for, so is more proportionate and nuanced than the previous methodology. Revisions To Planning Guidance 4.9 The main issues raised by the representations are summarised below along with proposed changes to the Guidance and other amendments identified in APPENDIX 1. Exemptions 4.10 The respondents suggested amended wording to make the exemptions clearer such as when discussing exemptions, remove the phrases ‘amenable’ and ‘discretion of the Council’ as this is not useful for developers. This has been amended in the final Guidance. 4.11 Consultation responses objected to developer obligations being sought for affordable housing units and suggested that if these are not made exempt then a lower per unit obligation compared to open market housing be implemented. Development of affordable housing impacts on the infrastructure and facility requirements in the same way that open market housing does. Further work will be undertaken to explore how to incentivise and accelerate the delivery of affordable housing while ensuring infrastructure is fully financed. An exemption for affordable housing units in not being pursued in the PG. Page 105
Page 106
4.12 Brownfield development was initially included as a possible developer obligations exemption to support the aspirations of NPF4 and reflect informal discussions with Elected Members who expressed support for encouraging the redevelopment of previously used land and buildings. NHSG requested removal of town centre exemption for developments that create housing as all residential accommodation impacts on primary care services and requested that brownfield exemptions be updated to be for commercial development only. Town Centre exemptions for residential developments are included within the current Supplementary Guidance and their removal would unfairly impact on developments currently planned. The proposed brownfield exemption has been updated to specify that the exemption only relates to brownfield development within Town Centres. This reflects the town centre exemption within the current Supplementary Guidance which has operated successfully. The scope of the exemption has been narrowed to encourage the reuse of vacant land within Town Centres while minimising the impact on infrastructure delivery on the public sector. The revised exemption is necessary to incentivise town centre regeneration projects and reflect the significant additional costs involved in brownfield development. This update has been made as a result of the consultation responses received, as well as internal discussions relating to budgetary pressures. It is important that a balance is struck between encouraging brownfield development and ensuring that the burden for funding infrastructure does not fall on the council. This is the reason for proposing the exemption for brownfield development is restricted to town centre development only. 4.13 Respondents recommended that the guidance should emphasise that proposals will be assessed against policies in NPF4 and those in the LDP. These suggestions have been implemented. Education 4.14 The land values and land size requirements for new schools were questioned by respondents. The land value costs for new build schools are identified on a case-by-case basis based on recent completed and proposed projects. Respondents questioned the evidence base for the Pupil Product Ratio (PPR). The PPR has been tested on a range of recently built and existing development across Moray. 4.15 It was suggested by respondents to adopt a sequential testing procedure to establish the most effective way to mitigate impact on schools. The responsibility to identify appropriate mitigations for the school estate lies with the Council’s Education Service and the Planning Guidance is not an appropriate place for this. Healthcare 4.16 Respondents noted a lack of evidence for healthcare obligations, namely no healthcare appraisal and no existing capacity for General Practitioner (GP) practices. The need for obligations towards healthcare is evidenced through guidance on floorspace requirements per GP, and number of patients per GP which allows the calculation for the floorspace requirements from development to be made. The existing capacity and number of patients registered to each GP practice are not in the public domain. 4.17 Concerns were raised by respondents over the evidence base for dental and pharmacy obligations. These had been removed from the draft guidance that was subject to public consultation as NHS Grampian are currently unable to provide an up-to-date evidence base Page 106
Page 107
for these mitigations. Respondents raised concerns over GP shortages and the issues caused by these. Developer obligations are not sought for staffing resources, and it would not be appropriate to discuss these issues within the Guidance. Transportation 4.18 A lack of detail was noted by respondents on what would trigger a transport assessment/statement for commercial developments. Transport Assessment guidance from the Scottish Government is used to determine when a Transport Assessment is required. The Planning Guidance is not an appropriate place to set out these requirements. Respondents requested that developers impacted by the provision of new active travel infrastructure in Buckie should be consulted specifically. The Planning Guidance consultation serves as the relevant consultation process for this obligation. City And Town Centres 4.19 Respondents noted that LDP2020 does not contain a sufficient hook to include obligations related to city and town obligations in the draft SG. Town Centre obligations have been removed from the final Guidance as alternative funding opportunities for town centre regeneration are being considered through work being undertaken on maximising the socio- economic impacts arising from renewable energy developments associated with NPF4 policy 11. Governance 4.20 It was claimed by respondents that 15 years is too long to spend obligations. This timeframe has not increased from the previous SG and Moray has a slower build-out rate, therefore the 15-year timescale is deemed to be reasonable to allow adequate time for the Council and NHS Grampian to be able to spend funds. 4.21 In the event that the Guidance is approved it will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications (including applications to modify/discharge s75 agreements in terms of s75A of the 1997 Act). When considering any planning application going forward, it will be important to consider the impact on delivery of the required infrastructure for the particular development, on a case-by-case basis. Viability 4.22 Respondents claim the guidance fails to consider land already acquired under the current guidance. If sites are unviable, then developers will be required to go through the Council’s viability process, which has not changed. Supplementary Guidance for Developer Obligations has been in place in Moray Council since October 2016. 5. PROPOSALS 5.1 If the proposed changes arising from the responses in APPENDIX 1 are agreed, the PG will be adopted by the Council on the same day and will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. 6. UPDATE Developer Obligations received and secured 6.1 Developer Obligations are secured prior to planning permission being granted either through an upfront payment or in a series of staged payments through Section 75 legal agreements which set out trigger points for payments. Page 107
Page 108
6.2 During the 2024/2025 financial year, developer obligations totalling £185,568.04 were received from upfront payments from 24 approved planning applications. A breakdown of the figures by obligation type for both financial years is given at Table 1 at APPENDIX 4. 6.3 During the 2024/2025 financial year, £557,702.09 was received from previously approved Section 75 legal agreements. A breakdown of the figures by obligation type is given at Table 2 at APPENDIX 4. The figures also include indexation and late payment fees where applicable 6.4 During the 2024/2025 financial year, a total of £74,263.00 was secured via Section 75 legal agreements. A breakdown of the figures by obligation type is given at Table 3 at APPENDIX 4. These secured amounts will be received by the Council in the coming years as the triggers are reached. Phased payments are index-linked to ensure obligations reflect inflation. Affordable Housing 6.5 Commuted sums towards affordable housing for developments of 1-3 units are required to meet housing needs in the local housing market area as set out in NPF4 policy 16(e) and in policy DP2 of the LDP 2020. These contributions are not developer obligations, but the Strategic Planning and Development (SP&D) Team collects, holds and monitors the expenditure of these as well as developer obligations. A breakdown of the figures received and secured toward Affordable Housing is set out in Tables 1, 2 and 3 at APPENDIX 4. Developer Obligations Spend 6.6 The SP&D Team works closely with other Council Services and NHS Grampian (NHSG) to monitor the spending of developer obligations are on relevant projects within the agreed timescales. NHSG currently face significant challenges in securing funding for capital projects, which has limited the spend of developer obligations funding. Developer obligations gathered from historic obligation types such as Sports and Recreation and Community Facilities and spent on projects in 2024/2025 are set out in Table 4 at APPENDIX 4. 7. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS SUBJECT YES NO Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcome Improvement Plan) X Policy and Legal X Financial X Risk X Staffing X Best Value and Transformation X Property X Information Communications Technology/Digital X Equalities. Social Inclusion and Economic Impact X Page 108
Page 109
Climate Change and Biodiversity Impact X 7.1 Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Improved Collaborative Leadership, as part of continuous improvement through Best Value, will better enable the Council to fulfil the ambitions set out in its strategic plans. a) Links to Council Corporate Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Council Plan strategic priorities: ☐ Tackle Poverty and Inequality. ☒ Build Stronger Greener Vibrant Economy. ☒ Build Thriving, resilient, empowered Communities. b) Links to Local Outcomes Improvement Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Local Outcomes Improvement Plan priorities: ☒ Developing a diverse, inclusive, and sustainable economy ☒ Building a better future for our children and young people in Moray. ☒ Empowering and connecting communities. ☒ Improving wellbeing of our population 7.2 Policy and Legal The Guidance will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications when adopted. 7.3 Financial The Council may need to provide for any adverse impact on existing infrastructure and facilities resulting from new development should developer obligations not be sought or the level sought does not cover the costs following viability appraisals. Mechanisms such as forward funding of infrastructure projects carry an inherent risk associated with the pace and scale of future development and the timescales over which obligations will be achieved. 7.4 Risk Co-ordination of infrastructure and cross service working are required in order to plan for the infrastructure that supports growth in line with the LDP2020 and NPF4 to ensure that Developer Obligations are sought towards the necessary infrastructure items and these projects are deliverable to support the residents of Moray. If development is not planned for appropriately and supported by the necessary evidence provided by the relevant services, key agencies and community planning partners, then the Council cannot seek Developer Obligations to mitigate the impact of the development or apply the appropriate rate alongside use of good scenario modelling and information sensitivity analysis. If infrastructure is not well-planned and co-ordinated, the Council risks of not meeting the deadline for spending Developer Obligations and having to refund Developer Obligations to the developer with accrued interest. Therefore, the Council runs the risk of having to provide the infrastructure necessary to facilitate development at their own cost and a risk of appeal by developers. There is also a reputational risk to the Council should an appeal be Page 109
Page 110
granted in the developer’s favour. If adequate resources and staffing are not provided, the Council runs the risk of collecting developer obligations but not having sufficient staffing capacity to deliver projects which would result in a refund of collected funds. The Council should aim to provide certainty to developers over the level of developer obligations required. Excessive demands for obligations could constrain development in Moray and failure to achieve sufficient obligations for infrastructure requirements resulting from a development will place an additional strain on public services. Under the current financial pressures, it is not financially sustainable for the Council to bridge the funding gap if no developer obligations are secured and as an option developers could submit viability assessments if they consider the level of developer obligations render their development unviable. The inclusion of Brownfield housing units as exemptions for Developer Obligations means that the developer obligations secured will be reduced and the Council will be responsible for a greater portion of the development costs of infrastructure. Applications which have been minded to grant but have not yet been determined will be reassessed on the updated Guidance upon approval by this committee. For planning applications which have been determined and have a S75, it will be open to the Developer to make a s75A application to modify/discharge the s75 agreement, which will be considered on a case by case basis. Complaints and objections to the level of developer obligations could cause delays to the development management process and could affect the performance standards for both Development Management and Strategic Planning and Development. 7.5 Staffing Work on Developer Obligations is carried out within the Strategic Planning and Development Team, supported by officers in Education, Transportation, Housing, Legal, Finance, Estates, Open Space, Scottish Water and NHS Grampian. Challenges from developers result in significant staff time within the Strategic Planning and Development Team and other Council Services such as Legal, Transportation and Education to enable the Council to defend their position. Adequate staffing int Legal Services is required to draft s75 legal agreements and modifications to avoid unnecessary delays in the process. Legal Services are currently under-staffed and have significant pressures from competing priorities. 7.6 Best Value and Transformation There are no Best Value and Transformation implications to be considered. 7.7 Property The level of developer obligations must be taken into account when purchasing and selling land. Higher developer obligations should result in a reduction of land value. 7.8 Information Communications/Technology/Digital There are no Information Communications/Technology/Digital implications to be considered. Page 110
Page 111
7.9 Equalities, Social Inclusion and Economic Impact There is no requirement for an Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) to be carried out. 7.10 Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts Future developments for infrastructure will take into account any impacts on climate change and biodiversity and be designed accordingly. 8. CONSULTATION 8.1 This report has been prepared in consultation with Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations, Head of Growth, Planning and Climate, Chief Financial Officer, Service Manager Legal Services, Service Manager Transportation, Senior Engineer (Transportation), Service Manager Housing Strategy, Service Manager Environmental Services, Service Manager Leisure and Culture, Head of Education, L Rowan, Committee Services Officer, and the Principal Climate Change Officer have been consulted and comments incorporated into this report. 9. BACKGROUND PAPERS 9.1 None. Page 111
Page 112
APPENDIX 1 Topic Contributor Summary Response General General NHS Grampian Welcomes the opportunity to submit representations on Moray’s draft Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance 2024. NHS Grampian will continue to work closely with the Council to identify new facilities, those currently under pressure and the scale of contribution required. Noted. Support noted and welcomed. Scottish Forestry No Comment. Noted. Homes for Scotland (HFS) Welcomes the opportunity to comment. Noted. Exemptions Moray Estates/ Highland and Island Enterprise When discussing exemptions, remove the phrases ‘amenable’ and ‘discretion of the Council’ as this is not useful for developers. Noted and amended. Moray Estates/ Highland and Islands Enterprise Support exemptions for ‘redevelopment of brownfield sites’ and ‘commercial development where the floor space is less than 1,000m2 or the site area is less than 1 hectare. Support noted. Moray Estates/ Highland and Islands Enterprise Change wording for commercial development exemption to “Developer obligations will be sought for commercial development where the floorspace is 1,000m2 or greater and where the Noted and amended. Page 112
Page 113
site area is 1 hectare or more.” Moray Estates/ Highland and Island Enterprise Development of affordable housing should be exempt from Developer Obligations. If not exempt at least a lower per unit contribution compared to open market housing otherwise delivery of Affordable Housing is threatened. Development of affordable housing impacts on the infrastructure and facility requirements in the same way that open market housing does. Further work will be undertaken to explore how to incentivise and accelerate the delivery of affordable housing while ensuring infrastructure is fully financed. NHS Grampian Under Exemptions and Student accommodation it should be clearly stated that contributions will be required for healthcare. Request inclusion of healthcare contributions for sheltered housing and extra care developments as these require GP and other NHS facilities. Nursing homes are seen as preventing admission to hospital, so primary care teams are responsible for increased care needs. Need more information on the level of care provided by care home staff. Request removal of town centre exemption for developments that create housing as all residential accommodation impacts on primary The exemption for student accommodation clearly states that this exemption is for education only. Student accommodation is required to contribute towards healthcare, transportation and sports and recreation. Further research would be required to identify appropriate contribution levels for sheltered and extra care developments, given the level of care provided by care home staff. The Council looks forward to working with NHS Grampian further on this matter. Town Centre exemptions for residential developments are included within the current Supplementary Guidance and their Page 113
Page 114
care services. Request that the brownfield development exemption is updated to be for commercial development only as all residential development will impact on primary care services. removal would unfairly impact on developments which have no developer obligations factored into their costings. The Brownfield exemption has been updated to specify that the exemption only relates to development within Town Centres. This will ensure that development within Town Centres is supported while minimising the impact on infrastructure delivery. Scope of contributions Homes for Scotland A national Housing Emergency has been declared. The implementation of overly restrictive developer obligations cannot be used to delay or prevent homes being delivered. Agreed. Consider the level of developer obligations set out in the Planning Guidance to be reasonable and proportionate. Evidence base Links with NPF4 Scottish Government The Supplementary Guidance should emphasise that proposals will be assessed against policies in NPF4 and those in the LDP: - Page 24 ‘Open Space and Sports, Community & Recreational Facilities’ add ‘The National Planning Framework’ after ‘the LDP’ in the first sentence. - Page 25 ‘Play Opportunities and Destination Parks’ add ‘The National Planning Framework’ after ‘the adopted LDP’ in the first sentence. Noted and amended. Page 114
Page 115
Moray Estates/ Highland and Islands Enterprise Page 4 of the draft states that the Council will take decisions based on the adopted LDP, the proposed developments, and should also take into account NPF4 (especially Policy 18). Page 24 should refer to NPF4 Policy 21. Noted and amended. Noted and amended. Green Networks and Access Improvements Homes for Scotland Several examples that obligations will be sought do not have a sufficient hook in the LDP, for example cycle parking facilities and repair stations. New development can, and should, only contribute to what is fairly and reasonably related to the development which is proposed as established in Circular 3/2012 and the Elsick Supreme Court judgement ([2017] UKSC 66). Requirements change throughout the course of the adopted LDP, and it is not reasonable to expect the Council to identify all contributions that may be required in the LDP. The LDP2020 Policy PP3 states that developer obligations will be sought towards transport, and Green Networks and Access Improvements. Cycle parking facilities and repair stations fall within these. Given that NPF4 is encouraging active travel, healthier lifestyles, etc. it is not unreasonable to ask for these to facilitate this. Agreed. All contributions sought relate to the proposed development and the Council consider them to meet the tests of Circular 3/2012 and the updated Circular 4/2025 and the Elsick Supreme Court judgement ([2017] UKSC 66). Page 115
Page 116
In the Elsick judgement, the reporter assessing the Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Plan stated that the fund “will only be used to gather contributions towards infrastructure improvements that are related to the developments concerned and strictly necessary in order to make any individual development acceptable in the planning terms”. This principle must apply to all the contributions sought in the draft SG. Education Serviced land Homes for Scotland (HFS) Not clear what the land values for sites of new schools has been based on, information needs published. No justification for 2.5 hectare land size for a new primary school. Land requirements set out in The School Premisses Regulation 1967 advise alternative land requirements to reflect varying school rolls. There is an element of potential double counting in the requirement for developer obligations for education, regarding transfer of serviced land at The land value costs for new build schools are identified on a case by cases basis, and are informed by an independent valuation by the District Valuer. This figure is based on a provision of a modern school and associated facilities such as playing fields and SUDS based on recent completed and proposed projects. The 1967 regulations are 58 years old and education requirements have changed significantly since these regulations were published. Where a development is required to transfer serviced land at nil cost to the Council, the Council will pay for the part of Page 116
Page 117
nil cost. Collection of additional land value payments from other developers is not justified. If proportionate payments were required to equalise the financial burden of the developer having to transfer, and service, the school site, then they should be transferred to the developer that transferred and serviced land for 100% of the school. This is not the case in practice. The requirement for these additional funds, the prescribed use and whether or not that requirement meets the tests is not transparent. Propose that the Council purchase the serviced land from the developer and the subsequent payment of contributions towards land and building costs by all parties. the land that is attributable to pupils generated by other developments. This contribution is front funded to the developer by the Council. Other developments generating pupils that are zoned to the new school will then be required to provide a proportionate contribution towards the land value element. This recoups the element front funded by the Council. What is proposed here equates to the same methodology that the Council currently use but incur extra costs associated with legal fees and officer time. The Council does not have a budget for this. This would also increase risk to the Council, as a developer could hold the Council to ransom over the land costs if they did not agree with the purchase price. This would hold up the provision of necessary infrastructure. Pupil Product Ratios (PPRs) Homes for Scotland (HFS) No empirical evidence referenced to support pupil product ratios (PPRS). School population has stayed static at around 12,000 since 2019 despite the construction of almost 2000 houses, because of this it is suggested to devise a The PPR has been tested on a range of recently built and existing development across Moray. Page 117
Page 118
methodology to measure new-build occupancy and test the accuracy of the pupil product ratio figures. Housing Land Audit Homes for Scotland (HFS) Total number of outstanding homes assessed to be built in school’s catchment area is not clear, SG refers to a ‘Housing Land Audit’ without detailing the year the audit was undertaken. The Housing Land Audit is published annually, and the most recent published HLA will be when the contribution is calculated. Naming the current HLA would mean that the Planning Guidance would quickly become out of date. Identifying contributions Homes for Scotland (HFS) Suggest adopting a sequential testing procedure to establish the most effective way to mitigate impact on schools: 1- Catchment review, determine if a neighbouring school/s could accommodate new pupils 2- If step 1 is not feasible, examine existing facilities to reconfigure/extend 3- If steps 1 and 2 are both unfeasible, identity location and scale of a new school 4- Assess whether to include replacement of any existing school The responsibility to identify appropriate mitigations for the school estate lies with the Council’s Education Service. The Planning Guidance sets out the basis of calculating contributions where a mitigation has been identified. It is not the place of the Planning Guidance to identify how capacity issues within schools should be mitigated. The proposed sequential testing procedure is oversimplistic and at odds with the infrastructure first approach, as there is no forward planning. It also does not factor in funding mechanisms and capital plan budget or programming. Nursery Facilities Homes for Scotland (HFS) Council position that nursery costs will be covered by future guidance is unlikely to meet Further work will be undertaken on this additional information at a later date and Page 118
Page 119
the tests within Circular 3/2012 and Policy 18 of NPF4. incorporated into Developer Obligations that will be subject to further public consultation. It is important that we include the link within this Planning Guidance in order to deliver the aspirations set out in NPF4. Healthcare Healthcare Provision NHS Grampian Welcomes inclusion of Health in SG as facilities are under pressure and will require either internal alteration, expansion or provision of new facilities. DOs are essential for to mitigate the impact arising directly for new residential developments. Support noted. Evidence Homes for Scotland (HFS) No Healthcare Appraisal is referred to such that any evidence can be identified which would identify any need for healthcare contributions. SG is notably opaque and suggests that no detailed analysis of capacity has been undertaken. The tests set out in Planning Circular 3/2012 are not met. It cannot be objectively determined that the obligations are necessary, would relate to any specific proposed development, or is reasonable in all other respects. Recently upheld planning appeals The need for contributions towards healthcare is evidenced through guidance on floorspace requirements per GP, and number of patients per GP. This allows us to calculate the floorspace requirements required from development. Planning Guidance is not the appropriate place for detailed analysis of capacity at specific healthcare centres. Page 119
Page 120
(POA-110-2015 and POA-110-2017) demonstrate the need to ensure compliance with the tests, which are also now contained within national planning policy. The draft SG does not appear to provide any evidence that an impact assessment on the impact of patients from new housing has been undertaken. The draft SG provides no information on the existing capacity of General Practitioner (GP) practices within the Council area or the number of patients currently registered with each GP practice. The SG lacks assessment of the impact of expected patients generated from these new homes on existing healthcare practices within their defined catchment areas. The existing capacity and number of patients registered to each GP practice are confidential information and not within the public domain. GP Shortage The draft SG does not give sufficient consideration to the national shortage of GPs and associated support staff. Making financial contributions towards physical infrastructure is not necessarily the required solution to mitigate the impact of patients generated from new homes. Rather, there is a nationwide issue in the closure of existing GP practices, reduction in GP working hours and projected shortfall in available GPs that need to be addressed. The provision of financial contributions towards the The shortage of GPs is a separate issue to the physical capacity requirements within GP practices. Developer obligations are not sought for staffing resources and it would not be appropriate to discuss these issues within the Planning Guidance. Page 120
Page 121
undefined physical infrastructure will not address these issues. SG doesn’t objectively determine that healthcare obligations are necessary, would relate to any specific proposed development, or is reasonable in all other aspects. Therefore the tests set out in Circular 3/2012 are not met. New development creates new demand on health centres which are required to be mitigated where they are operating at or above their design capacity. The number of patients per household support the position that new development relates to capacity issues within health centres. Limitations of Developer Obligations Homes for Scotland Closure of rural GPs has forced more patients into Elgin practises, causing increased number but not from new housing developments. Capacity issues within GP practices can be caused by a variety of issues. Contributions are only sought for the impact of new development on healthcare centres. Contribution amounts NHS Grampian NHS Grampian will require considerable investment to provide the physical infrastructure and required staffing levels to operate the facility. Consideration should be given to the use of a single figure sum per residential unit rather than separate figures for permanent accommodation and internal reconfiguration as costs to reconfigure can be similar to new/extending facilities and developer obligations on their own do not fully cover mitigation costs. NHS Grampian will continue to work closely with Historically, internal reconfiguration costs have been identified as costing less than permanent accommodation. The current costs in the Planning Guidance are index linked from existing costs provided to the Council by the NHS. If these costs have substantially changed then the Council look forward to reviewing the costs in conjunction with the NHSG when sufficient evidence comes forward. Support welcomed. Page 121
Page 122
the Moray Council to identify new facilities, those currently under pressure as well as the scale of contribution required. Dental and Pharmacy Provision Homes for Scotland (HFS) Unreasonable to ask for dentistry and pharmacy contributions as these are typically private businesses. Building homes increases the business case for these new services. Contributions towards dental chairs relate to NHS provision of dental chairs and pharmacy and not private provision. Homes for Scotland (HFS) No evidence linking new homes and the need for additional dental chairs. Policy 18 of NPF4 and Circular 3/2012NPF4 is clear that infrastructure requirements must be informed by an evidence base which is based on evidence on infrastructure capacity, condition, needs and deliverability. Council required to carry out an impact assessment to provide evidence when seeking contributions towards healthcare. The direct requirements of additional patients can be assessed against accommodation available at existing practices. Dental and pharmacy provision have been removed from the Planning Guidance until such time as sufficient evidence of the impact of new development on the existing infrastructure can be identified. It is important to keep the link to dental and pharmacy provision within the Planning Guidance, as when this evidence comes forward, contributions will be sought. Appendix 6 wording NHS Grampian Appendix 6 Require ‘healthcare’ section to state “Contributions are sought for the closest Medical Facility the development is zoned to or any such facility that would serve the development” as service provision is changing, and developments may be allocated a service Noted and amended. Page 122
Page 123
that best suits its needs as opposed to closest proximity. Transportation Guidance Homes for Scotland Note lack of detail available on when proposed transport improvements are intended to be delivered. It is not the place of the Planning Guidance to identify timescales for provision of infrastructure. Transport assessment Moray Estates/Highland and Islands Enterprise Provide guidance for commercial development on what would trigger a transport assessment/statement with this type of development. Commercial developments are assessed on a case-by-case basis, and due to the large number of variables in commercial developments it is not possible to provide guidance which would be useful to developers within the Planning Guidance. Buckie Active Travel Bridge Homes for Scotland Any developers impacted by the provision of new active travel infrastructure in Buckie should be consulted specifically. Contributions towards the active travel bridge in Buckie are currently sought. The Planning Guidance consultation serves as the relevant consultation process for this contribution. Open Space and Sports, community and recreational facilities NPF4 Moray Estates/Highland and Islands Enterprise The draft guidance explains that new sports and recreation facilities will be required to meet the Council’s Open Space requirements set out in the LDP, Open Space Strategy or other relevant guidance. This should also refer to the standards in NPF4, notably policy 21 (Play, recreation and sport). Developer obligations for Noted and amended. Page 123
Page 124
such facilities should not relate to commercial development which should be expressed in the guidance. Commercial Contributions for Sports/ Recreation Moray Estates/ Highland and Island Enterprise Commercial developments should be exempt from sports and recreational contributions. Commercial developments are not expected to contribute towards education, healthcare or sports and recreation. City and Town Centres Scottish Government Want to know consultation procedure for town centre contributions as SG makes no mention of amendment at a later date. According to Circular 3/2012, information on standard charges, formulae and calculations should be set out in SG. Town Centre contributions have been removed from the draft Planning Guidance. Homes for Scotland (HFS) LDP does not contain a sufficient hook to include obligations related to city and town contributions in the draft SG. Paragraph 138 of Circular 6/2013 notes that: “…there must be a sufficient ‘hook’ in the [Strategic Development Plan] or LDP policies or proposals to hang the supplementary guidance on, in order to give it statutory weight.” Town Centre contributions have been removed from the draft Planning Guidance. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Strategic Environmental Assessment Scottish Government Seek clarification if SEA screening has been undertaken for new SG draft. A new SEA is required even if proceeding with much of what SEA screening was undertaken for the draft guidance. Page 124
Page 125
(SEA) was screened out in 2017 as this is a separate piece of guidance and will go through an adoption process and therefore trigger SEA. Governance Unspent Contributions Homes for Scotland (HFS) Guidance should be amended to state that unused contributions should be returned after 5 years. Seeking to retain a contribution for 15 years raises questions as to whether the contribution sought will comply with the five tests within Circular 3/2012: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements or that now form part of national planning policy through Policy 18: Infrastructure First within National Planning Framework (NPF) 4. Moray has a slower build-out rate, therefore the 15 year timescale is deemed to be reasonable to allow adequate time for the Council and NHS Grampian to be able to spend funds given the timeframe required to construct larger infrastructure items. Some other local authorities operate with longer timescales for refunding unspent contributions, such as Highland Council with 20 years for developments between 1 and 49 houses. Moray Estates/ Highland and Island Enterprise 15 years to spend contributions is too long, 5 is preferable. If development puts pressure on services, these pressures should be remedied as soon as possible. Viability Viability Homes for Scotland (HFS) Fails to consider land already acquired under the current guidance. There is little possible recourse for these sites if the draft SG now renders these sites (potentially allocated sites) as unviable. If sites are unviable, then developers will be required to go through the Council’s viability process, which has not changed. Page 125
Page 126
Renewable Energy Maximising Net Economic Impact Supplementary Planning Guidance Moray Chamber of Commerce Keen to engage in future on the "Maximising Net Economic Impact Supplementary Planning Guidance." The Maximising Net Economic Impact Supplementary Planning Guidance is separate to the Planning Guidance and will be released for consultation separately. Note concerns: 1. Risk of Disproportionate Developer Obligations 2. Potential for Reduced Community Benefits 3. Negative Impacts of a Precedent Set by Highland Council which raises expectation of financial contributions from developers, which has already been estimated by BiGGAR Economics to potentially reduce onshore wind development by 80% in the Highlands by 2030. 4. Undermining Scotland's Net Zero Commitments: Additional local-level obligations beyond the Scottish Government’s national guidance could deter future investment, undermining both the confidence of investors and the broader national net zero strategy. Renewable developers welcome the opportunity to maximise the social and economic benefits that their projects can bring and are keen to work with Moray Council to consider how this can best be achieved without risking their financial viability. For example, co-creating a framework to help best deliver against the needs of the region. Page 126
Page 127
Our members suggest that the forthcoming guidance be shaped by principles that maximise the socio-economic benefits of renewable projects for Moray while ensuring rapid deployment of onshore wind capacity. We recommend prioritising the following: • Proportional and flexible community benefit schemes • A framework that encourages onshore wind deployment alongside supply chain development • The known onshore wind pipeline in Moray already contributes significantly to the local economy, supporting employment, local businesses, community funds, and GVA. These contributions are at risk if a restrictive developer obligation framework are introduced. Members would appreciate the opportunity for a direct consultation with the Economic Development Team. Page 127
Page 128
Page 128
Page 129
DEVELOPER OBLIGATIONS PLANNING GUIDANCE 2025 APPENDIX 2 Page 129
Page 130
m.connect on-demand service Page 130
Page 131
1Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Contents 1 Introduction 2 Introduction 2 Purpose 2 Status 3 2 Context 4 Developer Obligations 4 Evidence 4 Planning Policy 4 Front Funding of Infrastructure 5 3 Process 6 LDP Delivery Group 6 Planning Obligations/Legal Agreements 8 Viability 9 Freedom of Information 10 Exemptions 11 Governance 12 Indexation 12 4 Infrastructure and Facility Requirements 13 Types of Development 13 Methodology 13 Infrastructure and Facility Requirements 13 Education 14 Transport 17 Healthcare 23 Open Space and Sports, Community & Recreational Facilities 24 Green Networks and Access Improvements 26 5 Appendices 27 Appendix 1: Developer Obligations Assessment Report 27 Appendix 2: Developer Obligations Checklist 31 Appendix 3: Transportation 32 Appendix 4: Transportation Interventions 34 Appendix 5: Information Requirements for Development Viability Assessment 36 Appendix 6: Infrastructure Requirements 45 Page 131
Page 132
1 Introduction The sustainable economic growth of Moray requires the provision of infrastructure and facilities to deliver new development. Local authorities and other infrastructure providers across Scotland are struggling to provide infrastructure and facilities that will enable new development to happen without putting a strain on existing resources. Therefore, developers are required to contribute to the infrastructure and facilities to mitigate any adverse impact their development has on the existing network. However, developer obligations must be balanced carefully with development costs, sales values, land values and other policy requirements to ensure development remains viable and can continue to deliver the aspirations of the Council and Community Planning Partners for Moray’s economic growth set out in the Corporate Plan. This guidance focuses on developer obligations that vary according to the location and scale of development rather than those whose policy requirements will be applied uniformly across Moray (i.e. affordable housing, accessible housing, and compensatory planting). Failure to provide for policy requirements will render a development proposal contrary to the Local Development Plan for Moray (LDP). This guidance should be read in conjunction with the NPF4, LDP and any other relevant guidance. The aim of this guidance is to set out a transparent and consistent approach to the likely infrastructure and facility requirements that will be sought for different types of development, the assessment methodologies that will be used to calculate the level of contribution required, and the rates applicable. This guidance applies to proposals within the area covered by the Moray LDP. Within the Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA) proposals will be considered against the CNPA Local Development Plan (CNPA LDP) and Supplementary Guidance on Developer Contributions, which can be viewed at https://cairngorms.co.uk/planning-development/. Where there is a lack of detail on developer obligations within the CNPA LDP and Supplementary Guidance then the Moray Council Supplementary Guidance on Developer Obligations will be applied. 2 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 132
Page 133
Purpose The purpose of the document is to provide clear guidance on the: Developer obligations process; Infrastructure and facility requirements; Assessment methodology; and, Governance. This guidance will help the development industry factor into viability appraisals the potential financial implications of likely infrastructure and facility requirements at an early stage of the development process to influence land values and provide greater certainty to communities of what the likely infrastructure and facility requirements of a development will be. The Council will work with its Community Planning Partners and key agencies to assess the likely infrastructure and facility requirements and ensure these are fair and proportionate to the impact of the development proposal. The Council encourages developers and landowners to contact the Strategic Planning and Development team as early as possible in the development process so that an assessment of the likely infrastructure requirements and developer obligations can be undertaken which can be used to inform the land value/purchase price of the land. Status This guidance will be used as a material consideration after the date that the guidance is approved by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee. 3Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 133
Page 134
2 Context Developer obligations are contributions sought from developers to mitigate the impact of their development on the community. When a development takes place there is a need for infrastructure and facilities to accompany it. This can include a wide range of infrastructure and facilities (e.g. schools, healthcare facilities, roads, public transport) depending on the scale and location of the development. Developer obligations are intended to ensure that developers make appropriate provision for any pressure on existing infrastructure and facilities or supply additional infrastructure and facilities to negate the impact of the development on the local community. Developer obligations are agreed before work on a development starts and are between the Council and the developer. Evidence Based on information available during the preparation of the Local Development Plan, and up to the third quarter of 2025, the Council has anticipated where the need for developer obligations will arise. It is not possible to identify this in every case. The Settlement Statements within the LDP set out the key requirements for facilities and likely infrastructure to which development is required to contribute. However, Settlement Statements may be overtaken as circumstances change during the life of the LDP. It is unrealistic to expect the Council to anticipate every situation where the need for developer obligations will arise, and decisions will be taken based on the adopted LDP, NPF4, the proposed development and its impact on existing infrastructure and facilities, and the tests set out in The Scottish Government Circular 4/2025: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements as set out below. The Council will maintain and work to the most up-to-date information on school rolls, the Housing Land Audit, the Council’s Capital Programme, NHS Grampian’s Asset Management Plan, and other relevant plans and strategies. Contributions primarily relate to capital costs and will be sought towards projects identified in these plans and strategies. Where a mitigation changes after a contribution has been agreed or received from a developer, then the Council reserves the right to apply the contribution to the new mitigation. Should the cost of the new mitigation be less than the cost identified for the original mitigation then the proportional difference will be refunded to the developer. Planning Policy The Scottish Government Circular 4/2025: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements sets out the circumstances in which planning obligations and good neighbour agreements can be used and how they can be concluded efficiently. Developer obligations (formerly planning agreements) or other legal agreements will only be used where issues cannot be resolved in another way such as attaching a condition to a planning consent. For example, a planning obligation/legal agreement will be required for phased contributions to infrastructure provision as each successor in title needs to be bound by the planning obligation/legal agreement. The Circular sets out 5 tests to be applied when planning obligations made under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) are sought. 4 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 134
Page 135
Developer obligations sought must meet the tests set out in Circular 4/2025 and embody the infrastructure first principles with NPF4. Developer obligations must be: Necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms; Serve a planning purpose; Relate to the proposed development; Fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development; and, Be reasonable in all other respects. National policy and guidance on developer obligations including the 5 tests set out above are reflected in the adopted LDP. Front Funding of Infrastructure NPF4 policy 18 sets out that an integrated Infrastructure First Approach is to be taken to land use planning. Providing the infrastructure necessary to allow a development to proceed may require the Council or other partners to incur costs while working in partnership with developers, or through front funding of investment. Such expenditure will need to be recouped and where appropriate, contributions will be amended to reflect the actual costs incurred as opposed to the estimated costs set out in methodologies contained in this guidance. Circular 4/2025 provides that Local Authorities can recover proportionate payments from subsequent developments which benefit from initial investment until the costs have been recovered in line with the agreed planning obligation/legal agreement. Moray Council will continue to seek developer obligations for infrastructure once it is completed from sites which will utilise the additional capacity created. 5Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Buckie’s Darling, Buckie Page 135
Page 136
3 Process LDP Delivery Group An LDP Delivery Group has been set up by the Council to facilitate the alignment of investment plans and maintain an up-to-date evidence base to inform developer obligation assessments. The Group is led by Strategic Planning and Development and includes representatives from Transportation Services, Education Services, Housing Services, NHS Grampian and Scottish Water with scope to involve others as and when required. The group identifies the infrastructure needed to support the growth associated with allocated sites within the Local Development Plan. This includes consideration of cumulative impact and the timing of infrastructure delivery to support growth. 6 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Diagram1: Process Flow Chart Developer liaises with Council to determine anticipated infrastructure and likely levels of developer obligations Strategic Planning & Development assess requirement for level/type contribution and liaise with applicant Applicant may submit development viability statement (facts, figures) confidentially to demonstrate viability of site. Planning application assessed against Local Development Plan and other material considerations by Development Management Application determined. If approved, then subject to conditions or planning agreement dealing with developer obligations Strategic Planning & Development advise Development Management team of proposed level/type of contribution, method of securing any proposed timescale/phasing of payments/works Development Management consult Strategic Planning & Development Planning Application submitted to Council Report of Handling/Committee Report prepared Page 136
Page 137
Dialogue on developer obligations can take place at any time with the Council. However, developers are encouraged to contact the Council as early as possible in the development process to ascertain the likely contributions that will be sought and their anticipated level so that these can be factored into early site development appraisal calculations and the extent to which these impact on the total development cost and the residual land value. This service is provided free of charge by the Strategic Planning & Development Team at the Council. The cost of meeting developer contributions and any other policy requirements must feature in any land valuations that determine residual land value. When a planning application is submitted, the Council assesses what developer requirements are necessary to mitigate any infrastructure and/or facility deficiencies that are a direct result of the proposed development. These requirements are based on an assessment of existing facilities and infrastructure (taking into account any planning and funded improvements) to identify any infrastructure and facility capacity issues in absorbing new development. An assessment is provided to the developer by the Council setting out the contributions, methodology as to how these contributions have been calculated, and the justification for securing these. An example of a developer obligation assessment report is shown in Appendix 1. The developer can reasonably expect to provide, pay for, or otherwise contribute towards the provision of infrastructure and facilities that would not have been necessary but for the development. Where a developer wishes to provide the infrastructure or facility in full, then this must be in agreement and to the satisfaction of the Local Authority. The basic premise is that the proposed development must not detract from the amenity of existing residents in terms of additional pressure the proposal would generate. In assessing developer obligations, the Council may take account of the cumulative impact of a number of proposed developments that gives rise to the need for mitigation. In these circumstances, the developer obligations sought will be on a pro- rata basis. As the system of developer obligations in Moray has now been established for some time, and the guidance provides a transparent process for calculating developer obligations for sites identified in the LDP, developers who have purchased land without considering an appropriate level of developer obligations will be considered to have acted unreasonably and without due diligence. A checklist setting out the actions developers will be expected to undertake and those that the Council will carry out in the identification, negotiation and agreement of developer obligations is set out in Appendix 2. 7Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 137
Page 138
Planning Obligations/Legal Agreements Developer obligations may be secured through upfront payments under Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, Section 48 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 or Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. A legally binding Section 75 agreement (also referred to as a Planning Obligation) is likely to be required for larger developer obligations to secure through phased payments and in perpetuity with each successor in title. Therefore, if the developer sells the site the new owner takes on the responsibility of meeting the developer obligations. Section 75 legal agreements are likely to be used for larger developments, particularly where there is phasing of payments and infrastructure. Section 75 agreements will be prepared in accordance with the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and Scottish Government Circular 4/2025. An application may be made to modify an existing Section 75 agreement under Section 75A of the Act 1997 and this may result in the amendment of particular obligations either up or down, or may include obligations that were previously not sought at the time of the original application. Where an application proposes a net increase in the number of units from the original planning consent, a new assessment will be undertaken for these units and the obligations necessary will be reflected in the clauses of the Section 75 legal agreement relating to the development. Legal agreements are signed off by all parties with an interest in the land and the Council before planning consent is issued and contain the payment structure for developer obligations as well as any other obligations required on the part of the developer or the Council. The exact payment terms will be a matter of agreement between the Council and the applicant. Where a developer anticipates the need for a Legal Agreement they should prepare for this and include the time required to seek all land owners agreement within the project plan for the development. Developer Obligations towards Moray Council infrastructure will be index linked to the General Building Cost Index (GBCI) as published by the Building Cost Information Service of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and obligations towards NHS Grampian infrastructure will be index linked to All in Tender Price Index (TPI) as published by Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). Contributions will be index- linked from the first anniversary of the execution of the relevant legal agreement. A developer can apply to the Council to modify or discharge an obligation within a Section 75 legal agreement and has a subsequent right of appeal to the Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA) if the authority refuses the application. These applications are assessed against the relevant development plan policies and five tests set out in Circular 4/2025. 8 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 138
Page 139
The need for a legal agreement may be removed where financial contributions are to be paid as an upfront financial payment prior to planning consent being issued. This mostly relates to smaller development sites, where the level of developer obligation required is disproportionate to the legal costs to set up an agreement. In these cases, upfront payments will be required in order to meet this policy requirement. There may be delays relating to the clearance of funds depending on the method of payment chosen. Funds will not be deposited until planning permission is issued. Viability Developer obligations must be carefully balanced with development costs, sales values and land values to ensure development remains viable and can continue to deliver the Council’s aspirations for Moray’s economic growth and the delivery of affordable housing. This is substantiated in Circular 4/2025 which advises that the economic viability of proposals should be taken into consideration when applying developer obligations. Where there are viability issues the Council may enter into discussion with the developer to negotiate an appropriate level of developer obligations following the submission of a viability assessment based on Appendix 5. Viability Assessments Where a developer considers that the level of developer obligations being applied renders their commercially viable proposal commercially unviable then they must bring this to the attention of the Council setting out the issues they consider to materially affect the viability of their proposal. In these circumstances, a viability assessment and “open-book accounting” must be provided by the developer which Moray Council, via the District Valuer, will verify. For this service, the developer is required to pay the District Valuer’s fee, which will be determined by the District Valuer on a case-by-case basis. The information required by the applicant in order for the Council to undertake the review of the viability assessment is shown in Appendix 5. The Council will not consider the viability assessment until all the information required is submitted and to the satisfaction of the Council. Further advice is also available on the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) website at www.rics.org.uk 9Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 139
Page 140
Should a variation be considered acceptable an assessment report will be issued setting out what developer obligations have been agreed and the reasons for any change to the policy requirements. Planning applications where the negotiated value is a variation exceeding £50,000 will be reported to a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee for their consideration/approval. Freedom of Information The Council may disclose information where it is obliged to do so, including where it is subject to request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOI) or the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004. In such circumstances, the Council will seek the views of the developer and take them into account when considering and responding to any request. Where appropriate, developers are advised to obtain their own legal advice on this matter. 10 Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance Residual Land Value Developer Obligations Developer Costs GDV GDV Costs 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% Gross Development Value GDV (total sales income from the development) minus Total Development Costs (construction costs, professional fees, developers profit, finance charges, developer obligations) equals Residual Land Value (amount to be paid to the landowner) Community Orchard, Buckie Buckie Page 140
Page 141
Exemptions The Council have adopted the following exemptions: Student Accommodation. As this development will not generate resident children and place an additional burden on the existing schools, they will not be expected to contribute to Education facilities. A proposal to change these types of accommodation into mainstream housing will require planning permission, and an education contribution will be sought at this time (if necessary); HMO Accommodation. These developments will not be expected to contribute to Education, but may be required to contribute towards Healthcare; Sport and Recreational facilities and Transportation Sheltered, Extra Care, and Serviced Accommodation. These developments will not be expected to contribute to Education, Healthcare and Sport and Recreational facilities, but may be required to contribute towards Transportation; PNOTRE (Prior Notification) and PAPRE (Prior Approval). These developments will not be expected to contribute to Education, Healthcare and Sport and Recreational facilities, but may be required to contribute towards Transportation; Replacement Houses; Holiday Accommodation; Temporary caravans; Residential Annexe where it is conditioned to be ancillary to the main property; Town Centre Redevelopment of existing buildings for residential use where the original fabric is retained and redevelopment is achieved via internal conversion; or redevelopment of opportunity sites identified in Town Centre Masterplans adopted as a material consideration by the Council; Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions (AMC) planning application; Amendment of previously permitted planning application of 4 or more residential units results in a net increase of 1 SRUE or less than 1 SRUE; Sites with extant planning consent whereby: the previous planning consent is within the timeframe between consent being granted and expiry at the time of the verification of the current planning application; or the previous planning consent has commenced or developer obligations had previously been paid; Commercial Development where the floor space is less than 1,000m2 or the site area is less than 1 hectare; and Redevelopment of brownfield sites within Town Centres 11Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 141
Page 142
Governance The Council and NHS Grampian will endeavour to spend the funds received on appropriate infrastructure and facilities within 15 years of the date of payment, or for those applications where phased payments are received through a Legal Agreement within 15 years of the date of final payment, unless otherwise agreed. Contributions not spent by the end of the relevant period will be refunded to the developer with any interest accrued within 21 days of receiving a written notice from the developer requiring to do so. Where applicable, net of any additional administrative costs directly attributable to the particular contribution to be refunded. For applications where payment has been made upfront, where planning consent lapses as development has not commenced on the site within the period of the consent or a smaller dwelling built, developer obligations will be refunded to the applicant within 21 days of receiving a written notice from the applicant requiring it to do so, with any interest accrued. Interest of 5% per annum above the Bank of England base rate will be charged on the late payment of developer contributions from 14 days after the date the developer obligations fall due until payment. For residential developments, the Council will not expect the individual purchasers of the completed residential plots to have liability for any of the financial contributions. Indexation All rates as set out in this guidance are correct as of Quarter 3-2025 and will be reviewed and published every 12 months. Developer Obligations towards Moray Council infrastructure will be index linked to the General Building Cost Index (GBCI) as published by the Building Cost Information Service of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and obligations towards NHS Grampian infrastructure will be index linked to All in Tender Price Index (TPI) as published by Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). These rates will be reviewed every 12 months to ensure they are in line with actual costs incurred. The published index linked rate for the date the application is submitted will be used in the assessment report. 12 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 142
Page 143
4 Infrastructure and Facility Requirements Types of development Developer obligations will be sought for the following types of development: Residential development: All proposals which involve the creation of new residential unit(s). Commercial development: All proposals where the floorspace is 1,000m2 or where the site area is 1 hectare or more Other applications: Where the Council or NHS Grampian considers the proposal to be of a scale or type appropriate to merit consideration of developer obligations Methodology Developer obligations will be sought on a per-residential unit equivalent (unless otherwise stated). A three bedroomed residential unit will be taken as a “standard sized residential unit” (SRUE). The figures below show how the obligation is calculated. Where a planning permission in principle application is received and the precise mix of units is not available then the assessment will be based on 1 SRUE (3 bed unit) for each of the units proposed. 1 bed units will not be expected to contribute towards education facilities. Infrastructure and facility requirements Developer obligations will be sought for the following infrastructure and facilities: Education; Transport; Healthcare; Open Space and Sports, Community & Recreational Facilities; Play Opportunities and Destination Parks; Green Networks and Access Improvements This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and requirements may change over time as additional mitigations are identified in the Council’s Capital Plan and other relevant strategies. A further assessment of infrastructure and facility requirements will be undertaken on submission of a planning application. 13Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Size of Residential Unit 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5 bed 6 bed Contribution 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 Page 143
Page 144
Education Contributions will be sought towards meeting the cost of improvements for nursery, primary, and secondary education infrastructure that is necessary as a direct consequence of residential development. When and where do they apply? Contributions will be sought from all residential developments where the school roll in the catchment primary and/or secondary schools exceeds 90% of its planning capacity as a result of the development, cumulatively along with other identified developments in the school catchment. This figure has been adopted due to the rural nature of Moray and the large number of schools with composite classes from a school estate which includes a number of older buildings which can restrict the number of pupils a school can accommodate. Additional Support Needs (ASN) provision can also limit the number of pupils which can be accommodated in a school as a result of increased space requirements for pupils with ASN needs. An ASN strategy is currently being developed by Education Services and this may require a separate contribution towards ASN. The Scottish Government Guidance on Determining Primary School Capacity (2014) sets out that planning capacity is a physical, theoretical measure of the total number of pupils which could be accommodated in a school, based on the total number of teaching spaces, the size of those spaces and the class size maxima. Where a mitigation is required, this will be provided by the most appropriate method by either a permanent extension, reconfiguration of the existing building to provide additional classroom space, through the erection of a new-build school, or by rezoning. Mitigations are informed by collaborative work with Education Services, alongside Capital Plan allocations, the Learning Estate Strategy, and indicative measures identified in the Moray Local Development Plan. How is the contribution calculated? Contributions will be calculated for each development and are based on the Housing Land Audit (HLA) and published School Roll Forecast (SRF) for Moray using the following formula: Average Number of Pupils Over 90% Capacity x Rate of Mitigation = Contribution Contributions are calculated on the basis of the average number of pupils that the school(s) are over capacity over the 5-year period following the submission of a planning application. The average number of pupils over 90% planning capacity will be expressed as a percentage of the number of houses proposed by a development against the total number of houses built within the school catchment during the 5-year period. 14 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 144
Page 145
Where the proposed build out of the development is beyond 5 years, contributions for the remaining units for the extended period beyond 5 years will be calculated using the following formula: Number of Houses Remaining x Relevant Pupil Product Ratio x Rate of Mitigation The rates applicable to each mitigation are set out below: The rates per pupil as set out above reflect the recent costed projects within Moray, indexed in line with BCIS where appropriate. If the identified mitigation is a rezoning exercise, then a contribution will be sought towards the cost of the rezoning consultation. School catchment rezoning is a separate statutory process so in the event that a rezoning application is not approved, then alternative mitigation would need to be explored. The rates for reconfiguration and rezoning are indicative as these may vary depending on the nature of the project proposed. The cost for rezoning may include costs towards reconfiguration or other infrastructure as part of the mitigation. For primary schools, contributions will be used to create capacity for the relevant catchment area. As set out in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 the Scottish Government require Local Authorities to allow out of zone placements and as such, capacity may be created at an alternative local school to reduce demand in the relevant catchment. Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) The number of pupils generated per residential unit (often referred to as the ‘pupil product ratio’) is set out below: This PPR has been tested and proven to be reasonable in Moray. 15Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Cost per pupil Mitigation Measure Primary School Secondary School Rezoning £5,697.78 £5,697.78 Reconfiguration £7,720.57 £15,441.17 Permanent Extension £49,235.81 £60,446.37 New School £69,204.67 £88,523.12 Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) Primary Education 0.3 Secondary Education 0.15 Page 145
Page 146
New Schools In larger developments, where the development as a whole or as a part of the masterplanned area generates the need for a new school the developer will be required to provide an appropriate sized area of land for the school: 2.5 hectares for a primary school. This figure is based on a provision of a modern school and associated facilities such as playing fields and SUDS. The land provided should be an appropriate shape, reasonably flat, accessible, transferred at nil cost to the Council, and serviced at the developer’s expense. Where the development does not fully require a new school, the Council will pay for the part of the land that is attributable to pupils generated by other developments. Other developments generating pupils that are zoned to the new school will then be required to provide a proportionate contribution towards the land value element, that the Council has front funded, in addition to the contribution to building costs. A per pupil rate for the land value element will be based on the total land value cost which will require an independent valuation to be undertaken. Nursery Provision New housing development may result in extra demand for early learning and childcare places, resulting in the need for a material increase in nursery provision. Future guidance on nursery provision, including rates will be provided. 16 Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance Linkwood Primary School Elgin Page 146
Page 147
Transport A developer will be required to undertake mitigation measures to ensure there is no adverse impact on the transport network as a direct result of their development or arising from the cumulative impact of development in the area. Transport interventions that are expected to be provided as part of a new development should be reflected in associated planning applications. The developer will be expected to deliver the infrastructure and measures at their cost and for cumulative impact through a proportionate contribution towards transportation interventions identified in the Elgin Transport Strategy or other location specific transport plans which may be agreed by the Council. The Scottish Government Planning Guidance on Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods states that ‘The Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhood concepts aim to create places where people can meet the majority of their daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home, by walking, wheeling or cycling’. Transport mitigation such as active travel connections and public transport provision may be identified to support local living. This will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Transport infrastructure requirements and costs will vary from site to site. Developers are encouraged to contact the Council’s Transport Development Team as early as possible in the development process to ascertain the likely transport infrastructure requirements that will be sought in order that these can be factored into early site development viability calculations. A mitigation measure to the transport network that can be carried out by the developer will generally be secured via planning condition and where this is not possible a financial contribution will be sought through a legal agreement. Examples of modifications to the transport network and provision of sustainable travel secured through s75 can include: Funding of bus services to serve the development during early phases; Provision of or funding of public transport priority measures (e.g. bus gates); Installation of traffic signals, controlled pedestrian crossings and/or upgrading/refurbishment of existing traffic signal infrastructure; Provision or upgrading of roads, bridges and other infrastructure (e.g. new footways); Alterations to existing roads. 17Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 147
Page 148
Examples of modifications to the transport network and provision of sustainable travel secured through conditions attached to a planning consent can include: Infrastructure to support Active Travel, in particular Routes to School; Travel plans to incentivise use of active travel infrastructure and public transport; Installation/upgrading of street lighting; Infrastructure to support Traffic Regulation Orders/Stopping-Up Orders; Passing places. Examples of standard costs associated with sustainable travel and transport network improvements include: New bus shelter (Moray Council is required to deliver infrastructure within the existing public road): £5,075; Processing of Road Traffic Regulation Order (e.g. extend speed limit, waiting restrictions) as set out in the current Moray Council Fees and Charges schedule. Local Authority provided public transport Developer obligations will be sought from developments within rural and urban areas, where no public transport connection is available and will contribute to public transport provided by Moray Council to serve the additional residents generated by the new developments. Transport Assessments/Statements For developments of 50 or more dwellings the final need for transportation developer obligations will be determined by a Transport Assessment (TA) which should be carried out by the developer. For developments of 49 dwellings or below, a Transport Statement will be required and this will identify the existing transport infrastructure, travel characteristics associated with the site and the proposed measures to improve the infrastructure and services to encourage sustainable travel to the site. Detailed accessibility analysis and assessment of the traffic impacts would not normally be required. The information required for a Transport Assessment/Statement can be found in Appendix 3. Developer obligations will be sought towards transport interventions at locations where there is a material increase in traffic. For example in Elgin at the A941 New Elgin rail crossing point and adjacent Edgar Road and Laichmoray junctions a material increase is anything in excess of 1% as these already operate above capacity during the peak periods, for all other locations in Elgin a material increase would be in excess of 5%. For all other locations in Moray the material impact will be considered to be 5% where there are currently operational issues and 10% elsewhere. 18 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Mitigation Measure Cost per SRUE Moray Council provided bus £418.00 Page 148
Page 149
High quality design which prioritises active travel and the use of public transport and results in an identifiable reduction in the use of private cars evidenced through the Transport Assessment may be reflected in the final need for transportation developer obligations. The use of target mode shares will require justification and strong evidence of interventions to support active travel and public transport, and will only be considered where there is an agreed monitoring programme and clause within a S75 agreement which would secure an additional developer obligation towards public transport or active travel mitigation if targets were not met. If additional public transport or active travel measures cannot be provided then additional developer obligations will be sought towards mitigating the impact of additional vehicles on the transport network. Cumulative Impact of Development on the Wider Transport Network Development of a number of sites will have an effect on the operational performance of the transport network. When these sites are considered together this may require different mitigation measures than when considered individually. Additional assessments of key junctions on the trunk road network, utilising previously agreed capacity modelling parameters with Transport Scotland, will be undertaken and overall mitigation measures further developed for the cumulative impact of developments, taking cognisance of the needs of pedestrians and cyclists as the National Transport Strategy aims to make sure that public transport and active travel options are the preferred choice for people making short journeys. Elgin Elgin Transport Strategy (ETS) addresses the cumulative impact of development allocated in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 up to 2030. The ETS sets out a series of transport interventions which seek to improve pedestrian and cycle access, develop public transport, ease congestion and make travel around Elgin more predictable and consistent. The ETS can be viewed on the Council’s website at www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file109528.pdf The transport elements considered within this developer obligations guidance only apply to the local road network. Where any development has the potential to change the volume or nature of traffic using the Trunk Road Network (A95 and A96) further consideration will be required in discussion with the Council’s Transport Development Team and with Transport Scotland. This further consideration may result in planning conditions and/or additional mitigation requirements related to the strategic transport network. 19Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 149
Page 150
The final need for developer obligations will be determined through an agreed TA/TS. Contributions towards the transport interventions identified in the ETS will be sought from all residential development including windfall sites. Transport interventions in the ETS are split into: Core: address both existing network constraints where development will have an adverse impact as this will exacerbate an existing situation and to provide for the additional demand for travel associated with new development; Directly related to development: interventions directly related to the development of a LDP site (e.g. replacement of bridge to enable two-way traffic); Council: specific improvements led and delivered by Moray Council (e.g. Moray Council Travel Plan). Contributions will not be sought towards transport interventions attributed solely to the public sector. As noted previously, the transport elements considered within this developer obligations guidance only apply to the local road network and further discussions will be required where there is a potential impact on the Trunk Road. While indicative improvements to the A96 are included within the wider Elgin Transport Strategy the Council acknowledges that further and more detailed engagement on rationale for specific interventions, consideration of trunk road safety, impact on strategic traffic movements and design in accordance with Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance and Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Elgin is split into five areas as shown on Plan A in Appendix 4. The transportation need for a development is calculated on the basis of where the development is located and where trips from the development would likely be passing through and is calculated using peak period car trips based on trip generation rates from TRICS which are the same as used in the Elgin Traffic Model. Information pertaining to TRICS and the Elgin Traffic Model is provided in Appendix 3. Developments are required to proportionately contribute towards interventions within their respective areas and interventions within the central and commercial area given that the central and commercial area will attract trips from all residential developments within Elgin. Where an intervention is on or crosses boundaries contributions will be sought from developments in both areas. The transportation need and associated level of developer obligations will be based on a Transport Assessment/Statement provided by the developer and agreed with Moray Council. The transportation need will be informed by the percentage increase in development traffic at the points of the transport network where ETS interventions are proposed, including Active Travel interventions particularly where increases in traffic would lead to community severance. 20 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 150
Page 151
Where the TA/TS identifies a development impact of less than 1%, no developer obligation would be sought for that intervention. Where the TA/TS identifies that an improvement is required at one of the ETS interventions which is more onerous than that included in the ETS, then the developer will be required to develop and deliver mitigation measures at that location. High level costs for each transport intervention have been supplied by the Council’s transport consultants, Jacobs. These costs include an outline allowance for land purchase and utilities diversions. A table setting out the ETS transport interventions and associated costs are shown in Appendix 4. Should the actual cost of a transport intervention following construction and operation be lower than that estimated through the ETS, then an appropriately apportioned refund will be provided where a developer has provided the full developer obligation for the transport intervention. Buckie In Buckie, developer obligations are required to enable the provision of new active travel infrastructure, including a new bridge over the Burn of Buckie, which would provide a new high quality, safe and direct connection from the Southwest Buckie development area to the eastern part of Buckie where the majority of existing and future employment opportunities are located, along with other facilities such as education, healthcare and retail. A proportionate contribution will be sought from the sites which make up the Southwest Buckie Masterplan and R7 Muirton Road site, based on a per housing unit rate, with additional funding being provided by Moray Council to account for demand associated with existing housing to the west of the Burn of Buckie. The current estimated cost for the active travel connection (September 2025 prices) is £2,033,365.67. The current number of housing units for relevant developments are: Existing Housing: Silberg Drive 180 housing units; Alba Road 147 housing units; and Inchgower 112 housing units. Development Sites: R7 Muirton Road (indicative capacity) 161 housing units; and R8 + LONG 600 housing units. 21Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 151
Page 152
m.connect on-demand service Total number of housing units which would benefit from the new infrastructure is 1200 (based on indicative site capacities in April 2024). This gives an indicative rate for developer obligations towards the Burn of Buckie Active Travel infrastructure of £1,694.47 per housing unit at the time of writing this report. Note as planning applications are received then the number of housing units may increase/decrease. This will lead to a proportional change in the level of developer obligations sought. Other settlements For all other settlements and in rural areas, each planning application will be assessed on its own merits. Developers will be expected to meet in full the cost of all external works identified in the Transport Assessment and/or through the planning process and undertake these works. The developer may also be required to make an appropriate contribution towards mitigation measures on the wider transportation network, in particular active travel provision and public transport. The Council may agree transport plans or specific interventions for other locations (e.g. Forres, Buckie) from time to time where the predicted growth from a range of sites indicates the need to set out a single approach to transport infrastructure improvements to mitigate the impacts of those developments or provide off-site infrastructure to support sustainable travel. Any requirement to contribute to the delivery of one of these plans or interventions will be consulted and set out as an appendix to this Guidance. 22 Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance Page 152
Page 153
Healthcare Healthcare facilities can include General Medical Services (GMS), Dental Services, Community Pharmacies and Health and Social Care Partnerships (where it can be identified there is need for provision in the GP Practice), or such other infrastructure systems relating to those which will offset the impact of development e.g., remote consulting, reconfiguration etc. Scottish Health Planning Notes and GP Premises Directions provide national guidance on standards and specification for healthcare facilities. When and where does it apply? It applies to all residential developments where the capacity of existing facilities will be exceeded as a result of the development. Site specific requirements are initially identified in the Settlement Statements within the LDP. Requirements for specific mitigations are identified in appendix 6. The baseline is identified as the recommended number of patients of 1,500 per General Practitioner (GP). Although guidance refers to a GP, this can also include other Healthcare Professionals. The Primary Medical Services Directions and the Scottish Health Planning notes set out floor space and accommodation requirements. Primary healthcare provision also includes a number of Health and Social Care Partnership and link worker services located within the same facility. Additional floor space is therefore identified for this purpose. Contributions may be sought for a new build facility, permanent extension, internal reconfiguration works or any other mitigation identified by NHS Grampian to provide additional capacity. The mitigation will be based on required infrastructure capacity (i.e. floorspace requirements) to deliver the number of GPs and support services as opposed to number of staff currently employed in premises. On this basis, the following contribution per residential unit equivalent will be sought for each mitigation measure: On larger residential development sites, where development as a whole or part of a masterplan generates a requirement for requirement for GP, Health and Social Care Practice Moray (HSCP Moray), facilities there may be a need to provide these on-site. Similar to education facilities, a proportional land value contribution will also be required. This may be in the form of serviced land at nil value cost or a financial contribution, which will be additional to the mitigation measure for build cost. On larger residential development sites there may also be a requirement for an interim solution to be provided to ensure the residents can access a Healthcare Facility at the early stages of the development. This may be in the form of a commercial unit at nil rental cost for an agreed timeframe. 23Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Mitigation Measure Permanent Internal Accommodation Reconfiguration Contribution per SRUE £1,838.45 £1,081.58 Page 153
Page 154
Open Space and Sports, Community & Recreational Facilities New sports and recreation facilities such as sports pitches, parks and children’s play areas will be required to meet the Council’s Open Space requirements set out in the LDP, NPF4, Open Space Strategy or other relevant guidance. Sports Pitches The Review of Sport, Leisure and Recreational Provision in Moray, April 2014, identified that grass pitches in Moray are heavily used but are restricted by poor weather, lack of floodlighting, use of other activities and maintenance issues. The Review identified that the Scottish climate and vast amount of football that takes place on natural grass pitches are incompatible and unsustainable from a maintenance resource perspective. With the ever-improving developments of synthetic turf technology, the flexibility offered by the surface in terms of game size and the capacity for repeated play without detrimental effect is further evidence that a synthetic grass pitch located in every associated school group (ASG) area can ensure year-round outdoor sports pitch activity is available and reduce the pressure on natural grass pitches. The sportscotland national average for synthetic grass pitches is 1.0 full sized pitch per 10,000 population. The Facilities Planning Model 2023 sets out that Moray provision currently aligns with the national average however 3 of Moray’s pitches have restricted access due to them being located on private property (Army, RAF and Private School) and 1 other pitch is not full sized. A previous outdoor pitches strategy for Moray Council aimed to provide a synthetic grass pitch in every ASG in Moray. Current pitch provision in Forres falls below this intention therefore contributions will be sought towards a provision of an enclosed, floodlit, synthetic grass pitch in Forres to mitigate the adverse impact of proposed development on recreational sports facilities. Contributions will also be sought towards the provision of grass pitches where new development creates strain on existing grass pitches. Contributions will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 24 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Mitigation Measure Synthetic Grass Pitch (1.0ha) Contribution per SRUE £280.42 Page 154
Page 155
Sports, Community & Recreational Facilities Sports, community and recreational facilities are an integral part of new developments, particularly if existing provision would not have the capacity to cope with increased population. Moray Council has a sport and leisure capital investment plan which will continually evolve and align with the Council’s capital plan. This specific investment plan will identify new facility requirements as well as existing refurbishment. Financial contributions may be secured towards internal reconfiguration or other works to enhance existing facilities, create an extension or a new build facility to help alleviate the impact of users arising from new development. These facilities may include, but are not limited to, outdoor facilities such as multi use games areas (MUGA’s), athletics facilities, lighting, fencing, spectator areas, changing facilities and indoor facilities such as swimming pools, fitness rooms, exercise studios, community meeting space and sports/gym halls. Further consultation may be required both internally and with the local community to establish how facilities would be impacted to further evidence contributions required. Due to the significant variation of costs across sports, community and recreational facilities rates will differ and be applied accordingly. Play Opportunities and Destination Parks Developments will be required to provide play spaces in accordance with the adopted LDP, NPF4 and the Open Space Strategy or other relevant strategies and with reference to the Play Sufficiency Assessment. Contributions will be sought towards enhanced play provision in community parks which serve the development where the development will create strain on the existing play spaces. Contributions will be identified on a case-by- case basis. Moray Council has identified Destination Parks in Aberlour (Alice Littler Park), Buckie (Ian Johnston and/or Linzee Gordon), Elgin (Cooper Park), Forres (Grant Park), Keith (St Rufus Park). 25Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance St Rufus Park (Keith) Page 155
Page 156
These parks play a role within communities providing a greater variety of opportunities for play for a greater age range and may provide other facilities such as skateparks or pitches. These have wider catchments than neighbourhood or local equipped play areas. If existing provision would not have capacity to cope with increased population financial contributions may be secured towards enhancing, reconfiguring, extending existing facilities and/or new facilities within Destination Parks. This could include, but is not limited to, play provision, MUGA’s, paths, seating and other furniture, lighting, or any proposals within approved guidance or masterplans. Green Networks and Access Improvements No development should be viewed in isolation and have a duty to contribute to the quality of their local environment by integrating into existing green networks and access routes. Off-site provision may be necessary and where this is the case, developer obligations will be sought. Examples that developer obligations may be sought for include: New and/or improvements to existing core paths and active travel routes serving the development and/or connecting to existing core paths/active travel routes; Cycle parking facilities and repair stations at key destinations such as town centres, community facilities and town parks (e.g. Cooper Park in Elgin); Route or interpretative signage; Off-site sustainable urban drainage systems (all greenfield sites are required to provide this on-site however, it is acknowledged that this may not be practical on brownfield sites); New habit, wildflower planting, hedgerows and tree lines to connect green corridors and support ecological habitats and biodiversity; and Improvement of poor-quality open spaces as advised by the Open Space Strategy and Audit. Planning conditions will be used where possible, however where core paths align with the Active Travel network delivery may be facilitated as part of the developer obligations towards the transportation network. Developer obligations will be sought on a case-by-case basis. 26 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 156
Page 157
! ! ! Appendix 1 Developer Obligations Assessment Report Please note that this assessment is hypothetical and demonstrates the methodology applied. As set out below, a total developer obligation of £1,912,914.52 (£22,504.88 per unit) is required to mitigate the negative impact that this development proposal has on local education, transport and healthcare infrastructure. Date: Application Reference: 24/00000/APP Description: Residential development of 85 houses and associated infrastructure at Moray Town To: Development Management Applicant: I refer to the above-mentioned planning application under consideration by Moray Council. This assessment is carried out in relation to policies contained within the Moray Local Development Plan (LDP), specifically policy DP2 Housing and PP3 Infrastructure & Services. Copies of these policies can be found on the Council website at http://www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file133546.pdf This assessment report will set out the basis for any agreement you enter into with Moray Council. Your application will be unable to be determined (in terms of delegated powers/reported to committee) until we have reached agreement in writing on the terms as set out in the assessment report. 27Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 157
Page 158
Summary of Obligations Infrastructure Level of Contribution Primary Education £796,545.41 New build Moray Primary School Secondary Education £523,238.48 Extension at Moray Secondary School Healthcare £152,591.35 Permanent accommodation at Moray Health Centre Transportation £662,717.27 Total Developer Obligations £2,135,092.51 Breakdown of Calculation of Obligations This section of the report sets out how the obligations outlined above have been calculated. Calculation of Standard Residential Unit Equivalents (SRUE) Applications are assessed on the basis of standard house unit equivalents (SRUE). This application is considered to comprise of the following: 5 x 1 bed (0.6 SRUE) = 3 SRUE 15 x 2 bed (0.8 SRUE) = 12 SRUE 50 x 3 bed (1 SRUE) = 50 SRUE 15 x 4 bed (1.2 SRUE) = 18 SRUE This assessment is therefore based on 83 standard residential unit equivalents (SRUE). 28 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 158
Page 159
INFRASTRUCTURE Primary Education Pupils from this development are zoned to Moray Primary School which is has a mitigation identified as the result of new development. The development has been factored into the School Roll Forecast 2023 (SRF) on the following assumed phasing: 30 units in 2027, 30 units in 2028, and 25 units in 2029. Education Services has identified that a new school will be required. The number of pupils over 90% capacity that this development is responsible for has been identified as 11.51. Therefore, contributions are sought on the following basis: 11.51 pupils x £69,204.64 = £796,545.41 Contribution towards Primary Education = £796,545.41 Secondary Education Pupils from this development are zoned to Moray Secondary School which is has a mitigation identified as the result of new development. The development has been factored into the School Roll Forecast 2023 (SRF) on the following assumed phasing: 30 units in 2027, 30 units in 2028, and 25 units in 2029. Education Services has identified that an extension towards Moray Secondary School will be required. The number of pupils over 90% capacity that this development is responsible for has been identified as 5.91. Therefore, contributions are sought on the following basis: 5.91 pupils x £88,534.43 = £523,238.48 Contribution towards Secondary Education = £523,238.48 Transportation Based on the interventions identified within the Elgin Transport Strategy (ETS), the Moray Council Transportation Service has confirmed that contributions will be sought to mitigate the impact of the proposed development on the transport network as detailed in Appendix 4. The average contribution per unit is £7,796.67and the following will be sought: £7,796.67x 85 units= £662,717.27 Contribution towards Transportation = £662,717.27 29Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 159
Page 160
Healthcare Healthcare facilities include General Medical Services (GMS), community pharmacies and dental practices. Scottish Health Planning Notes provide national guidance on standards and specification for healthcare facilities. The recommended number of patients is 1500 per General Practitioner (GP). Healthcare infrastructure requirements have been calculated with NHS Grampian on the basis of national standards and specifications for healthcare facilities and estimating the likely number of new patients generated by the development. NHS Grampian has confirmed that the existing health centre is operating at capacity and contributions will be required to increase capacity at the Health Centre. Therefore the following contribution will be sought: Increase capacity at the Health Centre: 83 SRUE x £1,838.45 per SRUE = £152,591.35 Contribution towards Healthcare = £152,591.35 30 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 160
Page 161
Appendix 2 Checklist for Developers and the Council in the Developer Obligations Process 31Developer Obligations Planning Guidance R RDevelopers will be expected to: Check the Guidance on Developer Obligations for potential requirements along with any other relevant Supplementary Guidance. Reflect all policy requirements set out in the Moray Local Development Plan and any site-specific requirements stipulated in the LDP Settlement Statements, Action Programme, Masterplans and Development Briefs, and undertake a TA/TS to an agreed scope. Contact the Council as early as possible in the development process to ascertain the likely obligations that will be sought and their anticipated level. Factor any developer obligations or other policy requirement/site specific requirement into development appraisal calculations. Reflect developer obligations in the development appraisal and in the value of the land. Establish and agree their preferred phasing of developer obligation payments and delivery of developer obligations, which will be included in a Section 75 or other appropriate legal agreement. Conclude any agreement timeously. The Council will: Meet with developers early in the development process and issue an interim assessment setting out the anticipated level of developer obligations that will likely be sought. Prepare developer obligations assessment at pre-application and application stage when required. Negotiate and deal with the assessment of developer obligations and any planning obligations in a timely manner. Suggest the use of particular types of legal agreements, planning conditions, etc., appropriate to the circumstances. Only use planning obligations where they meet the tests set out in Circular 4/2025. Consider all relevant factors which may impact on the financial viability of the development scheme. Issue planning consent only when the Section 75 agreement or other appropriate legal agreement has been signed by all parties and (if required) the agreement has been recorded in the Register of Sasines or registered in Land Register of Scotland. Monitor contributions, seek payments when due and notify applicants of any change in circumstances that may affect the concluded obligation. Page 161
Page 162
Appendix 3 Transportation Information required for Transport Assessment (TA)/Transport Statement (TS) The onus will be on the developer to provide a TA/TS which follows the Transport Scotland Transport Assessment Guidance 2012 and, where required use the Elgin Traffic Model. Where developments are expected to create an increase in traffic, a completed Transport Assessment Form www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file87671.pdf must be submitted by the developer to allow officers to consider the requirement or otherwise for further assessment. Developers are urged to carry out early consultation with Transportation prior to the submission of development proposals. If a Transport Statement/Transport Assessment is required the scope should be agreed with Transport Development prior to the submission. A TA must provide: An assessment of travel characteristics*; A description of the measures which are being adopted to influence travel to/from the site*; A description of the transport impacts of the development in a dynamic network and how these will be addressed e.g. proportionate contribution towards intervention identified by the Elgin Transport Strategy. And, include: Forecast of person trips generated by the development*: Forecast of person trips generated by mode of transport*; Appraisal of the routes from development to end destinations (schools, employment, local services) by foot, cycle, public transport and vehicle. * Minimum requirement for Transport Statement. 32 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 162
Page 163
Elgin Traffic Model The Elgin Traffic Model is a macrosimulation model, the extents of which cover the whole of the Elgin road network. The model provides the facility to review the performance of the collective traffic system to check for changes in network performance and to determine the areas of the network where there would be an increase in traffic as a result of a development. When use of the Elgin Traffic Model is required, developers and their consultants must first agree the scope of the assessment to be undertaken with the Transport Development Team and then complete an Elgin Traffic Model Access Form www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file114455.doc The model is operated by the Council’s transport consultant who will undertake any necessary changes to the model and run the testing scenarios. Output from the model runs will be provided as a report with model output data in the form of shape files (if required). There is a fee associated with accessing the model which will depend on complexity of any changes required to the base model and the number of scenarios tested through model runs. The payment of invoices will be through the Moray Council (data will not be released until payment has been received). TRICS The Vehicle Trip Generation rates used in the Elgin Traffic Model have been derived using TRICS. TRICS is the national standard system of trip generation and analysis in the UK and Ireland, and is used as an integral and essential part of the Transport Assessment process. The system allows its users to establish potential levels of trip generation for a wide range of development and location scenarios and is widely used as part of the planning application process by both developer consultants and local authorities. Table 1- Trip Generation Rates Residential Trip Vehicle Trips Per Dwelling Generation Rates Arrivals Departures Total AM Peak 0.140 0.390 0.530 PM Peak 0.350 0.190 0.540 33Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 163
Page 164
34 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Appendix 4 © Crown copyright [and database rights] 2026 OS AC0000806936 M oray Council Page 164
Page 165
35Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Table 2 – Elgin Transport Strategy Interventions Indicative costs for each measure have been provided by our consultant Jacobs. They have been calculated by quantity surveyors based on available information and make an initial allowance for utility diversions and land costs. Reference Intervention Cost Central I1B New north/south rail bridge: Ashgrove/Linkwood Road to £13,956,026 Masondieu Road- two way arrangement with signals I2A Moss Street – convert to one-way (northbound) & widen £906,667 footways/cycle lanes I2E South Street – pedestrianise between £1,394,870 Commerce Street and Batchen Street I3A New Elgin Road- improve performance/replace junctions £3,640,613 North/South of railway I4B New cycle/pedestrian north/south rail bridge: £6,357,124 Ashgrove Road I4F Station Road cycle lanes £111,590 M1A Edgar Road pedestrian crossing improvements £90,666 M1B Station Road/Maisondieu Road pedestrian £313,846 crossing improvements M3B Elgin Bus Station redesign/improve operation £3,487,176 South-East I4H Linkwood Road cycle lanes £139,488 I4K Pinefield to East End Primary School Active Travel Route £295,866 M1D Thornhill Road pedestrian crossing improvements £313,846 North-West I3K North Street/Morriston Road junction improvements £34,871 I4M A941/Lesmurdie Road: improvements to pedestrian/ £156,922 cycle provision and crossing South-West I3H Edgar Road/The Wards junction improvements £418,461 Note:this list does not include interventions which would be undertaken either solely by the public sector or interventions attached to a specific development. Full details of all of the interventions within the Elgin Transport Strategy can be found at: www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file109528.pdf Page 165
Page 166
Appendix 5 Information Requirements for Development Viability Assessment The Applicant (who may, or may not be the end developer) is required to submit the following information to enable the Independent DSV and Council review of development viability: Financial Viability Appraisal as a hardcopy and as a ‘live spreadsheet’ in Microsoft Excel with working formulas; and Applicant Viability Data (AVD) form. Please note that the Council will not consider the viability assessment until all the information required is submitted and to the satisfaction of the Council. Applicant Viability Data (AVD) Form 1) Initial Details A) Planning Application Reference Number (As listed on Council’s public records - e.g. Council website): - B) Brief description of the proposed Development/Redevelopment: - C) Full postal address of the subject development site: - D) Please provide a plan which highlights the location of the subject development site E) Please provide a site plan which highlights the boundaries to the subject development site F) Please advise what the GROSS site area is (in hectares & acres) G) Please advise what the NET development area is (in hectares & acres) H) Please detail site density (number of houses per hectare & acre on a gross and net area basis) I) Please advise of the TOTAL Gross Internal Area (Calculated in accordance with the RICS code of measuring practice) to the new buildings to be built/converted/ refurbished (in square metres & square feet) J) Please include a hardcopy and an electronic copy (in Microsoft Excel with working formulas) of a policy compliant Financial Viability Assessment (FVA) including Developer Obligations and Affordable Housing Contributions K) Please confirm the land sales price expected to be paid or price paid L) Please provide an overview of the factors which are restricting full delivery of the Council’s Developer Obligations and/or Affordable Housing Contributions 36 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 166
Page 167
37Developer Obligations Planning Guidance 2) Development periods (for finance calculations) Description of item: A) Total development period B) Construction period (Private Housing) C) Construction period (Affordable Housing) D) Construction period (Commercial Development) E) Sales period (Private Housing) F) Sales period (Affordable Housing) G) Sales period (Commercial Development) H) Other (please specify) 3) Gross development value (GDV) Distribution pattern (e.g. straight-line, S-Curve, Weighted etc) Total length of period (months) Assumed start date A) Brief description of item being built (e.g. name of house type) TOTAL Gross Internal Area (GIA) of item (sqm) Number of each item Value (£s) per item Total value (£s) of item Number of bedrooms Type of item being built (e.g. private dwelling, affordable dwelling, office suite, etc) Value (£s) per item B) Brief description of additions to GDV Ground Rents Service charges Other (please specify) TOTAL TOTAL GDV Area of item (sqm) NA NA Page 167
Page 168
38 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Total cost (£s): Description of cost:Rate (if applicable): Total cost (£s): Description of cost:Rate (if applicable): Total cost (£s): Description of cost:Rate (if applicable): VAT VAT 4) Development Costs Note: Please indicate if costs are inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the rate at which VAT is charged and whether VAT can be claimed back. A)Development costs TOTAL B)Exceptional (Abnormal) Development costs (Where applicable) TOTAL C)Developer Obligations and Affordable Housing Contribution TOTAL TOTAL Development Costs Page 168
Page 169
39Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Description of item: A) Professional fees B) Agency & Marketing (Private Housing) C) Agency & Marketing (Affordable Housing) D) Agency & Marketing (Commercial Development) E) Legal costs associated with disposals F) Finance- Debit interest G) Finance- Credit interest H) Developer’s return (profit) for Private Housing I) Developer’s return (profit) for Affordable Housing J) Developer’s return (profit) for Commercial Development K) Site Acquisition costs L) Other (please specify) % Rate: % of: Base build cost GDV GDV GDV % of GDV or £s per unit Borrowing Any development surplus GDV or cost GDV or cost GDV or cost Total cost: VAT TOTAL Development fees & charges TOTAL COSTS Residual land value (TOTAL GDV - TOTAL COSTS) 5) Development fees & charges: Note: Please indicate if costs are inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the rate at which VAT is charged and whether VAT can be claimed back. Page 169
Page 170
Guidance Notes and Checklist for Planning Applicants Guidance notes for completing the AVD form and details of any relevant data/ supporting documentation to be provided. 40 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Item A I J Description Planning Application Ref. Number Total Gross Internal Area Policy Compliant Financial Viability Assessment (FVA) Notes Provide planning application details including reference number as listed on the Council website. If a planning application has not been submitted or if there are any documents not available on the website, or if revisions have been made that are not available on the website please provide copies (e.g. plans, design and access statements, pre- application supporting documents etc.). Measurements should be stated in accordance with the RICS Professional Statement 'RICS Property Measurement' (2nd Edition) and, where relevant, the RICS Code of Measuring Practice (6th Edition). Measurement basis should be clearly stated and use a traditional measurement basis (e.g. NIA or GIA). Provide a hardcopy and electronic copy in Microsoft Excel with working formulas. RICS Professional Statement: Financial Viability in Planning: conduct and reporting sets out what should be included in FVAs and how they must be carried out. Appendix C of RICS Guidance Note 94/2012 is an indicative outline of what to include in a viability assessment (please note RICS are currently reviewing the 2012 guidance note and both the above mentioned documents refer to England however they are considered relevant to the process in Scotland). RICS guidance note, Valuation of development property, 1st edition, October 2019 will also be a relevant document. The viability appraisal to include a cash flow as an Excel document showing how values have been assessed. The viability assessment to factor in the Council’s stated policy requirements in respect of Developer Obligations and Affordable Housing Contributions. 1) Initial Details Check Page 170
Page 171
41Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Item Description Notes K A-H A Land Value Description of item being built Include the land sales price expected to be paid. Supply copy of an option or conditional agreement. Supply proof of the land deal e.g. missives and disposition if already purchased. The cost of meeting Developer Obligations and any other policy requirements must be taken into account when purchasing land. Detail the development programme showing the anticipated period involved in development including pre-build, build period and marketing period. Include details for future phases, expected sales and rental growth, expected cost inflation and credit rates. Include name of house types as appearing on planning documents and as advertised. Detail number of bedrooms. Show the split between private housing, affordable housing and any commercial elements. Include estimates of sales values for residential properties, including supporting market evidence to support the estimated sales/lettings values. Detail the anticipated value of the affordable housing with supporting evidence of how these have been valued and the assumptions adopted. Include likely levels of rent and government grant received, details of any ‘Design & Build’ contracts entered into with Moray Council or a RSL (Registered Social Landlord). For the commercial elements of the scheme (if applicable) detail yields, including supporting evidence and any deductions for incentives, rent free periods, voids. Note the basis of measurement for each element (GIA- Gross Internal Area, NIA-Net Internal Area, NSA-Net Sales Area). Check 2) Development Periods (for finance calculations) 3) Gross Development Value (GDV) Page 171
Page 172
42 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Item Description Notes B A Additions to GDV Development costs Detail any existing income or any additional funds that will continue to be received over the development period. Provide a QS cost schedule: full build cost estimate, not a summary showing how the costs have been estimated and including specifications, drawings and quotes where available If a full cost schedule is not available, please provide an explanation (e.g. ‘cost based on previous tender/ completed development’ etc) of the assumed costs for all cost items included under sections 4A-4C (or shown within the appropriate sections of your submitted FVA) and reasons for providing assumed costs. Detail separately the costs for the private housing, the costs for the affordable housing and the costs for commercial (if any). The costs to be per square metre based on GIA. The development costs to include the following: prelims demolition costs site preparation costs externals site works infrastructure including internal access roads, drainage, hard and soft landscaping substructure and superstructure internal finishes any other development costs Each item to be detailed individually. State whether costs are inclusive or exclusive of a contingency and state what the contingency is (% of build cost). Indicate if costs are inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the rate at which VAT is charged and whether VAT can be claimed back. Check 4) Development Costs Page 172
Page 173
43Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Item Description Notes B C A Exceptional (Abnormal) development costs (where applicable) Developer Obligations and Affordable Housing Contribution Professional Fees Detail any exceptional or ‘abnormal’ development costs. Include supporting reports for site abnormals etc. and full cost estimates and build-up of how these costs have been assessed (state professional fees and contingencies separately). The following information will be required: Earthworks- a copy of the cut and fill model with existing and design levels and drawings plus any calculations by the Engineer/QS. Below ground obstructions- a copy of the site investigation report plus any calculations by the Engineer/QS. Retaining walls- drawings and specs indicating founds type, retaining wall details, sections, Rebar schedules and wall layouts with height. Plus any calculations by the Engineer/QS. Gas Protection measures- site investigation report confirming the presence of gas, specification and GIA of GF slabs that are affected. Foundations- design details, specification, lengths and pile cap or ring beam details of the piles required and to which plots. Quotations for any of the works. Indicate if costs are inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the rate at which VAT is charged and whether VAT can be claimed back. Detail any estimated Developer Obligations and Affordable Housing commuted payments (where applicable) as determined by The Moray Council. Detail separately the following professional fees: architects Quantity Surveyor engineers planning consultant project manager any other professional fees. Check 5) Development Fees and Charges Page 173
Page 174
44 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Item Description Notes B-D F-G H-J K L Agency and Marketing Finance Developer’s return Site Acquisition costs Other Provide an explanation of assumed costs included under sections 5A- 5L (e.g. ‘cost based on previous tender/ completed development) and reasons for providing assumed costs. Indicate if fees are inclusive or exclusive of VAT, the rate at which VAT is charged and whether VAT can be claimed back. This would include: show houses sales personnel running costs any other cost associated with agency and marketing It is assumed that projects are fully funded by borrowing. Detail assumed interest rates for credit and debit. Distinguish the level of return expected from the private housing, affordable housing and commercial development (if applicable). Detail whether the profit is a % of GDV or cost. Developer’s return can comprise ‘Profit’ and what is sometimes termed ‘Overheads’. Indicate whether the return includes Profit only or Profit and Overheads; and provide an itemised breakdown. State separately any additional acquisition costs: Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (LBTT) VAT surveyor’s fee legal costs any other site acquisition costs Include any development costs or fees not captured elsewhere (e.g. planning costs such as building warrant, NHBB, etc) Include any other data or supporting documentation you consider relevant to enable an independent review of development viability. Check 6) Other Information The Applicant Viability Data form and Guidance notes have been developed by the District Valuer Service and finalised by Moray Council to ensure a transparent and consistent approach in dealing with viability assessments. Page 174
Page 175
45Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Appendix 6 Where a mitigation changes after a contribution has been agreed or received from a developer, then the Council reserves the right to apply the contribution to the new mitigation. Should the cost of the new mitigation be less than the cost identified for the original mitigation then the proportional difference will be refunded to the developer. Education Contributions are sought towards the zoned primary and secondary schools which serve the development. Contributions will be sought for the proposed mitigation measures unless otherwise advised by Education Resources and Communities Service at the time of application. Buckie High School Buckie High School Contributions towards new £84,534.43 per pupil build secondary school Elgin Academy Seafield Primary School Rezoning** £5,441.05 per pupil* Elgin High School Greenwards Primary School New build primary school £66,086.44 per pupil Linkwood Primary School New build primary school £66,086.44 per pupil Elgin High School Extension at secondary £57,722.77 per pupil school New Elgin Primary School Rezoning £5,441.05 per pupil** Speyside High School Mortlach Primary School Rezoning £5,441.05 per pupil* * The rate provided for reconfiguration is indicative as these may vary depending on the nature of the project proposed. **The rate for rezoning is indicative as this may vary depending on the nature of the project proposed. The cost for rezoning may include costs towards reconfiguration or other infrastructure as part of the mitigation. Page 175
Page 176
Transportation Transportation requirements are set out in Appendix 4. Developer obligations will be sought from developments within rural and urban areas, where no public transport connection is available and will contribute to public transport provided by Moray Council Healthcare Contributions are sought for the closest medical practice the development is zoned to or any such facility that would serve the development.. While contributions may be identified for an extension to a medical facility or a new medical facility, reconfiguration works may be carried out in the interim to alleviate capacity constraints. Buckie Seafield and Cullen Contribution towards £1,052.06 per SRUE Medical Practice reconfiguration at the medical centre Elgin Maryhill Medical Practice Contributions towards an £1,788.27 per SRUE extension at the medical centre Linkwood Medical Practice Contribution towards a £1,788.27 per SRUE new build health centre Keith Keith Medical Group Contributions towards £1,788.27 per SRUE a new build health centre Forres Forres Health Centre Contribution towards an £1,788.27 per SRUE extension at the medical centre Lossiemouth Moray Coast Contribution towards an £1,788.27 per SRUE Medical Practice extension at the medical centre 46 Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Page 176
Page 177
47Developer Obligations Planning Guidance Milnes Fochabers Medical Practice Contributions towards a £1,788.27 per SRUE new build health centre Speyside Rinnes Medical Practice Contribution towards an £1,788.27 per SRUE extension at the medical centre Aberlour Health Centre Contribution towards £1,052.06 per SRUE reconfiguration at the medical centre Sports and Recreation Contributions are sought from all development which is zoned to Forres Academy. Forres Forres Academy Contribution towards £259.67 per SRUE 3G Pitch in Forres Page 177
Page 178
Page 178
Page 179
From mountain to sea REVIEW OF MORAY COUNCIL SCHOOL ROLL FORECAST METHODOLOGY An independent review into Moray Council’s School Roll Forecast methodology, school capacities and developer obligations assumptions, carried out by officers from Aberdeenshire Council’s Learning Estates Team Author: Rachael Goldring Learning Estates Team Leader APPENDIX 3 Page 179
Page 180
1 | P a g e Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Accuracy and comparison .................................................................................................................... 3 3. Review of Other Local Authority Methodology ................................................................................... 5 4. Comparison with Aberdeenshire Methodology ................................................................................... 6 Accuracy Comparison ............................................................................................................................ 6 Control Sheet ........................................................................................................................................ 7 NHS Data ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Staying on Ratios ................................................................................................................................... 8 Housing Curtailment Ratio .................................................................................................................... 9 Pupil Yield and Pupil Product Ratio ..................................................................................................... 10 Proportional Adjustment Factor ......................................................................................................... 11 Denominational Schools ..................................................................................................................... 12 Additional Support Needs Enrolment ................................................................................................. 12 5. Developer Obligations......................................................................................................................... 13 6. Dargavel Primary School ..................................................................................................................... 15 7. DPEA Planning Appeals ....................................................................................................................... 16 8. Capacity Calculations .......................................................................................................................... 17 9. Elgin High School ................................................................................................................................. 18 10. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Page 180
Page 181
2 | P a g e 1. Introduction 1.1 The purpose of this report is to determine if the current methodologies and assumptions that are used to inform the future requirements of the learning estate and associated developer obligations are credible and robust, and if not, identify weaknesses and recommend revised methodologies and assumptions to address these. 1.2 Moray is located in the North East of Scotland bordering the Moray Firth coast to the north, Highland Council to the west and Aberdeenshire to the east and south. Moray has a population of around 95,000 people according to 2024 Mid-Year Population Estimates, the majority of whom are dispersed amongst the main towns of Elgin, Buckie, Lossiemouth, Keith, Forres, Fochabers and Dufftown. In addition to these well connected towns, there are a wealth of villages of all sizes and remote settlements in the Cairngorms. 1.3 Moray Council delivers primary and secondary education across 8 secondary schools and 45 primary schools. The primary schools form eight Associated School Groups (ASG) which then automatically feed into the secondary schools. Each of the main towns has a secondary school, with the exception of Elgin which has two secondaries. This is unusual in Scotland for a town the size of Elgin unless the other secondary school(s) is denominational. The National Records of Scotland 2023 Population Estimates show the population of Elgin as just over 25,000 people, Dumbarton is the only smaller town to have two secondary schools, but one is denominational. Kirkintilloch is the next largest town with more than one secondary, and again one of these is denominational. Table 1 below shows the towns and settlement groups with similar populations and the number of secondary schools operating. Table 1: Comparison of number of secondary schools to population Town 2023 Population Number of Secondary Schools Any denominational Schools Saltcoats 31,800 2 Yes Methil, Leven and Buckhaven 30,730 1 No Kirkintilloch 29,960 3 Yes Bathgate 29,330 1 No Bonnybridge 25,710 1 No Elgin 25,040 2 No Vale of Leven 24,130 1 No Arbroath 23,500 1 No Dumbarton 21,030 2 Yes 1.4 Primary Schools in Moray vary greatly in size, ranging from Glenlivet Primary with a capacity of 47 and a roll of 15 pupils, to Bishopmill Primary with a capacity of 425 and a roll of 390 pupils during the 2024/25 session. Secondary schools are similarly varied, the smallest being Keith Grammar School with a capacity of 553 and a roll of 372 pupils during 2024/25 and the largest being Elgin Academy with a capacity of 1224 and a roll of 1074 pupils for the same period. Page 181
Page 182
3 | P a g e 2. Accuracy and comparison 2.1. In this report when comparing the accuracy of forecasts, the approach has been to compare the forecast with the actual roll at one year intervals. For example, the accuracy for 2024 focuses on the forecasts made in 2023 for the following session versus the actual roll in 2024. 2.2. The decision to focus on year by year accuracy is to test the methodology. Whilst it would be possible to compare whether the predictions made five years prior were accurate, the reality is that so many of the factors involved in forecasting are subject to outside influence and variation. The factors being compared have not remained constant. The comparison would only be effective if exactly the same number of houses as planned had been built each year, and if all people buying those houses had the average number of children, and if all of those families chose to enrol at their zoned school. 2.3. A comparison between the forecast roll and the actual roll for the last three years was undertaken. Whilst the data was available for a greater number of years, it is widely accepted across Scotland that the impact of COVID in 2020 and 2021 impacted school roll forecasts. Housing development was interrupted, families changed decisions about living arrangements and staying on rates in secondary schools from S4 upwards were affected by the alternative assessment arrangements following lockdown. On this basis it was deemed appropriate to focus on more recent data. 2.4. Table 2 below shows the forecast and actual roll for the last three years at ASG level and for each secondary school, with totals for all primaries and all secondaries. Accuracy levels are generally good, and when considering the overall primary and secondary pupil numbers the accuracy of the forecasts is improving. Table 2: Three Year Accuracy Comparison (Forecast vs Actual) 2022 2023 2024 Total Forecast Total Actual Pupils % Accuracy Total Forecast Total Actual Pupils % Accuracy Total Forecast Total Actual Pupils % Accuracy Buckie ASG 1081 1060 0.981 1056 1023 0.969 1009 1005 0.996 Elgin Academy ASG 1193 1113 0.933 1198 1194 0.997 1188 1216 1.024 Elgin High ASG 1090 1072 0.983 1091 1043 0.956 1074 1019 0.949 Forres ASG 1174 1112 0.947 1125 1103 0.980 1121 1077 0.961 Keith ASG 509 508 0.998 515 507 0.984 502 505 1.006 Lossiemouth ASG 874 869 0.994 848 835 0.985 838 846 1.010 Milnes ASG 530 537 1.013 528 531 1.006 524 511 0.975 Speyside ASG 460 456 0.991 442 445 1.007 448 443 0.989 Buckie High School 815 837 1.027 828 826 0.998 839 811 0.967 Elgin Academy 1070 1028 0.961 1074 1069 0.995 1076 1074 0.998 Elgin High School 837 831 0.993 853 842 0.987 846 855 1.011 Forres Academy 860 851 0.990 865 821 0.949 864 873 1.010 Page 182
Page 183
4 | P a g e Keith Grammar School 417 377 0.904 396 370 0.934 382 372 0.974 Lossiemouth High School 606 617 1.018 665 658 0.989 679 656 0.966 Milnes High School 436 445 1.021 468 477 1.019 491 469 0.955 Speyside High School 421 402 0.955 411 395 0.961 385 378 0.982 All Moray Primaries 6911 6727 0.973 6803 6681 0.982 6704 6622 0.988 All Moray Secondaries 5462 5388 0.986 5560 5458 0.982 5562 5488 0.987 2.5. Officers discussed the challenges that certain variables bring to the forecasting process that impact particular schools. Kinloss (Forres ASG) and Lossiemouth are both home to military bases which results in significant transience in the pupil population. Forces families are stationed at the bases for varying timescales and can be frequently relocated. These families would not be captured in the NHS data used for determining children under school age and neither the Army nor the Air Force could be expected to provide supporting data regarding postings to Moray Council for the purposes of roll projections. Therefore, officers accept that there will be continued fluctuation in the rolls at the catchment schools that cannot be predicted with any great accuracy. 2.6. The other challenge that officers discussed is around forecasting the rolls at the three denominational schools. St Peter’s Roman Catholic School in Buckie, St Sylvester’s Roman Catholic School in Elgin and St Thomas’ Roman Catholic School in Keith provide a denominational education to primary aged children across Moray. Enrolment is via application, and forecasting is based upon trends from previous years and internal knowledge. An adjustment is made to the NHS data for other schools within each ASG to create a P1 intake each year. 2.7. Cognisance must be given that the percentage accuracy is impacted by the sample size. In a small school, the difference of one pupil variance will have a larger impact on the accuracy percentage than it would on a large secondary school. This impact is different again when considering the forecasts for an ASG as a whole, or the total primary population. 2.8. Forecasting the number of primary pupils to within 125 pupils over the last two years across 45 schools is acceptable. In two out of the last three years, secondary school population has been forecast to within 75 pupils, with 2023 having a variance of 102 pupils. This indicates that at a high level, the forecasting methodology used by Moray Council is robust. 2.9. Accuracy levels for enrolments at Forres High School, Speyside High School and Keith Grammar School may also be impacted by pupils attending primary schools in neighbouring authorities who then return to their catchment school for secondary education, or vice versa. Recommendation 1. Greater collaboration with officers in Aberdeenshire and Highland Councils to identify numbers of Moray based pupils attending schools in the neighbouring authorities. Page 183
Page 184
5 | P a g e 3. Review of Other Local Authority Methodology 3.1 The forecast methodology used by Moray Council is derived from the same original methodology used by Grampian Regional Council. This original methodology and spreadsheet format is also used by Aberdeenshire Council and Aberdeen City Council, although each authority has evolved their process independently over the last two decades. During the last ten years Argyll & Bute Council, Orkney Island Council and North Ayrshire Council have also been trained in the Aberdeenshire Council methodology as they sought to review their individual approaches. 3.2 Across Scotland the methodology for preparing School Roll Forecasts is broadly similar, in that the current school roll is used as a baseline for projections and then data regarding housing, birth rates and placing requests is applied to project changes in pupil numbers. Variations in methodology are seen in authorities with a significant split between denominational and non-denominational schools; Gaelic Medium Education; high volumes of placing requests; and those with densely urban catchment areas. 3.3 A source of variation in many of the forecasts is the approach to applying pupil yield from housing. Some local authorities apply council-wide ratios to all primaries and secondary schools, whilst others have various ratios that are linked to a specific cluster of schools. Fife Council includes the pupil yield ratio at the point of development and also applies a ratio four years later to the P1 cohort to allow for the overall increase to the housing supply and children that are born in the new houses. A number of authorities recognise a need to either recalculate their ratios or review their approach to applying them but do not have the resources to prioritise that exercise. 3.4 There is also variation in the distribution of the pupil yield across each cohort of pupils. In some authorities the pupil yield is evenly split across all seven primary cohorts or all six secondary cohorts. Other authorities only apply housing yield to S1 to S4 cohorts. In some areas the proportion per cohort is fixed across all schools and weighted towards the lower age groups in primaries; in other areas the proportion per cohort is dependent on the school cluster so that neighbouring school groups have different ratios. 3.5 Another challenge faced by local authorities is the access to NHS data. Each NHS board provides data to their Councils in different ways, depending upon the data sharing arrangements in place. For Moray, Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire Council the data provided by NHS Grampian changed in 2018. Prior to this point, data regarding children living in school catchments below school age was provided on a postcode basis with an extract from the NHS CHI database which could be analysed at granular level. Following a ruling by the Information Commissioner on the use of CHI data, the format changed with NHS data analysts providing a summary of the number of children living in each catchment area by age. For Moray Council and Aberdeenshire Council this approach has proved challenging when preparing forecasts for sparsely populated rural catchments, as the numbers are aggregated across a range of ages when lower than five. There are also many postcodes within both authorities that lie across two school catchment areas. 3.6 The range of publication also varies – Highland Council for example publish forecasts up to 15 years, West Lothian Council publish up to 10 years, whilst Aberdeenshire Council only publish data up to 5 years. Page 184
Page 185
6 | P a g e 3.7 Across Scotland School Roll Forecasters from all 32 Local Authorities collaborate and share knowledge regarding their processes through an online forum. Moray Council officers have been members of this forum since its inception and have participated in many of the discussions and online conferences. 4. Comparison with Aberdeenshire Methodology 4.1 The school roll forecast methodology for Moray Council and Aberdeenshire Council are very similar. As mentioned above, both use a spreadsheet that originated when both organisations were part of Grampian Regional Council. The vast majority of the calculations within the spreadsheets remain the same, although each authority has made their own improvements over the years. Differences in approach can be seen in the following eight areas: Control Sheet NHS data distribution Staying on Rates Housing curtailment ratio Pupil yield distribution and Pupil Product Ratio Proportional adjustment factor Denominational Schools Additional Support Needs Enrolment 4.2 Both organisations have a spreadsheet for each Associated School Group (ASG), these being the cluster of schools that feed into each secondary school. This approach allows for a simple transfer of P7 pupils from the primary school forecasts into the S1 cohorts of the corresponding secondary schools each year. Accuracy Comparison 4.3 The forecasts for the last three years from Moray Council and Aberdeenshire Council have been compared. Table 3 details the forecast total number of primary and secondary pupils for each year compared to the actual number of pupils. Table 3: Comparison of Accuracy in Moray & Aberdeenshire School Roll Forecasts 2022 2023 2024 Total Forecast Actual Pupils % Accuracy Total Forecast Actual Pupils % Accuracy Total Forecast Actual Pupils % Accuracy All Moray Primaries 6911 6727 0.973 6803 6681 0.982 6704 6622 0.988 All Moray Secondaries 5462 5388 0.986 5560 5458 0.982 5562 5488 0.987 Aberdeenshire Primaries 20991 20865 0.994 20890 20525 0.983 20092 20125 1.002 Aberdeenshire Secondaries 15654 15869 1.014 15820 15852 1.002 16462 15892 0.965 Page 185
Page 186
7 | P a g e 4.4 Due to the significant difference in the number of pupils in each authority, it is difficult to directly compare them in terms of accuracy. Aberdeenshire has around three times the number of pupils as Moray; Aberdeenshire has over 3000 more secondary pupils than Moray has primary and secondary pupils combined. The geography of the two council areas also has an impact on forecasting. The proximity of Aberdeenshire schools to the Aberdeen City border and the relatively good transport connections, result in a large volume of placing requests. The differences notwithstanding, both authorities have relatively accurate forecasts. Control Sheet 4.5 Moray Council uses a control sheet for each ASG which contains staying on rates, pupil yield ratios, birth rate factors and totals for each cohort of pupils across all schools. Aberdeenshire Council has a similar sheet but only uses it for totals of each cohort. Having a central point for the various ratios is helpful as it reduces the risk of errors that could occur from updating the information on each school sheet. This is a feature of the forecasts that Aberdeenshire Council may benefit from considering in their approach. NHS Data 4.6 Both Moray Council and Aberdeenshire Council receive data regarding pre-school aged children in the same format from NHS Grampian. Each authority provides NHS Grampian with a list of postcodes for each catchment area and in return receives the total number of children living within that catchment area with dates of birth across five specific date ranges. This approach works well with larger schools that have a consistent turnover of new families but is more challenging for small rural schools. To prevent data protection breaches, where there are fewer than five children of a particular age bracket living within catchment, NHS Grampian aggregate the data across two or more age brackets until a total of five children appears. 4.7 The two anonymised extracts in Table 4 below show the data that is received for a large school and a small rural school. Table 4: NHS Data Example 4.8 Moray Council apply the aggregated data to their forecasts in a different way to Aberdeenshire Council. 4.9 In the example above Moray Council would divide the aggregated number by the number of years that it covers, so would input 3 x 0-1 year olds, 3 x 1-2 year olds and 3 x 2-3 year olds, 4 x 3-4 year olds and 4 x 4-5 year olds. Aberdeenshire Council assess the possible combinations of numbers and considering the return from previous years try to select the most likely distribution. The Aberdeenshire approach is more time consuming than the Moray approach School Age Group Total Large School 0 to 1 25 1 to 2 32 2 to 3 25 3 to 4 29 4 to 5 30 Small Rural School 0 to 3 9 3 to 5 8 Page 186
Page 187
8 | P a g e and Moray would need to consider whether the impact on workload would be appropriate to achieve what may yield limited improvement in terms of accuracy. Staying on Ratios 4.10 The current methodology for predicting the staying on rate of pupils in S5 and S6 is to apply a reduction to the cohort based upon a three year mean average. This ratio is calculated using the actual number of pupils in the cohort when they were in S3 and the subsequent reduction once they reach S5 and S6. Each secondary school has two ratios one for S5 and one for S6, and these are recalculated annually. This method is also used by Fife Council. 4.11 One of the potential disadvantages of the current methodology is that because the formula takes a cohort from two and three years prior, the changes that may have occurred in the last year from housing, placing requests or simply migration are not incorporated in the calculation. At present the impact of housing or placing requests are not factored into S5 and S6 predictions. 4.12 Assessing the accuracy of the most recent five years, there were only 6 correct projections of the actual number of pupils in the cohort out of a possible 80 instances. Furthermore, there were only 29 of the 80 predictions that were accurate to within 3 pupils. This is a 36% accuracy level to within 3 pupils. Table 5 compares the forecast and actual number of pupils in S5 and S6 for the last five years and provides the number of pupils variance in each instance. Table 5: Accuracy of S5 and S6 forecasts in Moray Secondary Schools 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 SRF Roll Range SRF Roll Range SRF Roll Range SRF Roll Range SRF Roll Range Buckie High S5 127 130 3 102 121 19 117 128 11 141 138 -3 164 138 -26 Buckie High S6 59 61 2 29 86 57 66 87 21 72 88 16 98 96 -2 Elgin Academy S5 150 149 -1 169 150 -19 151 146 -5 171 165 -6 150 150 0 Elgin Academy S6 117 121 4 108 105 -3 117 97 -20 103 112 9 121 115 -6 Elgin High S5 97 98 1 106 108 2 98 107 9 140 149 9 133 139 6 Elgin High S6 45 54 9 57 60 3 66 64 -2 62 49 -13 78 88 10 Forres High S5 116 101 -15 128 136 8 112 111 -1 127 130 3 137 130 -7 Forres High S6 69 77 8 69 69 0 79 80 1 71 61 -10 75 61 -14 Keith Grammar S5 53 66 13 61 55 -6 58 47 -11 71 62 -9 53 53 0 Keith Grammar S6 32 42 10 33 39 6 34 22 -12 30 23 -7 37 36 -1 Lossiemouth High S5 73 78 5 57 68 11 85 79 -6 87 92 5 95 80 -15 Lossiemouth High S6 43 36 -7 43 44 1 32 43 11 47 46 -1 51 53 2 Milnes High S5 63 75 12 54 54 0 70 67 -3 76 75 -1 68 67 -1 Milnes High S6 37 37 0 56 56 0 40 41 1 49 44 -5 51 28 -23 Speyside High S5 55 67 12 65 66 1 61 53 -8 56 67 11 62 60 -2 Speyside High S6 28 32 4 35 45 10 45 40 -5 40 22 -18 30 43 13 Page 187
Page 188
9 | P a g e 4.13 A number of other local authorities use a different calculation for determining staying on ratios (SOR). More commonly the average change between S4 and S5 is used for the S5 ratio, and the average change between the S5 and S6 cohort is used for the S6 ratio. An assessment was undertaken into whether calculating the SOR using this approach would have greater accuracy than the current methodology deployed by Moray Council. 4.14 Across the 80 instances, increased accuracy was seen for 36 predictions, and in 15 there was negligible difference. In these 15, whilst the formula returned a different result at decimal level, both methods returned the same rounded number. There were also 29 instances where the accuracy decreased. By changing the approach in 63% of cases over the last five years, the accuracy either improved or remained the same. 4.15 It was noted that in some instances the SOR calculation was adjusted to either an extended or reduced period of time to find an average. This appears to be in order to mitigate against some particularly high or low outliers that would affect the mean. This adjustment was then replicated using the alternative methodology, but whilst the new results were then closer to those in the Moray forecasts, the new results did not have a consistency in terms of accuracy. 4.16 In many instances both the original forecast and the amended methodology were significantly different from the reality. The accuracy of forecasting staying on rates is always variable. This element more than any other in the school roll forecasting process is the most influenced by intangible unrelated factors. Once pupils reach school leaving age then whether they remain enrolled at school will depend on a range of personal circumstances and socio-economic factors including but not limited to whether they intend to remain in higher or further education or seek employment; availability of subjects; exam results and the corresponding decisions of friends. 4.17 On that basis most authorities treat this element of the forecasts as an indicator of what the school roll is likely to decrease to rather than a finite projection. It is a high level indicator rather than a de-facto prediction. Recommendation 2. Consider changing the SOR calculation to use the S4 and S5 cohorts for S5 and S6 respectively 3. Consider further adapting the forecasts to include other influencing factors such as housing. Housing Curtailment Ratio 4.18 Moray Council applies a factor to some ASGs with volume housebuilding to reduce the number of units in future years. The purpose of this is to balance the strategic optimism of construction industry reporting with a more realistic delivery schedule. Aberdeenshire Council does not apply any reduction to the build out rates provided in the housing land audit when preparing forecasts, however it is recognised that officers within planning and delivery teams have adjusted the figures provided by developers when they are considered to be unrealistic. Page 188
Page 189
10 | P a g e 4.19 The ratio is applied to the two Elgin ASGs, Buckie ASG and Forres ASG. It is not applied to Keith, Speyside, Lossiemouth or Milnes ASG. Further the ratio is only applied to sites where more than 10 units per year are projected. This is important as within those ASGs there are some small schools for which a reduction ratio could impact the viability of those schools in the forecasts. 4.20 The rate varies depending how far into the future the predicted build out rate is for. No ratio is applied to the current year, a 10% reduction is applied for the next two years, rising to 25% in years three and four, and subsequently applied at a rate of 30% for any build out rates that are five years or more hence. 4.21 The ratio is important in areas where the utilisation of schools is high and there is a risk of roll exceeding capacity. Using what may be overly optimistic build out rates could either result in developers being charged developer obligations that are not required and also may result in unnecessary capital expenditure to provide additional capacity. This approach is therefore measured and appropriate for areas historically house building as not been as prevalent as initially intended. 4.22 However, at the other end of the spectrum where small schools are at risk of closure/mothballing due to population decline, the removal or constraint of planned housing could give a false impression of poor viability. Therefore, it is important that the ratio is not applied to smaller developments or those with lower build out rates. 4.23 Given the requirement in the Act to consider alternatives to closure and the impact on the community, broadening the application of this ratio could have adverse impacts on any future consultation and give rise to opportunity for challenge from communities. Recommendation 4. Moray Council should explicitly state within the School Roll Forecast methodology and Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance that this is only applied where more than 10 units per year are planned, to ensure viability of rural communities. Pupil Yield and Pupil Product Ratio 4.24 In Moray, the distribution of pupils from new housing into each cohort varies by ASG. It is calculated annually based upon the distribution of pupil population in each ASG. On this basis if an ASG has a larger number of pupils in P5, then more pupils from housing will also be allocated to P5. The total number of pupils expected from the housing built in catchment that year is multiplied by the Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) and then multiplied again by the cohort distribution ratio. 4.25 The Aberdeenshire approach is to have a static distribution that is applied to all primary schools across the authority. This is weighted more towards the lower stages of the school, as whilst the new build houses may be purchased by families with children of all ages, those with older primary aged children tend to keep them at their current schools than move them for one or two years. Page 189
Page 190
11 | P a g e 4.26 In secondary school forecasts Aberdeenshire again has a static distribution of 0.25 for each year from S1 to S4. Moray calculates the distribution annually relative to the cohort size for S1 to S4. 4.27 Table 6 provides examples of the Moray distribution and the Aberdeenshire distribution. Table 6: Cohort Distribution Ratio in Primary School Forecasts Cohort Ratio Applied in Buckie ASG 2024 Ratio Applied in Elgin Academy ASG 2024 Ratio Applied in all Aberdeenshire Primary Schools P1 0.14 0.12 0.17 P2 0.11 0.13 0.16 P3 0.14 0.14 0.16 P4 0.14 0.14 0.14 P5 0.16 0.14 0.13 P6 0.16 0.16 0.12 P7 0.15 0.16 0.12 4.28 Whilst there is variation in the ratio applied by the two authorities, and indeed across ASGs in Moray, the direct impact of this on the forecast is limited. For a development of 30 houses, an additional 9 primary aged pupils would be expected. In the Buckie example above that would equate to 0.99 pupils in P2 and 1.44 pupils in P6. However, due to rounding, this would be one pupil in both cohorts. 4.29 In terms of the Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) that is applied to housing developments, Moray Council uses a static ratio of 0.3 for all primary schools and 0.15 for all secondary schools. Aberdeenshire Council has a range of ratios that are applied to individual schools depending on their location and rurality. Aberdeenshire Council recently audited the Pupil Product Ratio and made adjustments accordingly which feature in the latest school roll forecasts. 4.30 This audit involved identifying the postcodes which had new housing over the last five years, the number of houses built per year, and an analysis of how many additional children joined each cohort during the course of that session and in the subsequent session. 4.31 Whilst officers in Moray have not carried out a review of the PPR to the same extent as Aberdeenshire, this has been reviewed in recent years and officers are confident that their ratio is appropriate. Recommendation 5. Moray Council may wish to carry out a more detailed review of PPR when resources allow. Proportional Adjustment Factor 4.32 The proportional adjustment factor is a calculation that Aberdeenshire Council applies to primary and secondary school forecasts. This is designed to align the forecasts with the national population projections and to account for pupils who do not attend the mainstream schools within the authority for a variety of reasons. This could be that they attend a private or independent school, attend a special needs provision, attend a school in a neighbouring authority or are homeschooled. The calculation also factors in pupils from other authorities attending Aberdeenshire primary and secondary schools. Page 190
Page 191
12 | P a g e 4.33 In recent years in Aberdeenshire the national population estimates have been significantly different from the actual number of pupils enrolled in the previous year and in the unadjusted forecasts. This is due to the last published dataset being pre-Brexit, pre-Covid and also dating before the economic downturn in the oil industry and the fishing industry. Therefore, officers have calculated the accuracy of the previous year’s forecast and have applied that as an Accuracy Adjustment Factor until more up to date national data is available. 4.34 Moray Council has the proportional adjustment factor as an element of the formula for each year group; however, the factor is always set at a value of 1 so does not impact on the forecast in any way. Recommendation 6. As Moray Council is effectively not using this element of the forecasts they may wish to remove it from the formula. Alternatively, they may wish to consider using an Accuracy Adjustment Factor to moderate the forecasts. Denominational Schools 4.35 Aberdeenshire Council does not have any denominational schools within its boundaries, therefore, there is no provision within the Aberdeenshire methodology for calculating this factor of school roll forecasts. The methodology for Moray involves applying trends and averages to the NHS data in order to determine what the likely P1 intake will be each year. This is then deducted from the NHS data for other neighbouring schools accordingly. Whilst officers have advised that this is one of the most challenging aspects of school roll projections, the methodology is appropriate. The accuracy levels are good with P1 cohorts generally being within 3 or 4 pupils of forecast. Additional Support Needs Enrolment 4.36 Within Moray each ASG has a base school that is designated for pupils with additional support needs. Parents submit a placing request to attend and within the placing request policy, pupils with ASN have priority 1 so the vast majority will be accepted. In Aberdeenshire all schools are expected to provide the same level of support in P1 and P2 so pupils would attend their mainstream zoned school. From P3 onwards those identified as requiring an Enhanced Provision place would be referred to the Local ASN forum who determine the applications. The small number who require a place at a Complex Needs Provision from P1 would be identified through a multi-agency approach and Child Planning Meeting. These pupils are accounted for through the proportional adjustment factor in Aberdeenshire forecasts. Page 191
Page 192
13 | P a g e 5. Developer Obligations 5.1 Moray Council adopted the latest Local Development Plan in July 2020, and this will remain in place until the Council adopts the next Local Development Plan (LDP) in 2027. The Plan is supported by a suite of policies and documents, one of which is the Supplementary Guidance for Developer Obligations. The 2020 iteration of this document is the current applicable guidance which sets out, amongst other things, when contributions will be required for Education provision and the rates that will apply. Other contributions are collected for transport, healthcare, open space, sports and recreational facilities and for access improvements. 5.2 Scottish Government Circular 3/2012: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements sets out five tests which need to be applied when seeking developer obligations through a Section 75 agreement. These are: Necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms Serve a planning purpose and, where it is possible to identify infrastructure provision requirements in advance, should relate to development plans Relate to the proposed development either as a direct consequence of the development or arising from the cumulative impact of development in the area Fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development; and, Be reasonable in all other respects. 5.3 As part of the preparation of the next LDP, Moray Council have prepared and consulted on a Draft Supplementary Guidance for Developer Obligations in 2024. Moray Council intend to adopt this guidance in December 2025, this guidance will be expected to replace the current 2020 guidance when the Plan is adopted in 2027. 5.4 In the current supplementary guidance developer contributions are triggered for Education when the anticipated completion of the development and all other approved sites within the catchment area result in the primary school operating above 80% of its planning capacity, or the secondary school operating above 90% of its planning capacity. 5.5 The draft supplementary guidance amends this threshold to the school operating at or above 90% of its planning capacity for both primary and secondary schools. The change to the developer contribution threshold for school occupancy seems sensible and appropriate. At 80% occupancy in a large school such as Seafield Primary School with a planning capacity of 474 pupils, there would still be around 95 spaces available. As this is applied in the context of utilisation on completion of the development, this element of the 2020 Supplementary Guidance may result in the authority securing fewer contributions as it would be harder to meet all five of the tests set out Scottish Government Circular 3/2012. At 90% occupancy the necessary mitigations can be put in place to counteract the impact of development. If Moray Council chose to wait until 100% capacity before triggering contributions, then the school has already reached capacity and pupils from the development cannot be accommodated. 5.6 The draft guidance introduces a more nuanced approach to calculating the contributions. Going forward calculations will be based on the average number of pupils that the school is over capacity for the next five years, this is a change to the blanket approach that was previously used. Furthermore, the new guidance explicitly confirms the existing practice that Page 192
Page 193
14 | P a g e one bedroom units will be exempt from Education contributions, this had previously been mentioned in the appendices as an example assessment report. 5.7 Both versions of the guidance use a Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) of 0.3 for primary schools and 0.15 for secondary schools. As discussed in Section 4.31, Moray Council are satisfied that this is an appropriate ratio that has been appraised by officers. 5.8 The two versions of the document also include the following statement: For primary schools, contributions will be used to create capacity for the relevant catchment area. As set out in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 the Scottish Government require Local Authorities to allow out of zone placements and as such, capacity may be created at an alternative local school to reduce demand in the relevant catchment. 5.9 This statement is useful as it allows the Authority some flexibility in managing the increase in pupils generated from the development. This is particularly relevant in Elgin where there are nine primary schools across two secondary school ASGs. Not all of these schools will be capable of meaningful extension, and this clause gives Moray Council the ability to propose alternatives to what may otherwise result in a new primary school being required. 5.10 Aberdeenshire Council’s Supplementary Guidance uses a 100% occupancy threshold for both primary and secondary schools. Whilst this leaves no doubt that the cumulative impact of a given development will result in a school exceeding capacity, the timescales involved in delivering capital projects can result in schools reaching capacity but the necessary solution remaining in the future. Further by using 100% occupancy, a development could in theory bring a school up to 99.3% occupancy with space for a very small number of additional pupils, but the developer would not be required to fund any mitigations. 5.11 Across Scotland the threshold for requiring developer obligations varies. Whilst some other authorities also use the 80% initiation point as per Moray’s current guidance, the majority of authorities across Scotland are using a threshold of between 90% and 100%. Therefore, the proposed changes by Moray Council will bring them in line with the majority of other authorities in Scotland. 5.12 As also discussed above in Section 4.29, Aberdeenshire applies the relevant PPR for that school, unlike Moray Council who have a set ratio for all schools. Aberdeenshire Council recently audited the Pupil Product Ratio and made adjustments accordingly which feature in the latest school roll forecasts. Recommendation 7. For large scale development introduction of review clauses that at set periods to allow renegotiation of terms. This may be in the favour of either the Council or the Developer but is a way to mitigate against changing realities. 8. Moray Council proceed with the adoption of a higher threshold of 90% for education contributions as per the Draft 2024 Supplementary Guidance. Page 193
Page 194
15 | P a g e 6. Dargavel Primary School 6.1 In 2022 Dargavel Primary School opened in Bishopton, Renfrewshire as a direct result of new housing development and the relevant Section 75 agreement. The school was originally planned with a capacity of 340 pupils against a development of 2500 houses and following an increase of the development to over 4000 units, the capacity of the planned school increased to 430 pupils. Enrolments at the new school were significantly higher than expected and following further revisions to the school roll forecasts it was estimated that a capacity of 1100 pupils may be required. 6.2 The decision of Renfrewshire Council to build the school with a capacity of 430 pupils has resulted in investigations and reports into how this could happen. 6.3 The lessons to be learned from the subsequent Bowles Report and Audit Scotland reports are not to build bigger than needed or to over-estimate demand, but instead to monitor the data and adjust plans accordingly. The biggest failing with regards to Dargavel was that the Council waited too long to consider that their plans for the new school might be insufficient, despite the empirical evidence pointing to that fact. There was a disconnect between those providing the data about school rolls and projections, and those involved in planning the school. Criticism was also levelled at the lack of foresight with regard to Developer Obligations and the Section 75 agreements. The wording of the agreement curtailed any funding for secondary school capacity increase at 200 pupils. 6.4 Moray Council are already heeding the lessons learned by reviewing the forecasts and reassessing whether the planned projects are appropriate. 6.5 In terms of developer obligations, the recommendation laid out above with regards to review clauses should mitigate the inability to predict more than a decade into the future with any great accuracy. Page 194
Page 195
16 | P a g e 7. DPEA Planning Appeals 7.1 There have been 39 cases referred to the Scottish Government’s Planning and Environmental Appeals Division between January 2022 and December 2024 specifically relating to developer obligations. Of these, 11 cases relate specifically to challenges by developers regarding education contributions. Whilst the details of the individual cases vary, the success of the Council in defending them is clearly linked to the robustness of their roll projections, learning estate strategy and co-ordinated approach to planning and infrastructure. In cases where limited review of forecasts or pupil yield have taken place, or where the forecast has proved largely inaccurate; these have resulted in developers winning the appeal. Conversely where the strategies and data align and are supported by regular reviews that demonstrate the need for mitigations, the councils have been successful in getting the appeals dismissed. 7.2 The reporter in case POA 230-2017 (City of Edinburgh) makes “the following general observations on the appropriate approach to formulating policy for requiring contributions and making an assessment of what infrastructure is needed and how the costs of it can be fairly distributed…” “The calculations are inevitably made at the outset and before the houses on the …site are built and occupied ... They are forward looking and must be based (and can only be based) on future facing methodologies, assessments and assumptions…But where the payments are intended to be used and invested for future education services, certainty of future planning of services for the providers of such services is important;” “The inevitably wide range of future uncertainties in the provision of education services makes any kind of detailed precision of contributions (and contribution calculation) difficult if not impossible to achieve… The detail of infrastructure solutions to such uncertainties inescapably is likely to evolve over time…” “The complications in relation to anticipating future demand for schools and school places abound. These include factors such as the reputation of individual schools; how modern and up to date the buildings and facilities at schools are; the ability to apply to schools… on a placing request; the general complicating factor of the impacts from and of the non-State sector; specifically current uncertainties as to the impacts on that sector of changes to VAT on school fees…; variable factors over time such as birth rate changes or changing migration rates;… and decisions made on education grounds about maximum class size utilisation…” “These factors will often have knock-on effects. More widely… modelling human behaviour is complex (which is another way of describing unknown unknowns). Unpredicted events can intervene in the best planning models… School roll projections are informed by annual updating. It follows from that, when assessed over an extensive time frame, that it is not an essential prerequisite for necessary mitigations (if identified as necessary) to have been fully identified and planned for, as at the date that the obligation is imposed... Equally the inability in advance to identify specifically the year in which mitigations are to be needed is not fatal to the approach of the Council.” 7.3 Moray Council’s approach to the Learning Estate comprising a breadth of data and analysis, along with the revised threshold for collecting developer obligations, should set the authority in good stead for any future appeals. Page 195
Page 196
17 | P a g e 8. Capacity Calculations 8.1 Primary School capacities are calculated following the 2014 guidance set out by Scottish Government. The authority has a clear methodology that is applied to each school primary school and this is reassessed annually. A document is prepared for each primary school which details the size of spaces available for teaching and general purpose classes, the capacity of each room is determined by dividing the size by 1.7sqm space allocation standard. The capacity of each room is totalled, giving the planning capacity for the school. Each head teacher completes the document with the planned class configurations, and this utilisation is converted into the working capacity. There is strong governance in place through annual committee reports which confirm the working capacity for the year ahead. The planning capacity is used for longer term strategic planning and decision making, as per the national guidance, whilst the working capacity considers the year on year functional capacity of the school given the size of the individual year groups and the ability to configure those into classes whilst complying with the class size maxima. 8.2 Secondary School capacity does not have a nationally agreed methodology; however, Moray Council officers have been involved in a working group which has been set up by ADES to develop this methodology. 8.3 Whilst primary school capacity methodology is relatively straightforward as each classroom tends to be allocated to one group of pupils who are based in that room for the academic year; secondary capacity is determined by the number of periods a room needs to be allocated for a particular subject across the week and the ability to effectively timetable that space. 8.4 Subjects are categorised as practical and non-practical and have corresponding class size maxima. Pupils in each cohort are organised into sets, and the size of the cohort will determine the number of practical and non-practical sets. Practical subjects such as science and art are capped at 20 pupils per set and by their nature need to be taught in specific classrooms with the appropriate equipment. Non Practical subjects such as maths and history are capped at 30 pupils and whilst most schools are organised into faculties with dedicated classrooms per subject, these subjects can be taught in any appropriately sized non practical classroom. It is broadly agreed across Scotland that a room utilisation of between 70% and 85% is desirable, with further adjustments to occupancy made for subject choices, timetabling and curriculum delivery models. This approach allows for flexibility and supports in year movement of pupil numbers. 8.5 It is recognised that there has been an increase in pupils needing additional support in recent years, and a greater focus is given to ensuring that spaces within schools are appropriate to their needs. This often results in spare classrooms and general purpose spaces being adapted to provide specific spaces that can support physical therapy or support neurodiversity and help pupils to regulate. It is important therefore that capacity calculations take this into account and that roll increases do not impact negatively on pupils with additional support needs. A review is planned by both Aberdeenshire Council and Moray Council that will consider the impact of ASN spaces on overall capacity figures and baseline accommodation requirements. Page 196
Page 197
18 | P a g e 9. Elgin High School 9.1 One of the purposes of this report was to independently assess Moray Council’s School Roll Forecast methodology and assumptions in light of a previous decision to extend Elgin High School. In the interim period between that decision being made and the current time, the roll projections for Elgin High School have reduced, and officers have questioned whether the extension should proceed. 9.2 Tables 7 and 8 show the one year accuracy levels of the School Roll Forecast for Elgin High School since 2019, and the accuracy of the 2019 forecast for each of the subsequent years respectively. 9.3 The additional 30 housing units built during 2020 and a much higher staying on rate in S5 and S6 than expected result in the forecast being under by 30 pupils in year one. This is compounded by the increased staying on rates in 2021 and 2022, and it is only when the housing development is lower than the 2019 forecast from 2022 onwards, that the roll and the forecast begin to realign. Table 7: Year on Year Accuracy Elgin High School SRF Table 8: 2019 Elgin High School SRF Comparison 9.3 Scotland’s Learning Estate Strategy ‘Connecting People, Places and Learning’ emphasises the importance of maximising occupancy within the current estate. Ensuring that buildings are used efficiently and that space is not underutilised is especially important in areas with fluctuating demographics or rural catchment areas. Longer term sustainability is also important, and councils need to be aware of the environmental impact of capital works and of the embodied carbon within their existing estate. 9.4 Moray Council have commissioned an independent review of the capacity and utilisation of Elgin High School. The subsequent report from Building Spatial Intelligence will provide the Council with further evidence as to how to proceed. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2019 SRF Roll % Acc. 2020 SRF Roll % Acc. 2021 SRF Roll % Acc. 2022 SRF Roll % Acc. 2023 SRF Roll % Acc. Elgin High 723 753 1.041 783 796 1.013 837 831 0.992 853 842 0.987 846 855 1.011 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2019 SRF Actual Diff 2019 SRF Actual Diff 2019 SRF Actual Diff 2019 SRF Actual Diff 2019 SRF Actual Diff Pupils 723 753 +30 756 796 +40 795 831 +36 817 842 +25 833 855 +26 Housing 75 105 +30 75 73 -2 95 59 -36 100 81 -19 111 84 -27 Placing Requests 0 5 +5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -5 -5 S5 & S6 Combined 142 152 +10 162 168 +6 156 171 +15 192 198 +6 190 227 +37 Page 197
Page 198
19 | P a g e 9.5 The latest school roll forecasts do not support the requirement to extend Elgin High School. There is a national reduction in primary aged population, which in time will filter into secondary school rolls. Recommendation 9. Once the methodology is confirmed from the working group into secondary school capacity, Moray Council may wish to apply this methodology to Elgin High School to further inform and ratify future decisions. Page 198
Page 199
20 | P a g e 10. Conclusion 10.1 There is no proscribed approach for calculating school roll forecasts. The methodology used by most Councils is broadly similar, albeit with variations suited to the demographic landscape of each authority. Moray Council can be confident that their approach mirrors that of most if not all other Scottish Local Authorities to a large extent. 10.2 In directly comparing the methodology used by Moray Council and Aberdeenshire Council the similarities are greater than the differences. Both authorities apply a consistent baseline approach using current school rolls, housing data, birth rates, and placing requests, and both have adapted their processes in response to changes in data availability and local context. While minor differences exist—particularly in the handling of NHS data and the length of forecast publication—these do not significantly impact the robustness or reliability of the forecasts. 10.3 Moray Council’s continued engagement with the national forecasting forum further reinforces the credibility of its methodology and ensures alignment with evolving best practices across Scotland. 10.4 The accuracy of forecasts beyond a single year is particularly important for forward planning, especially in areas experiencing fluctuating housing development or demographic change. Multi-year projections support more strategic decision-making and help ensure that education infrastructure keeps pace with community needs. Whilst the focus of this report has been on the direct comparison of forecasts one year at a time, the longer term accuracy is also key. The ability to prepare accurate forecasts in the short term, gives confidence that longer term forecasts will also be relatively accurate if all conditions remain the same. The challenge for local authorities in their longer term forecasting relates to the variables outwith their control. 10.5 Furthermore, triangulating school roll forecasts with decisions on placing requests, planning application responses and capital investment decisions is essential. This integrated approach ensures that forecasts are not only technically sound but also practically aligned with development trends and funding priorities, thereby strengthening the Council’s ability to deliver timely and effective education provision. 10.6 The decision making or even the recommendation regarding whether to proceed with the Elgin High School extension, or to postpone it, or consider alternatives is not within the scope of this review. However, officers can be confident that the data which contributes to that decision is robust and the methodology is appropriate and relevant. Report Prepared by Rachael Goldring - Learning Estates Team Leader, Aberdeenshire Council September 2025 Page 199
Page 200
Page 200
Page 201
APPENDIX 4 Table 1. Developer obligations upfront payments by contribution type received in the last financial year Financial Year Consultations Received Upfront Payments Received Affordable Housing Healthcare Education Sports and Recreation (Forres) Transportation Total Received 2024/2025 137 24 £65,950.00 £111,129.60 £0.00 £1,299.20 £7,189.24 £185,568.04 Table 2. Developer obligations payments received by contribution type from Section 75s for previously approved developments in the last financial year. Financial Year Affordable Housing Healthcare Education Sports and Recreation (Forres) Transportation Total Received 2024/2025 £28,000.00 £356,206.79 £156,481.16 £0.00 £17,014.14 £557,702.09 Table 3. Developer obligations payments by contribution type secured via Section 75s in the last financial year. These secured amounts will be received by the Council in the coming years as the triggers are reached. Financial Year Consultations Received Section 75 Agreed Affordable Housing Healthcare Education Sports and Recreation (Forres) Transportation Total Secured 2024/2025 137 5 £65,125.00 £9,138.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £74,263.00 Page 201
Page 202
Table 4. Developer Obligations spend by contribution type in the last financial year. Financial Year Contribution Type Project Total Spent 2024/2025 Affordable Housing Affordable Housing Provision £23,875.00 Community Facilities Various Projects for community groups £497.88 Library Seating Provision £18,917.98 Table 5. Developer Obligations received since the adoption of Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance in October 2016 Via S75 Via S69 Via Simplified Agreement Via Upfront Payment Contributions Received £3,398,158.24 £119,856.25 £17,815.33 £1,757,863.88 Table 6. Developer Obligations Spent since the adoption of Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance in October 2016 Contributions Spent £2,578,017.95 Page 202
Page 203
Report to: Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Meeting Date: 5 March 2026 Report by: Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations Author: Darren Westmacott Contact Email: Darren.Westmacott@moray.gov.uk Subject: Draft Hillside Farm (Dufftown) Masterplan 1. PURPOSE ☒ For Decision ☐ For Information 1.1 The purpose of this report is to ask the Committee to agree the draft Hillside Farm (Dufftown) Masterplan for public consultation. 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III (E)(2) of the Council’s Scheme of Administration relating to the review and preparation of Local Development Plans. 2. SUMMARY 2.1 The draft Hillside Farm (Dufftown) Masterplan is the first phase in a partnership approach to deliver affordable housing on the R1 Hillside Farm development site in Dufftown. The draft masterplan will be subject to public consultation, including a drop-in event and using virtual methods and responses will be reported to a future meeting of this Committee for consideration along with the final masterplan for approval. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that Committee: i) agree the draft Hillside Farm (Dufftown) Masterplan, as set out in Appendix 1, for public consultation for an 8-week period; and ii) notes that comments received to the consultation, the Council’s response to these and the final masterplan will be reported back to a future meeting of this Committee for approval. Darren Westmacott Planning Officer (Strategic Planning and Development) Rachael Watts Item 10. Page 203
Page 204
Senior Project Manager (Housing Mix Delivery) 4. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 4.1 In 2021, Dufftown and District Community Association (DDCA) carried out a Housing Needs and Demand Report which identified a community need for affordable housing in the area. Leading the implementation of a community led housing project, the DDCA – following initial discussions with Moray Council – identified a suitable site at Hillside Farm, Dufftown (R1 in the Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) 2020). 4.2 In 2022, Moray Council and Dufftown and District Community Association (DDCA) entered into a memorandum of understanding to deliver affordable housing on the Hillside Farm development site. This would include a mix of DDCA community-led homes and Council social rented housing, with the remainder of the site likely to be private owner-occupancy housing. 4.3 As part of the Moray Growth Deal's £7.5m Housing Mix Delivery project, which is funded by Moray Council and the Scottish Government, the first phase of the Hillside Farm project is to develop a concept masterplan for the site that will create a framework to deliver a development reflective of the character, history and built heritage of Dufftown. Following a tender process, Collective Architecture were awarded the contract to develop the masterplan. 5. DRAFT HILLSIDE FARM MASTERPLAN 5.1 The draft Hillside Farm Masterplan prepared by Collective Architecture is provided as Appendix 1 to the report. 5.2 The masterplan sets out a vision for a new neighbourhood, rooted in place, with opportunities to grow a local economy, create new accessible open space, address the climate emergency and support the elimination of fuel poverty through the provision of warm, sustainably heated homes. To achieve this, the draft masterplan incorporates the following elements: • A design code, with materials and landscaping guidelines, for the three proposed character areas to ensure a holistic approach is taken across each phase of development. • Green corridors and landscape buffers to integrate the development sensitively into the rural edge setting. • A network of safe and well-connected routes, prioritising active travel, and making Dufftown more accessible for all. • Formal and informal play opportunities are to be provided together with sites for allotments and community orchards. These are connected via a series of green and blue networks incorporating swales and rain gardens. Proposals to enhance biodiversity through planting and other mechanisms, such as bird boxes are set out in the draft masterplan. • A phased approach to the development site, incorporating community-led, affordable and private housing and infrastructure. • A Sustainability and Energy Strategy which takes a low carbon approach to design, development, energy and resident behaviour. 5.3 Collective Architecture, along with Council officers and representatives from the DDCA, Page 204
Page 205
sought to engage with the community in developing proposals for the masterplan. Two drop-in events were held in the Royal British Legion Hall, Dufftown. The first, on 9 August 2023, invited the community to have their say on the design process and to find out more information about the project. The second event presented progress on the design and site layout concept and was held on 6 December 2023. Over 100 people attended the two events, with 57 feedback forms submitted. Feedback newsletters were produced following each event and circulated via social media, the DDCA and the Council’s dedicated webpage for the project. This feedback, along with information collated from stakeholder workshops with internal Council consultees, saw the production of an initial masterplan and cost estimate in mid-2024. 5.4 Following a series of discussions with the DDCA, Collective Architecture and the Council’s Transportation Services across late 2024 and early 2025, Collective Architecture were instructed to proceed to carry out an extensive options appraisal of the proposed masterplan in an effort to reduce costs and assist with site viability at a strategic level. This resulted in amendments to the layout, namely the relocation of the proposed access which significantly reduced the amount of cut and fill required and therefore the associated costs. 6. NEXT STEPS 6.1 It is proposed to issue the draft masterplan for an 8-week consultation period, supported by the following actions: • Promotion through Moray Engage and social media to raise awareness of the consultation. • Consultation drop-in event in Dufftown (date to be confirmed). • Bookable 1-2-1 online appointments with officers. 6.2 Following the consultation, responses will be reported back to a future meeting of this Committee to consider, along with the final Masterplan for approval. The masterplan will be a material consideration for development management purposes. 7. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS 7.1 The table below shows whether risks and implications apply if the recommendations are agreed: SUBJECT YES NO Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcome Improvement Plan) ✓ Policy and Legal ✓ Financial ✓ Risk ✓ Staffing ✓ Best Value and Transformation ✓ Property ✓ Information Communications Technology/Digital ✓ Equalities. Social Inclusion and Economic Impact ✓ Climate Change and Biodiversity Impact ✓ Page 205
Page 206
7.2 Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Improved Collaborative Leadership, as part of continuous improvement through Best Value, will better enable the Council to fulfil the ambitions set out in its strategic plans. a) Links to Council Corporate Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Council Plan strategic priorities: ☒ Tackle Poverty and Inequality. ☒ Build Stronger Greener Vibrant Economy. ☒ Build Thriving, resilient, empowered Communities. b) Links to Local Outcomes Improvement Plan – The proposals in this report support and contribute to improved outcomes for communities as outlined in the following Local Outcomes Improvement Plan priorities: ☒ Developing a diverse, inclusive, and sustainable economy. ☒ Building a better future for our children and young people in Moray. ☒ Empowering and connecting communities. ☒ Improving wellbeing of our population. 7.3 Policy and Legal The proposals support the delivery of the statutory MLDP 2020 and National Planning Framework (NPF) 4. Once approved, the masterplan will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications for the site. The development of affordable housing on Hillside Farm, Dufftown is identified in the Council’s Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2026/27 – 2030/31. 7.4 Financial The development of the masterplan has been funded in part by the Moray Growth Deal Housing Mix project. The DDCA have funded the remainder of the masterplan through the Dorenell Windfarm Community Benefit Fund. 7.5 Risk None arising from this report. 7.6 Staffing Work on the draft Hillside Farm Masterplan has been carried out within existing workloads of the Strategic Planning and Development section, including Moray Growth Deal Housing Mix along with input from Housing, Transportation and Consultancy (Flooding). Officers will continue to work on the masterplan and future delivery, including discussions with potential developers. 7.7 Best Value and Transformation None arising from this report. 7.8 Property None arising from this report. 7.9 Information Communications/Technology/Digital None arising from this report. 7.10 Equalities, Social Inclusion and Economic Impact There are no negative impacts arising from this report. The masterplan assists the Council Page 206
Page 207
in complying with its statutory public sector equality duty in terms of accessible, affordable housing while contributing to reducing socio-economic disadvantage through enhanced and improved communities. 7.11 Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts NPF4, specifically Policy 1 (Tackling the climate and nature crises) gives significant weight to the global climate and nature crises in the determination of planning applications. NPF4 Policy 2 (Climate mitigation and adaption) states that all proposals should be designed to minimise emissions over their lifecycle and development is to be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risk from climate change. Similarly, Policy 3 (Biodiversity) requires development to contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity. Policy 15 (Local Living and 20- minute neighbourhoods) supports the principle of Local Living. By taking a holistic approach, the draft Hillside Farm Masterplan seeks to achieve some of the aspiration of the Moray Development Plan (NPF4 and MLDP2020) by providing opportunities to grow a local economy, create new accessible open space, address the climate emergency and provide warm, sustainably heated homes. 8. CONSULTATION 8.1 This report has been prepared in consultation with the Executive Director Economy, Enterprise and Operations, Head of Growth, Planning and Climate (Chief Planning Officer), Chief Financial Officer, Service Manager Housing Strategy, Service Manager Legal Services, Principal Climate Change Officer, Senior Engineer Transportation, Equal Opportunities Officer and Lissa Rowan, Committee Services Officer and any comments made have been incorporated into the report. Page 207
Page 208
Page 208
Page 209
Hillside Farm, Dufftown Masterplan for Site R1 July 2025 Rev C APPENDIX 1 Page 209
Page 210
p 2 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Prepared by: Collective Architecture Collective Architecture 4th Floor, Albert Chambers 13 Bath Street, Glasgow G2 1HY info@collectivearchitecture.co.uk www.collectivearchitecture.co.uk Project Team: Narro (Structural and Civil Engineers) WI Talbot (Quantity Surveyors) Rayburn Farquhar Bowen (Landscape Architects) Client: Moray Council & Dufftown & District Community Association Revision: Date: Status: Reason for Issue: Checked: Approved: - 16.12.23 Draft Draft Client Issue KM RA A 31.01.24 Draft Client Issue KM RA B 17.05.24 Draft Client Issue KM RA C 31.07.25 Issued Client Issue KM ML Page 210
Page 211
p 3 July 2025 Collective Architecture Foreword 5 00 Introduction 6 0.1 Masterplan for Hillside Farm 8 0.2 Partnership Working 10 0.3 Project Team 11 0.4 Policy and Planning Context 12 0.5 Community and Stakeholder Engagement 14 01 Site and Context 18 01.1 The Site 20 01.2 Location and Site Analysis 22 01.3 Local Amenities 23 01.4 Routes and Active Travel 24 01.5 Existing Townscape Character 26 01.6 Site Constraints 32 01.7 Site Opportunities 34 02 Masterplan Principles 36 02.1 Introduction to the Masterplan 38 02.2 Options Testing 42 02.3 Phasing Development 44 02.4 Phasing Strategy 46 02.5 Masterplan Principals 48 02.6 Learning from Dufftown 50 02.7 Connecting Hillside Farm to Dufftown 52 02.8 Landscape First 54 02.9 Integrated Water and Parkland 58 02.10 Spatial Strategy 60 02.11 Character Areas 64 02.12 Designing Streets 66 02.13 Vehicular Movement and Parking 68 02.14 Places for Community 70 02.15 A Place to Play and Grow 74 02.16 Sustainability & Energy Strategy 76 02.17 Technical Requirements 77 03 Design Code 78 03.1 Character Area 1 - Ben Aigan View 82 03.2 Character Area 2 - The Lanes and Spine 86 03.3 Character Area 3 - Eastern Courtyards 90 03.4 Architectural Guidelines 94 03.5 Landscape Guidelines 96 Contents Page 211
Page 212
p 4 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Page 212
Page 213
p 5 July 2025 Collective Architecture Foreword We’re delighted to introduce the Hillside Farm Masterplan, which provides an opportunity to create a high-quality neighbourhood in the heart of Speyside helping to meet the high demand for housing and support the sustainable growth of the community of Dufftown. Forming part of the Moray Growth Deal’s £7.5m Housing Mix Delivery Project, with funding contributions from the Scottish Government and Moray Council, the development of the wider Masterplan has been a unique collaborative process with Dufftown and District Association (DDCA). The Masterplan sets out a vision of high-quality design and accessible greenspaces to create a development that is reflective of Dufftown’s unique character, heritage and landscape setting. Councillor David Gordon Chair of Planning and Regulatory Services Committee Councillor Marc Macrae Chair of Economic Development and Infrastructure Services Committee Moray Council New housing at Hillside Farm from West visual Page 213
Page 214
0.0 Introduction 0.1 Masterplan for Hillside Farm 0.2 Partnership Working 0.3 Project Team 0.5 Policy and Planning Context 0.5 Community and Stakeholder Engagement 00 Introduction Page 214
Page 215
00 Page 215
Page 216
p 8 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The Hillside Farm site extends to an area of 4.3ha on the western edge of Dufftown, a short ten-minute walk from the Clocktower in the heart of the town. The development of a strategic plan for the Hillside Farm site will mark a further important milestone in the evolution of Dufftown, building on its unique landscape setting and heritage as a planned community. The site is bounded by Hill Street to the north; existing dwellings at Hillside Avenue and Kinivie Court to the east; an existing established tree belt to the west; and three detached bungalows fronting onto the historic Market Green to the south. The site slopes from its high point in the south, towards the Hillside Farm buildings in the north. This masterplan will draw out the unique characteristics of the existing historic, social and natural setting of Hillside Farm and wider Dufftown to provide an exemplar framework for the extension of the town. The masterplan will holistically marry best practice approaches to placemaking, sustainability and housing to make a new place which respectfully integrates into its special context. The masterplan has been developed to take into account the following key parameters: • To identify the existing natural and designed landscape characteristics of the site and their impact on the broader context of Dufftown so that these can be enhanced and protected as part of any future development. • To support Moray Council to undertake and the identify future technical studies to underpin proposals with critical understanding of constraints and opportunities. • To work collaboratively and openly with the Moray Growth Deal Communications Group, Moray Council, key stakeholders and the local community using best practice engagement techniques and processes to create a co-designed framework that puts local need at its heart. • To develop a framework for development which is harmonious with the special landscape setting and biodiversity of Hillside Farm with a unique ‘sense of place’. • Building upon our experience, identify opportunities for an open-minded approach to house types and mix to create a Dufftown family of homes appropriate to the local architectural and social context rather than looking for identikit, anywhere, ‘off-the-shelf’ solutions. • To set out a Design Code for future development that sets principles for the scale, materiality and characteristics to embed Dufftown specific solutions within supplementary guidance. • To identify opportunities for sustainable, passive, energy solutions within all proposed buildings. • To set out a framework for conservation, interpretation and landscape setting enhancement for the Hillside Farm site and its integration with the wider town. • To improve and enhance the areas around the site to form a linked network of spaces for the enjoyment of all residents as a place of living, working, learning and recreation. Whilst being a small town, Dufftown and its distilleries plays a key role at the economic heart of the north-east of Scotland. Hillside Farm represents a substantial opportunity to provide much needed, high-quality, housing and accessible green space within the town of Dufftown. 0.1 Masterplan for Hillside Farm Page 216
Page 217
p 9 July 2025 Collective Architecture The masterplan is planning guidance. The architectural images contained in this document are illustrative. They establish guiding principles for development; detailed proposals will be prepared to support planning application/s for the site. The Hillside Farm site as defined by Moray Local Development Plan 2020 •Clocktower Hillside Farm • N Page 217
Page 218
p 10 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The preparation of the masterplan is part of the Moray Growth Deal’s Housing Mix Delivery project, with £25,000 coming from the Scottish Government and Moray Council. The masterplan is also part-funded by Dorenell Windfarm Community Benefit Fund, administered by Foundation Scotland. Presently the site is working farmland under the ownership of A. Wiseman & Son. It is the long-term ambition of Dufftown and District Community Association to deliver 20 new community-led homes across a mix of tenures on the Hillside Farm site. These community-led homes could include affordable housing tenures including social rent equivalent and discounted sales. The latter will be protected as affordable with the Rural Housing Burden and all community-led properties will be controlled by Dufftown and District Community Association on behalf of the community. Moray Council are looking to deliver affordable housing at this site at Hillside Farm to meet an acute local shortage, these will be targeted as part of Moray Council’s Strategic Investment Plan 2024/25. At this stage, it is anticipated that the remaining parts of the site will be developed for private, owner-occupancy housing by a developer. This masterplan has been delivered through partnership working between Moray Council and Dufftown and District Community Association. Together they have worked with the appointed consultant team to produce the framework for future development of the site for around 100 new homes. 0.2 Partnership Working Client Client Partner Community Housing Support Funders Page 218
Page 219
p 11 July 2025 Collective Architecture Collective Architecture has undertaken a variety of projects over the past 20 years that have transformed places and their immediate/ wider communities through imaginative placemaking strategies and the adaptation of existing sites, buildings and landscapes. Collective Architecture has extensive experience in delivering strategic plans, housing developments and community buildings at a variety of scales. For this commission they have drawn on an experienced team who have successfully delivered housing projects within existing communities, involving master-planning neighbourhoods, often in a phased manner. The team have experience of delivering solutions within complex and challenging locations, including across Moray. Raeburn Farquhar Bowen are Landscape Architects who create rich, diverse landscapes for people and wildlife to cohabit, and in developing exciting and relevant designs through open engagement and community co-design. They bring extensive experience of landscape masterplanning for sustainable communities, in addition to experience within and adjacent to historic designed landscapes. Raeburn Farquhar Bowen are well established in landscape masterplanning and have a particular interest and expertise in green infrastructure, biodiversity, and facilitating active travel to create spaces for people, plants and wildlife to thrive in the 21st century. The project team have been appointed to deliver the masterplan with an open and collaborative approach. Each member of the design team brings a vast range of complementary skills and experience, including a broad range of strategic and housing projects in Moray. 0.3 Project Team Narro is a Structural and Civil Engineering consultancy who, over 36 years, have built up close relationships with Architects, Developers, and Contractors, providing high standards of service, expertise, and reliability. The core team for this commission have been selected based on their wide range of experience of working on various new build private, social and community housing projects. They have a proven track record of working together on all types of project scales, and complexities. Their dedicated civil engineering team provides an integrated service for structural engineering developments requiring drainage solutions or connection to the road network. They also undertake stand alone civil engineering projects to support active travel, optimise existing space for car parking or design junctions for multi-structure developments and support clients from feasibility studies to completion. WI Talbot surveyors offer a comprehensive range of residential and commercial services based in Aberdeen, Scotland. Working on projects across the country Talbot’s provide clients and design teams with decades of experience and expertise in the housing sector, together with in-depth local market knowledge and national resources. For this commission, Talbots will be providing quantity surveying services. Page 219
Page 220
p 12 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The masterplan for Hillside Farm has been developed to deliver on the ambition of the National Planning Framework 4 as well as a number of other key national policy documents and guidance. Important reference documents include: • National Performance Framework • Scotland’s Wellbeing - Delivering the National Outcomes • Creating Places • Designing Streets • Cycling by Design • Housing to 2040 • Our Place in Time: the Historic Environment Strategy for Scotland • Long Term Vision for Active Travel in Scotland to 2030 • Active Travel Framework, Transport Scotland • A More Active Scotland Delivery Plan • Scotland’s Climate Change Plan 2018-2032 • Transport Scotland National Walking Strategy 2016 -2026 • National Road Development Guide The masterplan accords with aspirations set out in current local and regional policy, including: • Moray Council Corporate Plan 2019-2024 • Moray Council Climate Change Strategy 2020-2030 • Moray Local Development Plan 2020 and supplementary guidance • Moray Council Strategic Housing Investment Plan • Moray’s Child Poverty Action Plan • Moray Community Planning Partnership Local Outcome Improvement Plan Moray Council Local Development Plan 2020 (LDP2020) sets out a spatial strategy which explains the council’s overall view of where development should go and the principles behind that. The written policies give guidance on all aspects of development, when it will be supported and when it will not. LDP2020 allocated the Hillside Farm site (R1) for housing and set a number of conditions in its allocation. This masterplan builds on the principles established by the LDP2020 and the response to how the masterplan and future planning applications should address the high quality design aspirations of Policy PP1 is shown in the adjacent table. Future development of Hillside Farm will be guided by national, regional and local planning policy. This section provides an overview of how the masterplan aligns closely with the shared objectives at all levels of policy for a ‘place- based’ approach to produce a deliverable framework. 0.4 Policy and Planning Context “Development proposals that include new streets and public realm should be inclusive and enable children and young people to play and move around safely and independently,maximising opportunities for informal and incidental play in the neighbourhood.”- NPF4, Policy 21 Throughout the document there are references to national and local policy, an example of which, can be seen below; Page 220
Page 221
p 13 December 2023 Collective Architecture LDP2020 Requirement Proposals must comply with key design principles set out in Volume 2: Settlement Statement for Dufftown. Transport Assessment required. Road improvements required to Hill Street to provide access including road widening, surfacing, drainage, footways and lighting. Junction improvements to Hill Street/Balvenie Street must be provided. Footpaths must be provided from development to existing path between Westburn Road and Kininvie Court and to Hillside Avenue. Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) required. Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) required. Demonstrate that there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the River Spey Special Area of Conservation (SAC) from development activity causing pollution or sediment to reach the SAC, or changes to water quality and quantity. Addressing Moray Local Development Plan 2020 Hillside Masterplan Response The masterplan closely aligns with the principles of LDP2020 Policies and key design principles outlined in the Settlement Statement. The masterplan process has closely engaged with Moray Council Transportation Service and any future planning application(s) must be supported by a Transport Assessment for the overall development. Improvements to provide for pedestrian, cycle and emergency only vehicular access (including phasing for delivery) to be agreed with Moray Council Planning and Transportation Services. Pedestrian and active travel improvements to be agreed with Moray Council Transportation Service. Proposals have been developed to enhance and improve the connectivity of site with emphasis on Active Travel opportunities. Phasing of delivery to be agreed with Moray Council Transportation Service. To be provided in support of any future planning application(s). To be provided in support of any future planning application(s).Proposals have been developed in accordance with best practice approaches to sustainable water management. To be provided in support of any future planning application(s). Site R1 Hillside Farm (4.3ha, allocated for 100 units) Page 221
Page 222
p 14 Hillside Farm, Dufftown A series of workshops and community events provided local residents and stakeholders opportunities to listen, co- design, share concerns and present ideas in a collaborative, open environment. These ensured that local knowledge and experience were embedded into the strategy. 0.5 Community and Stakeholder Engagement We believe it is important that as many people as possible are able to participate in discussions around the future of their communities. Our process aligned with the National Standards for Community Engagement, which are endorsed by the Scottish Government and adopted by Moray Council. Our approach for Hillside Farm: • Presented an accurate overview of the site’s planning policy context. • Articulated the reasons behind the masterplan proposals and the future planning and statutory processes associated with the masterplan, including a timeframe for any proposed development. • Aimed to spread awareness of the potential development of the site in line with Council LDP2020 and the new National Planning Framework. • Created a mechanism through which both individuals and organisations could positively contribute to the process. There are a large number of stakeholders and residents within Dufftown who rightly have a keen interest in how Hillside Farm may be developed for the good of everyone. It was important that we contacted and got as many people as possible involved in the engagement process. Page 222
Page 223
p 15 July 2025 Collective Architecture The community engagement events held in 2023 were well attended. The format of each was carefully planned to ensure communication was clear and information was accessible and easy to engage with. Feedback was invited at each stage via a range of channels to reach as many people as possible. Throughout the engagement process; • We worked with the client partners to reach out to residents in the vicinity of the site to ensure as many as possible participate in community events. • With the client partners we reached out through a range of channels including social media posts, posters in local places, email newsletters, community forums and the council website. • A dedicated webpage was established which provided background project information, FAQs, and adverts for upcoming events. Information presented at each event was uploaded for viewers to read through at their own leisure. • We ensured that all events took place over an extended timeframe throughout the afternoon and early evening, within an accessible venue in Dufftown. • Handouts were provided, in accessible format, for all events where emerging design proposals were being presented to allow everyone access to the information relating to the masterplan proposals. • Information was presented in a clear and simple format. Members from the design team, client partners and Moray Council were on hand to answer questions. • Feedback was invited through a number of channels including on the day in paper or to a member of the team, via the website or via post. “creating a structured and cohesive community for all ages” “encourage and allow essential workers to move here easily and quickly” “having a low cost home in a family setting would be a dream” Feedback survey quotes from Event 01 Page 223
Page 224
p 16 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Community Engagement Wednesday 9th August 2023, 4 - 8pm Event 01 - Introducing the Project, Royal British Legion Hall The opening event focused on what makes the site special in the eyes of stakeholders and the local community and asked people to reflect on the constraints and opportunities for any future development. This underpinned our shared understanding of the site and guided the principles for taking forward the strategic masterplan, through the establishment of common goals and principles. Wednesday 6th December 2023, 3 - 7pm Event 02 - Developed Proposals, Royal British Legion Hall The second event focused on the developed proposals for the site and overarching character principles for housing. Information boards included an updated constraints and opportunities diagrams; compiling feedback from Event 01 and the stakeholder day. The developed proposals and FAQs sought to address key resident concerns expressed through feedback from the previous event. Stakeholder Engagement Friday 6th October 2023, 10.30 am - 4 pm Moray Council High St, Elgin Collective Architecture met with key statutory stakeholders over 2 sessions as part of a stakeholder day: ‘Placemaking, Landscape, Transport & Infrastructure’ and ‘Homes & Community.’ CA were supported with information from the design team. These sessions enabled round table discussions to explore key strategic moves and to develop the design into a realistic, deliverable proposition. Morning session - Homes & Community Attendees; MC Senior Housing Officer, MC Housing and Strategy Development Manager, MC Planning Officer (Strategic Planning & Development), MC Economic Growth & Development Senior Project Manager, DDCA Communities Development Leader, CHT Communities Officer Afternoon session - Placemaking, Landscape, Transport & Infrastructure, Moray Council Attendees; MC Transport Development Engineer, MC Public Transport Manager, MC Consultancy Engineer, MC Planning Officer (Strategic Planning & Development), MC Economic Growth & Development Senior Project Manager, DDCA Communities Development Leader, CHT Communities Officer Our approach to engagement was based on our previous experience of similar projects whilst being tailored for the specifics of the Hillside Farm site. The design team produced feedback in the form of newsletters following each event. An overview of which follows below. Page 224
Page 225
p 17 July 2025 Collective Architecture Photos from Event 01 Event 01 Brief Summary Residents shared views on wider Dufftown facilities and travel to and from the current site at Hillside farm. Individuals expressed their views regarding new homes in Dufftown. Members of the community expressed concerns around drainage on the site, existing water supply and local sewage infrastructure. Individuals expressed concerns around pressure on existing utilities but were reassured to hear that development would not take place unless there was sufficient capacity in place. Many were interested in how local biodiversity and ecology could be enhanced though the development. Low maintenance and indigenous planting were seen to be a priority as well as a planting buffer to existing residents to the site east. The full feedback newsletter for Consultation 01 is within the Appendix. The demographic of event attendees is summarised in pie charts at the back of the Feedback Newsletter. Event 02 Summary The proposed site strategy was generally well received. Some individuals at the event or family members were interested in moving to Hillside Farm if there were options that suited their needs. Locals expressed apprehension around the number of new homes displayed within the strategy and the tenure of these. The design team received practical feedback regarding parks, farm traffic on Hill Street and mobility hubs. The material palettes and character zones were mainly supported, notably for their variety and accordance with the landscape. Information was also shared regarding the project timeline explaining where this strategic work sits in relation to project procurement and delivery. Community members found this to be beneficial. Individuals were signposted to Moray Council Hillside Farm webpage and DDCA social media for ongoing information regarding development at Hillside Farm. Photos from Event 02Page 225
Page 226
This chapter frames the strategic context for the masterplan, and the physical context for the site at Hillside Farm. 01 Site and Context 1.0 Site and Context 1.1 The Site 1.2 Location and Site Analysis 1.3 Local Amenities 1.4 Routes and Active Travel 1.5 Existing Townscape Character 1.6 Site Constraints 1.7 Site Opportunities Page 226
Page 227
01 Page 227
Page 228
p 20 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The site is located on the western edge of Dufftown within the settlement boundary. The size itself is comparable in size to the historic centre of the town. The site is presently split in two; one half arable farmland and the other rough grazing. The division of these is evident within historic maps. The field is bordered by a biodiverse border with a wild mix of native plants. The existing planned landscape of trees around the historic Market Green provide a historic gateway to the urban settlement. These trees are key to the character of the Green and are an important feature to be retained as far as possible in upgrading the road to access the site. The western tree border to the site is also important for the landscape character of the site and the legibility of the town edge on approach to Dufftown from the west. This row of trees was acknowledged to contain a variety of species in ranging condition. Integration with the existing landscape setting will be critical to the success of any future development of Hillside Farm. In particular, ensuring that homes make the most of outstanding views to the north, whilst approaching the site through a landscape-led approach that looks to embrace the principles of NPF4; which prioritises the retention of landscape character and improvement of biodiversity. Hillside Farm sits on the western edge of the current settlement of Dufftown, at the point where town meets country. As a planned settlement the existing townscape is strongly defined by its simple grid, with long views to the beautiful surrounding landscape. 01.1 The Site Scaut Hill Tips of Clunymore Hill of Parkbeg Toll W ood Hill of Towie W indfarm Knock of Buchromb Little Conval Ben Aigan (471m) View to the North Page 228
Page 229
p 21 July 2025 Collective Architecture 1 23 4 5 6 7 1 Mature trees at site corner 2 Conval Crescent entrance to B9009, poor junction visibility 3 Track to West of Hillside Farm site 4 Overgrown path / ditch between house to East of site towards playpark 5 Looking West down Hill Street, loose track surface 6 North West site corner to Hillside Burn and farm track ford crossing 1 2 3 4 5 6 Site Photos Page 229
Page 230
p 22 Hillside Farm, Dufftown For these reasons the Site at Hillside farm is within the Ben Rinnes Special Landscape Area, and the The Upland Farmed Valleys Landscape Character Type. More information can be found on this in the Landscape Appraisal in Appendix. Due to the town’s geographical location the area is well suited to arable farming and has a rich history of whisky distilling. Hillside Farm is located near Hillside Burn a tributary into the River Fiddich, an important river that feeds many of the local distilleries. Distilleries are a larger driver for regional tourism and a key local employer. Dufftown itself is a historic high street town of varied traditional and Scots baronial architectural styles, in keeping with the town’s age and available local materials. Dufftown, a town in Morayshire is at the heart of Scotland’s distilling country and arable upland landscape. Located to the North of the Cairngorms National Park, Dufftown is located in Speyside valley with key rivers and landscape areas. 01.2 Location and Site Analysis Key Main Towns A Roads B Roads Rivers Moray Region Map of Moray The Clock Tower, CanmoreView down Balvenie Street Page 230
Page 231
p 23 July 2025 Collective Architecture Dufftown has a range of facilities spanning health, leisure and retail. Most of these are located in prominent town centre buildings and are located on a map to the left. It was noted at the Consultation Event 01 that several key local business and shops in the town have suffered in recent years with numbers dwindling and many closing. The community noted the lack of a post office and butchers to being a loss in the area. Green Spaces 1 Highland Games Grounds 2 Historic Market Green 3 Park and Playpark 4 Football Grounds 5 Bowling Green 6 Princess Royal Forest Park 7 Toll Wood Amenities 1 Primary School 2 Community Centre 3 Medical Centre 4 Royal British Legion Dufftown 5 Library 6 Historic Town Centre with Shops 7 Mortlach Memorial Hall 8 Dufftown Clocktower 1 1 B9009 towards Glenrinnes A941 towards Rothes / Elgin Fife StreetChurch Street Conval Street Balvenie Street River Fiddich Hillside Farm LDP2020 Site R1 7 4 5 7 3 5 3 2 8 4 2 6 6 Key Town edge formed by landscape Key road connections Historic Town Edge Historic Farm Boundary 01.3 Local Amenities Town Amenities diagram N Page 231
Page 232
p 24 Hillside Farm, Dufftown A941 towards Rothes / Elgin towards Glenfiddich the Gownie Hillpath to Aberlour Glenrinnes Way footpath Distillery Walking Path A920 2 1 Hill Street The Clock Tower Hill Street B9009 towards Glenrinnes Fife StreetChurch Street Balvenie Street B9014 3 Conval Street 100m 200m 300m 400m Site Boundary Main Roads Popular Walking Routes Potential Pedestrian Route from the site Shared Surface (Pedestrian and Bike) Bus Stops, no 36 Elgin, no 36a Granton-on-Spey 1, 2 & 3 LDP Areas of Transport Improvement 1 A Road B Road Local Street Junction Improvement Needed Main Site Entrance (as recommended by MC Roads) Emergency Access (as recommended by MC Roads) Key 01.4 Routes and Active Travel The area has no official bike routes however there are some shared surface pavements; from the Clocktower along Balvenie Street and a short section on Hill Street. Walking and cycling friendly streets will be a priority within the new housing development although the topography and gradient of the site will present challenges. The nature of the site will present particular challenges for active travel and people with disabilities, both within the site and connections to surrounding area. Bus stops are presently located on Balvenie Street with services running to Elgin and Grantown on Spey, however these are outwith the recommended walking distance of Hillside Farm and future housing. Further public transport links should be considered. Dufftown has excellent walking routes in and around the town connecting town centre streets to the surrounding countryside. N Route connections diagram Page 232
Page 233
p 25 July 2025 Collective Architecture To support new housing at Hillside Farm there will need to be significant infrastructure and transport improvements. The junction from Conval Street and subsequent site entrance, will need upgrades and reconfigured. Hill Street will also require road upgrades for emergency access with the option for shared surfaces. The town is well connected to the surrounding forests and hillpaths via local walking paths and farm tracks. Numerous clubs gather in key 1 Dufftown Highland Games Pitch, photo Dufftown Highland Games website 2 Tininver Playpark Park, Google 3 Princess Royal Park,Google 4 Mortlach Primary, Google 1 2 3 4 5 6 Green Spaces and Amenity Spaces in Dufftown outdoor spaces throughout the town, with the Highland Games pitch central in the town and the town’s calender. Play areas are located to the East of Dufftown at Tininver Park and and at the south corner of the Highland Games pitch accessed through Kinivie Court. The town lacks more natural and integrated play. The Market Green is presently under utilised as an amenity space for pedestrians, mainly due to a lack of benches and shelter. 5 Dufftown Bowling Club, Google 6 Dufftown Football club and pitch, Google Page 233
Page 234
p 26 Hillside Farm, Dufftown To understand a place, it is important to understand its intricate tapestry of old and new, and how these merge together over time to form its character. Planning, culture and heritage are deeply rooted in place; they exist in the undocumented lives and oral histories of local people. As a planned settlement, we can quickly understand the driving forces for the towns development and why its spaces and places have the characteristics they do. Dufftown has developed around a landscape setting on a regular grid pattern. This plan is still clear and legible today, however more recent development between the historic street pattern and the boundary tree belts has been more ad-hoc and suburban in its form. Our concept approach looks to stitch the Hillside Farm site into the wider town pattern, acting to bring together the formal grid pattern of the 19th Century town with the informal contemporary infill that has stretched westwards in the intervening period. 01.5 Existing Townscape Character Grid Streets within the town Left SC Canmore - Dufftown, general view 1930 1438471 Right SC Canmore - Dufftown, general view 1930 1257019 http://canmore.org.uk/collection/1257019 Historic Character and Town Growth Page 234
Page 235
p 27 July 2025 Collective Architecture The planned street pattern and the historic trees The formality of the grid and the informality of the infill Site Page 235
Page 236
p 28 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 1 Ferrier Road - Streetfronts stepping in and out with lanes to housing stepping with gables up the hill. 2 Albert Street - Small low front boundary walls with large thin private gardens to rear. 3 Conval Street - Wide street, perhaps historically a shared surface, presently car dominated. 4 The Clocktower square - Strong street corners, courtyard shapes, shared gardens / yards to rear. 5 Old Mart - Buildings orientated so their fronts are to the streets. Smaller gardens. 1 2 3 4 5 Urban Patterns and Morphology Page 236
Page 237
p 29 July 2025 Collective Architecture Residential Neighbourhood and Urban Structures How local people experience the spaces of the town are as important as a reading of plans and maps. The appointed design team developed the strategic principles into a contemporary architectural language that compliments local vernacular buildings. The design of future homes at Hillside Farm should represent the priorities of the community of people in Dufftown, so that their knowledge, stories and insight can be embedded in the proposals. 6 Balvenie Street looking to the Clocktower, storey height varying along street and dormers breaking up the eaves lines 7 Macduff Place, streets terminating in key views/ buildings 8 Albert Street, gables and stepping up the hill 7 8 6 Page 237
Page 238
p 30 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Mortlach Primary; traditional window design Stepping ridgelinesDoors on gables Bay windows on detached house Historic Photos from Canmore Photos from Google streetview Feature ‘distillery’ housing court House with different elevations Recessed entrances Quirky window placements Prominent dormers Local Building Character Houses in the trees 3a Balvenie Street - Cottage Flat Varying eave heights and street proportions Page 238
Page 239
p 31 July 2025 Collective Architecture Local Building Materials Stone Render Slate Metal cladding Timber Material Colour Palette Site Photos Page 239
Page 240
p 32 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 01.6 Site Constraints The site presents many natural challenges namely the steep topography with a fall of 30m, North facing aspect and constrained points of entry. HILLSIDE FARM, DUFFTOWN 02SITE CHALLENGES FB Track Post 192.0 192.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 188.0 188.0 Tree Edge to Dufftown Water Fence Boundary Mixed Native Hedge Junction Corner Trees Narrow Track Slope Badger Activity Potential badger offset Buffer Key 6 1 10 2 5 15 4 14 11 13 9 7 8 12 13 HILLSIDE FARM, DUFFTOWN 5 Active Travel Connections Connections to Path Network Views Potential ecology offsets Green edges 14 13 8 10 4 122 3 7 11 14 5 6 9 1 3 Site Constraints 1. Existing Dufftown entrance sign at the settlement edge location doesn’t provide a strong sense of arrival to town. 2. Historic town edge at tree-line around historic Market Green. 3. Complex existing junction with poor visibility onto main road. 4. Rear fences to existing properties create negative boundary. 5. Existing tree belt to western boundary should be retained. 6. Substantial heritage trees at town entrance. 7. Narrow unadopted farm track requires to be upgraded to formal road. 8. Private property boundaries in proximity to road, may prove challenging for road upgrading and widening. 9. Substantial level change (c.20-30m) within site, falling towards the north. 10. Substantial level change across Market Green restricting new site entrance. 11. Existing water main to be diverted. 12. Sewer connection at Kinivie Court. 13. Stream and site low point (X). 14. Potential environmental offsets A Preliminary Ecology Appraisal was undertaken to identify ecological features of interest and determine the possible presence of protected species. Raeburn Farquhar Bowen have synthesised this information into their landscape diagram and desktop appraisal of Hillside Farm. A desk based Landscape Appraisal was also undertaken to understand Dufftown’s wider upland landscape character region in Moray. Hillside Farm Dufftown RaeburnFarquharBowen Baseline Desktop study Baseline Landscape Report ExtractPage 240
Page 241
p 33 July 2025 Collective Architecture (c) Crown copyright, All rights reserved. 2023. License number 0100031673 213.7m 201.8m CONVAL STREET CONVAL CRES KININVIE COURT ST MICHAEL'S LANE B 9009 HILLSIDE AVENUE HILL STREET FB Track STNA STNB STNC STND FH FH TP TP TP TP Stay Stay Stay Stay Sign Edge of Crops Edge of Crops Edge of Crops Sign Sign Sign EP EP EP EP EP SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SVSV LP LP LP LP LP LP LP LP LP Post Post Post Post Post Post Post Post Post Post PostPostPostPostPostPostPost Post Post Mkr 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 226.0 226.0 224.0 224.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 182.0 180.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 224.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 192.0 192.0 184.0 184.0 204.0 1:6 1:11 1:14 6 1 10 2 5 14 4 11 13 9 7 8 12 13 Site constraints diagram 0 m 500mN 3 Page 241
Page 242
p 34 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 01.7 Site Opportunities The site offers many natural benefits to future housing including; great access to the outdoors, fantastic views and the potential for high quality wildlife rich greenspace. Site Opportunities 1. Opportunity to establish the historic tree-line as the settlement edge. 2. Re-establish ‘Market Green’ as a positive gateway space in the wider townscape. 3. Simplify the existing junction arrangement and form new junction to open up the Hillside Farm site. 4. Create stronger connections for active travel to the town centre. 5. Tie into local walking route / scenic path network. 6. Existing tree line forms soft boundary to the settlement. 7. Substantial heritage trees could be retained. 8. Opportunity to work with site topography to create different character areas and accommodate a variety of different housing tenures. Roads to follow countours. 9. Sloping site provides long views out towards landscape in north. 10. Opportunity to create an active travel gateway close to town and working with and between the existing heritage trees. 11. Access Road North of Conval Street is adopted to the South West corner of the Site. 12. Secondary pedestrian access from Hill Street. 13. Swales and rain gardens into SUDs for water management. HILLSIDE FARM, DUFFTOWN 02SITE CHALLENGES FB Post 190.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 188.0 Tree Edge to Dufftown Water Fence Boundary Mixed Native Hedge Junction Corner Trees Narrow Track Slope Badger Activity Potential badger offset Buffer Key 6 1 10 2 5 15 4 14 11 13 9 7 8 12 13 HILLSIDE FARM, DUFFTOWN 5 Active Travel Connections Connections to Path Network Views Potential ecology offsets Green edges 14 13 8 10 4 122 3 7 11 14 5 6 9 1 3 Page 242
Page 243
p 35 July 2025 Collective Architecture Site opportunities diagram 213.7m CONVAL STREET CONVAL CRES KININVIE COURT ST MICHAEL'S LANE B 9009 HILLSIDE AVENUE HILL STREET FB Track STNA STNB STNC STND FH FH TP TP TP TP Stay Stay Stay Stay Sign Edge of Crops Edge of Crops Edge of Crops Sign Sign Sign EP EP EP EP EP SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SVSV LP LP LP LP LP LP LP LP LP Post Post Post Post Post Post Post Post Post PostPostPostPostPostPostPost Post Post Mkr 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 214.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 212.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 206.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 204.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 202.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 198.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 194.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 226.0 226.0 224.0 224.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 222.0 182.0 180.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 184.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 220.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 218.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 216.0 224.0 186.0 186.0 186.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0 192.0 192.0 184.0 184.0 204.0 5 13 12 8 10 4 122 3 7 11 13 5 6 9 1 11 0 m 500mN Page 243
Page 244
This chapter outlines the various high level strategies and principles that together form the masterplan. Future development at Hillside Farm should adhere to these principles to make a high quality place that enhances Dufftown for everyone. 02 Masterplan Principles 2.0 Masterplan Principles 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Options Testing 2.3 Phasing Development 2.4 Phasing Strategy 2.5 Masterplan Principles 2.6 Learning from Dufftown 2.7 Connecting Hillside Farm 2.8 Landscape First 2.9 Integrated Water and Parkland 2.10 Spatial Strategy 2.11 Character Areas 2.12 Designing Streets 2.13 Vehicular Movement and Parking 2.14 Places for Community 2.15 A Place to Play and Grow 2.16 Sustainability and Energy Strategy 2.17 Technical Requirements Page 244
Page 245
02 Page 245
Page 246
p 38 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The Hillside Farm site represents a significant ‘once-in-a-generation’ opportunity to provide high quality housing at scale on a prominent site within the settlement of Dufftown. The site location has the potential to form a key gateway to the existing community and deliver new homes to meet the local housing need identified by both of the client partners. Our approach is rooted in an understanding of what makes the existing historic town special and how the remarkable landscape character around the site and wider Dufftown enhances local peoples quality of life, who live and work in Dufftown. This approach to development should ensure that new homes are harmoniously and sensitively integrated into the site, in a holistic manner, over time. The approach conserves the historic tree belts that define the town edge, and ensures a strategy is in place for legacy planting, to safeguard these biodiverse havens for future generations. The masterplan builds in climate resilience through an integrated green and blue approach to water management, creating a place with enhanced ecological value and encouraging biodiversity to thrive. The masterplan sets out a vision for a new neighbourhood, rooted in place, with opportunities to grow a local economy, create new accessible open space, address the climate emergency and support the elimination of fuel poverty through the provision of warm, sustainably heated homes. It plans to: • Create a place where the community will grow and thrive. • Provide housing that meets peoples’ long-term needs and will promote intergenerational living • Improve access, and support the ongoing sustainability of, community facilities, which will offer more opportunity to stay, travel and live locally. • Protect the natural setting of Dufftown for future generations through careful stewardship and establishment of placemaking and sustainable design principles. Illustrative images are provided to show how the masterplan principles could be interpreted, such diagrams are indicative only. Development proposals should be brought forward and determined through a formal Planning Application(s). The street names shown in the drawing to the right are indicative only, These names are not in use in Dufftown at present and named after by local features directional views the streets terminate towards. Street naming should be developed with the local community to ensure local knowledge of Scots language and place names is captured in making a meaningful and modern place with character significance. 02.1 Introduction to the Masterplan This chapter outlines the various elements that make up the masterplan. These essential strategies and characteristics combine to ensure that development at Hillside Farm aligns with the policies of Moray Local Development Plan 2020 and National Planning Framework 4. Page 246
Page 247
p 39 July 2025 Collective Architecture The Masterplan N Indicative Site Boundary Hill Street B9009 Conval Street Kinivie Court Hillside Avenue Fiddich CourtFiddich Street Parkbeg Street Clunymore Street Aigan Lane Little Conval Lane Conval Avenue Parkbeg Court Clunymore Court Page 247
Page 248
p 40 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The masterplan will exemplify the six qualities of successful places: Healthy Supporting the prioritisation of people’s safety and improving physical and mental health. Pleasant Supporting attractive natural and built spaces. Connected Supporting well connected networks that make moving around easy and reduce car dependency. Wetlands and integrated SUDs Walking routes through a biodiverse landscape Connecting to Dufftown Footpaths linking communities Hill Street Connection to the Landscape Linking into a wider network of paths As defined in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4)Page 248
Page 249
p 41 July 2025 Collective Architecture Tree Belt Retained and strengthened Distinctive Supporting attention to detail of local architectural styles and natural landscapes to be interpreted, literally or creatively, into designs to reinforce identity. Sustainable Supporting the efficient use of resources that will allow people to live, play, work and stay in their area, ensuring climate resilience, and integrating nature positive, biodiversity solutions. Adaptable Supporting commitment to investing in the long-term value of buildings, streets and spaces by allowing for flexibility so that they can be changed quickly to accommodate different uses as well as maintained over time. Heritage Trees Creating an active travel gateway Market Green A point of arrival to Dufftown and future housing Access Primary vehicular access via improved junction at Conval Crescent B9009 Conval Street Page 249
Page 250
p 42 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 1. One sided road 2. High access point into site 3. Avoid building on steeper sections 4. Opportunities to increase density 3 1 2 4 Original Layout - Jan 2024 - 99 units 02.2 Options Testing An options review was undertaken to assist with the site viability at a strategic level. Road, site access and infrastructure were reviewed at high level to make efficiencies, this in turn offered significant layout improvements for the strategic design. Page 250
Page 251
p 43 July 2025 Collective Architecture 1. Primary access road re-positioned to align more closely with site levels, allowing the extent of cut and fill across the full site to be greatly reduced. 2. Primary roads rationalised, one sided roads avoided, greater density of units achieved. 3. Retention reduced as a result of revised cut and fill and by building on flatter sections of site. 4. Site access has been rationalised to reduce road length. 5. Site road layout has been rationalised to reduce the overall quantity required to service the properties. 6. Ramped site entrance footpath omitted as no longer required. 7. Tree removal works now required to accommodate site entrance. 8. Opportunities to reduce density via unit types, if required. 3 6 3 4 5 7 2 Developed Layout with increased density* - 128 units * Subject to detail design, next steps and future planning applications. Page 251
Page 252
p 44 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 02.3 Phasing Development Alongside revisiting the site principals, the Design Team developed a high level approach to phasing the development to enable partial, phased or full development of the site. This provides flexibility for Moray Council and partners moving forward. Option 1 - 57 units Develop southern section of site only Full site - 128 units Primary access road re-positioned to align more closely with site levels, reducing the extent of cut and fill. Primary roads rationalised, one sided roads avoided, greater density of units achieved. Retention reduced by building on flatter sections of site. Sketch layouts above with explanatory road access diagrams below. Page 252
Page 253
p 45 July 2025 Collective Architecture Option 3 - 38 units Develop northern section of site only. Access from Hill Street only, no through access road to wider site. Would still require some improvements to junction at Balvenie Street. Option 2 - 71 units Northern section of site developed with access from Conval Street serving 23 units due to restrictions along Hill Street. Sketch layouts above with road access diagrams belowPage 253
Page 254
p 46 Hillside Farm, Dufftown This phasing plan is to be viewed as a starting point for any future delivery discussions, to allow flexibility to meet any site challenges. Phasing of any development works could be preceded by an initial phase of Infrastructure enabling works. This could comprise all route infrastructure, site wide drainage, SuDS, utilities, infrastructure, landscaping, planting and play. This will enable the phases identified on the plan adjacent to be ‘plugged-in’ as they are developed. The masterplan identifies two optional phases noted as 1 & 2 in the diagram as well as an additional reduced development option 3. The Character Areas expressed in following Chapter are applicable to all of the development options. Detailed phasing strategies should form part of any future planning application(s) for the site, relating back to the approach outlined opposite. This means the impact of the new development can be monitored incrementally and mitigation measures introduced should unforeseen problems be encountered. Hillside Farm could be developed in a phased manner in line with the indicative approach outlined opposite. This describes an approach which will support a sustainable ‘build-out’ which should enable a mixed community to organically develop as new elements stitch into town. 02.4 Phasing Strategy Development and Infrastructure Phasing 1 2 3 A B D E Upgrade works to Conval Crescent junction to Moray Council requirements; formation of new access route with 5.5m carriageway and 2m footpath to open up Hillside Farm; form the access road into Phase 1 site for future extension as Phase 2 commences Upgrade existing informal path and form new foul drainage connection into upgraded existing network to facilitate Phase 1 housing development Upgrade existing track to adoptable standards and form new foul drainage connection into upgraded existing network to facilitate Phase 2 housing development Possible future public realm / landscaping works within Market Green to improve setting Option 1 - Southern development first - housing development of up to 57 units with associated infrastructure works for access and SUDs Option 3 - North development of 38 units, access from Hill Street only. No through access to wider site. Would require junction upgrades at Balvenie Street. C Diversion of existing Scottish Water Main to follow new street pattern 1 Option 2 - North development first of 71 units - Northern section of site developed with road access from Conval Street serving 23 units due to Hill street access restrictions. Page 254
Page 255
p 47 July 2025 Collective Architecture Prospective Phasing diagram of Option 1 and 2 N A E 1 2 B D C Page 255
Page 256
p 48 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Local Development Plan Allocation - 100 units Overall Site Area - 4.3 ha New accessible landscaped open space Key views to be protected Area of site identified for development Areas which should provide wetlands Key routes through Hillside Farm Trees Belt to be retained Opportunities within Market Green Heritage trees to be retained where possible Key In the following pages we show how these principles provide the structure for the high level strategies that should be followed in any future development. This is to ensure the delivery of a unique place befitting Dufftown. N 02.5 Masterplan Principals A series of key principles underpins the masterplan, and set out the fundamental parameters and priorities for Hillside Farm. This approach allows the neighbourhood to evolve in a holistic and phased way within a clear and coordinated framework. The diagram below illustrates these key principles. Page 256
Page 257
p 49 July 2025 Collective Architecture Green Corridors and Landscape Buffers All healthy and mature trees should be retained. Green, biodiversity, corridors should be formed to the eastern and western edges of the development. Landscape buffers should wrap around the new homes. Transportation New and improved links between on-site and off-site should prioritise active travel and make this the easiest and best option for moving around. Connections should make Dufftown more accessible for all. Building and Topography New buildings should follow the patterns of the site contours and understand the urban character of surrounding areas. Water Management Capturing water at surface level from inside and outside the site, water is slowed on its journey through the site with swales and wetlands. This reduces pressure on public sewer systems. Page 257
Page 258
p 50 Hillside Farm, Dufftown A town’s physical development tells a story of its evolution over time, the driving forces that have shaped its spaces and places. The characteristics that we see today tell a story of the social and cultural history of a place. New development should also reflect this heritage as well as promoting modern values of living in Dufftown today. Dufftown has developed around a landscape setting on a regular grid pattern, surrounded by the large scale buildings of agriculture and distilling. The strong town plan is still clear and legible today, however more recent development between the historic street pattern and the boundary tree belts has been more ad-hoc and suburban in its form. The masterplan approach stitches the Hillside Farm site into the wider town pattern, acting to bring together the formal grid pattern of the 19th Century town with the informal contemporary infill that has stretched westwards in the intervening period. The context of the site is unique and rich, tied to the historic Market Green on the edge of the planned community, acting as a termination to the grid in the west. This space and Hill Street will tie the Hillside Farm site back to the historic town. The built forms within the Hillside Farm site should reflect the established pattern and characteristics of the historic town. These are characterised by buildings with long elevations facing onto principal streets; key corners formed by larger buildings; prominent gables; and larger individual dwellings towards the edges of the grid. These characteristics are described in the diagrams below and expressed further within Chapter 3. A successful development at Hillside Farm should learn from and reflect the strong urban forms of the historic parts of Dufftown in particular the grid arrangement of planned streets which relaxes into the landscape by bending corners or stepping up hills, streets terminating with key civic buildings. 02.6 Learning from Dufftown Illustrative historic characteristics within the town Long elevations Key courtyards and crosses Larger dwellings at town edge Page 258
Page 259
p 51 July 2025 Collective Architecture Primary grid intersection / civic Key buildings at grid intersections Secondary grid intersection / residential Market Green Key Historic townscape pattern broken by unsympathetic modern development Streets Terminating in key buildings or views Page 259
Page 260
p 52 Hillside Farm, Dufftown As a small town, Dufftown could already be described as a 20-minute neighbourhood. Hillside Farm should knit into this structure and development will offer opportunities for improved connectivity within the wider town networks. The masterplan proposes new streets and lanes through the site which are appropriate to the different character areas and reflect the patterns seen elsewhere in Dufftown. These will prioritise people movement over vehicles. Connections outwith the site boundary should occur where increased permeability would be desirable. These routes should work with the existing topography, street pattern and views and be pedestrian and cyclist friendly. All routes should be publicly accessible and promote active travel. All new footpaths should be a minimum of 2m wide with surfaces to align with the Design Guidelines set out in Chapter 3. Early development works must upgrade the existing junction on Conval Street to provide the principal site access road, this should also connect with Conval Crescent. This should be in line with the principles established and agreed with Moray Council Transportation Services as outlined in the Appendix. Development must facilitate improvements to the existing informal lanes joining Hillside Farm to Kininvie Court and Hillside Avenue. Forming these new connections close to existing homes will enable all local residents to benefit from access to the site as a place for recreation, exercise and active travel. The development provides opportunities for longer term improvements to the accessibility and usability of Market Green and improve established walking trails and pedestrian safety. This could be supplemented by an arts or signage strategy. In line with regional and national policy objectives to make active travel the easiest option for journeys, homes must be provided with safe and secure storage for cycling and wheeling. This low-carbon approach to travel should be compatible with the continued delivery of sustainable public transport links from the town to nearby settlements. Access to public transport stops and provisions for users need to be assessed as part of any future planning application(s) to identify where improvements may be made to encourage travel by public transport. A network of safe and well-connected routes will provide access within the Hillside Farm site. These will integrate the new development into the wider town and will encourage, promote and prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and connectivity to public transport for sustainable travel. 02.7 Connecting Hillside Farm to Dufftown “Development proposals will contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20 minute neighbourhoods. To establish this, consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area.” - NPF4, Policy 15 Page 260
Page 261
p 53 July 2025 Collective Architecture Opportunities for Mobility Hub at Hillside Farm The Scottish Government’s Climate Change Plan 2020 update included a world leading commitment to reduce car kilometres by 20% by 2030. By rethinking how we use our cars and reducing the number of daily journeys we take we can help to make Scotland a healthier, fairer, greener place to live and significantly contribute towards Scotland reaching net zero. Hillside Farm can support the modal shift by providing mobility hub infrastructure within the site. Through partnership between Moray Council and DDCA, there is an opportunity to provide for multi-modal hubs at key locations for an electric car club and other facilities such as secure cycle storage, bike hire, parcel lockers and public transport travel info. An exploration of the viability and deliverability of such a hub should be taken forward by the partner organisations following adoption of this masterplan as supplementary planning guidance. Appropriate locations have been noted in the diagram above. Possible Mobility Hub Locations Upgraded Active Travel Routes Existing walking routes Key Routes to existing public transport New Active Travel Routes New informal walking routes Upgraded Junction Travel Key Page 261
Page 262
p 54 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The development should be sensitively integrated into the setting by a new layer of landscape infrastructure. The strategy should incorporate play spaces, safe lanes around new homes which prioritise people, and playful elements next to key walking and cycling routes. The existing western tree belt is a key boundary to the Hillside Farm site and the plays a significant part in how the existing townscape is seen on approach from the west. Retaining the existing mature trees is important for the local community. These heritage trees must be retained through the course of development of the site with succession planting implemented to ensure the long-term sustainability of this natural asset. The Western and South greenspace gives relief between the housing and tree belt as well as allowing space for nature and existing habitats to flourish and recover from agricultural use. New native planting should be integrated in these spaces to supports biodiversity and diverse wildlife populations. These buffers will play a prominent role in the new accessible green space to the North of the strategy and will link outwards into the broader landscape corridors. The formal heritage trees at the Market Green are also significant from a townscape perspective acting as a key gateway marker for both the existing town and Hillside Farm site. It is likely several trees may need to be removed to allow the formation of a site access. Retained trees should be protected during road formation. A plan for succession tree planting in the areas where heritage trees are located should be developed and undertaken with species native to Scotland and in line with the landscape design guidelines outlined in Chapter 3. A tree survey, tree protection plan and mitigation plan for trees within and bordering the site should be provided with any future planning application(s) in line with Policy EP7 of the Moray Local Development Plan 2020. The final routes for new footpath connections through the heritage tree zone must be agreed through future planning application(s) and designed and detailed to avoid and minimise any harm to the trees by the works. New surfacing should be “no dig” where it is laid adjacent to trees, designed and installed in agreement with the planning authority. It is important that boundaries to existing homes are respected through privacy planting for back-to-back garden arrangements along the eastern site edge to retain the semi-rural feel from existing back gardens. Connecting paths (noted in the diagram on the previous page) should connect communities and allow immediate accessible access to green spaces. Development at Hillside Farm should integrate closely with the rural edge condition of the site, maintaining and enhancing the landscape character through careful planning and long-term stewardship of the existing natural assets. 02.8 Landscape First “The development must be integrated into the surrounding landscape which will include safeguarding existing trees and undertaking replacement planting to include native trees for any existing trees that are felled... The strategy for new tree provision should follow the principles of the “Right Tree in the Right Place” - LDP2020, DP1 Page 262
Page 263
p 55 July 2025 Collective Architecture Root Protection for Existing Trees The masterplan has followed the guidance set out in the British Standard covering trees in relation to design, demolition and construction. The British Standard, BS5837 : 2012, provides recommendations relating to tree care, with a view to achieving a harmonious and sustainable relationship between new construction and their surrounding trees. During construction any contractor has a duty to protect existing trees from damage and the British Standard specifies how this happens. Typical section of root protection area with no dig zone Root protection zone No dig No dig New accessible green space Key New Tree-lined green corridors Heritage Trees to be retained and succession planting implemented Focal Green Cross Wetland Parkland Existing property fences New north-south lanes should contain street trees to ensure that these become ‘green corridors’ for pedestrians moving through the site. Where these meet the east-west streets there is significant opportunity for tree cross’s to act as focal points in the streetscape. These should integrate into the green-blue strategy for water management with opportunities for rain gardens. Greeenspace is used to navigate levels within Hillside Farm, creating secondary routes for back garden access as well as the provision of a central and more formal planted space at the heart of the strategy. Page 263
Page 264
p 56 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The Green buffers will enhance the landscape spaces around existing homes to the east and south of the Hillside Farm site in addition to providing opportunities for ‘play-on-the-go’. This could take the form of simple timber structures, large boulders and balance beams. These spaces will be activated by routes through connecting new and old. The Market Green is the gateway to Dufftown from the west and should have a landscape strategy that reflects this status. Existing heritage trees must be retained and succession planting implemented. New routes and planting could supplement this. There is an opportunity to create a distinct ‘Welcome to Dufftown’ signage strategy that engages walkers and cars alike. Buffer Enhanced Landscape Heritage trees retained Play Routes New planting Routes Succession planting Signage Signage Examples of places for play in the landscape The character of the landscape will help the development feel and look unique to Dufftown. We understand that high quality accessible green spaces have a significant positive impact on our health and wellbeing. Development at Hillside Farm will embed a ‘landscape first’ approach to placemaking. Page 264
Page 265
p 57 July 2025 Collective Architecture The Lanes will provide tree-lined view corridors running north-south for pedestrians. These will step down the hillside with a variety of house types and active spaces emerging from them. Each lane will have a distinct character, the eastern lane more linear and the western lane more diagonal setting down towards the wetland. Both provide walking short cuts between shared surface streets. Green Cross Wetland Play Examples of places for community spaces Green Cross Green Cross Lane Lane Green Cross Green Cross Courtyard Courtyard Courtyard Courtyard Courtyard Courtyard Adjacent Homes Countryside Views Lane Lane Green Crosses and Courtyards intersect the more urban, shared streets that run East to West. Inspired by streets in Dufftown, streets terminate in Courtyards where houses are sociably arranged with entrances together or open out to a view. Each courtyard is intersected by a lane and tree line softening the harder surfaces, creating a through-flow and providing a meeting point. Page 265
Page 266
p 58 Hillside Farm, Dufftown An integrated landscape and drainage strategy should be put in place that provides climate resilience, place-making, space for ecology and well-being. Blue-Green Infrastructure (BGI) integrates hydrological functions with nature and landscape. It makes use of water (blue) and nature (green) to future proof drainage infrastructure capacity, protecting against flooding and the effects of climate change. These features should be integrated into streets, open-spaces and within building plots and contribute to a distinctive sense of place and habitat connectivity within the masterplan. BGI should work with the existing topography and the proposed built fabric to provide a holistic approach to landscape and drainage. Within the Hillside Farm site, the topography conveys water to existing low points, which function as collectors of over-land water flows. These damp areas should guide development to make best use of existing processes and systems and compliment the site’s natural hydrological function. Visible water management features such as swales, wetlands, ponds and raingardens will collect and slow down rainwater creating a green network of interconnected and adaptable habitats which serve to move water, wildlife and people through the development. A sustainable approach to water management is being taken. Capturing water at surface level, water is slowed on its journey through the site with swales and wetlands, reducing pressure on public sewer systems. In addition, Hillside Farm will be a thriving water resilient place. 02.9 Integrated Water and Parkland water flow raingarden Existing dwellings new homes wetland swale swalenew homes “Integrate green and blue infrastructure such as swales, permeable paving, SUDS ponds, green roofs and walls and grass/wildflower verges into streets, parking areas and plots to sustainably address drainage and flooding issues and enhance biodiversity from the outset of the development” - LDP2020, PP1 (v) Biodiversity Examples of positive rainwater management strategies by RFB Page 266
Page 267
p 59 July 2025 Collective Architecture “Development proposals for or incorporating new or enhanced blue and/ or green infrastructure will be supported. Where appropriate, this will be an integral element of the design that responds to local circumstances.” - NPF4, Policy 20 These design features will reduce the impact on the existing sewer system, decrease surface water run-off and reduce the risk of flooding. Connecting water management and wetland amenity space is an efficient and flexible way to structure diverse green space which performs more than one function. The delivery of sustainable flood risk management and the creation of great places to live that are resilient to climate change are now key features of Scottish planning policy. These features will reduce the impact of flash cloudburst events by containing and slowing the flow of water, but they will also provide amenity value and expand the diversity of habitats. The proposals for the management of water on the Hillside Farm site has the aim of ending uncontrolled flooding while improving environmental water quality. By considering water first, we can move from battling to overcome its negative impacts to capitalising the positive contribution it can make to creating environmentally friendly places. Hillside Farm presents a special opportunity to demonstrate how new policy can be applied in practice whilst creating new landscape characters that speak to local distilling culture and heritage. Green-blue spaces also support wellbeing and encourage engagement with wildlife through ponds, boardwalks and spaces for viewing the landscape. Examples of positive rainwater management strategyPage 267
Page 268
p 60 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The masterplan represents how by taking a ‘landscape first’ approach to creating green spaces and buffers, with integrated green blue infrastructure, provides a central core within the site for a dense development pattern which reflects the local vernacular placemaking. Housing and infrastructure is stitched into this central core of the site through working with and managing the challenging site topography. In the first instance, development is concentrated to the Northern side of the site, leaving generous greenspaces and natural hillside to the South. Within the site, a central access road feeds the shared streets which span East to West following the contours of the hillside. To ensure step free access to dwelling entrances, retention (if applicable) is contained within back-to-back gardens. Steeper North-South lanes will connect between the more gently sloping accessible shared streets and courtyards. The levels strategy creates a series of flatter zones allowing for the formation of dense housing clusters, arranged to reflect the patterns found and recorded within the existing townscape. The masterplan layout groups housing in three principle ways; looser groups at the core edges; dense streets with long elevations in the central areas; and tighter courtyard clusters which are reflective of the gable corner arrangements found in Dufftown. The formation of streets between these homes emphasises a car-tamed approach with streets for people rather than being dominated by vehicles. These shared surface streets should allow for visitor parking and a variety of road surfaces to indicate access priorities. The following pages outline these spatial strategies and how they should be understood and implemented. These are tested and described in more detail within the Character Areas in Chapter 3. Development of future detailed proposals for each character area should reflect an approach that is in keeping with the principles of the spatial strategy and provide a mix of housing models, tenures and sizes. This will ensure a mixed and diverse community is encouraged and supported through a phased delivery period. The Hillside Farm site offers an opportunity to make a contemporary place which understands and reinterprets the house types and spaces between buildings we see in the historic town. 02.10 Spatial Strategy Indicative configuration sketches of fronts and gardensPage 268
Page 269
p 61 July 2025 Collective Architecture The Masterplan with retention highlighted Managing the challenging site topography The spatial strategy works with the site topography with an approach to retaining structures to allow homes and streets to step gently down the natural hillside. These formed levels create zones where homes can be formed which are accessible to all and streets that can be navigated easily by people of all abilities. Each platform will be provided with areas of accessible landscape. “Retain, incorporate and/or respond to relevant elements of the landscape such as topography and planted features, natural and historic environment, and propose street naming to retain and enhance local associations” - LDP2020, PP1 (i) Placemaking Natural fall of the site Stepped lane Stepped lane N gradient street - accessible access to plots gradient street - accessible access to plots gradient street - accessible access to plots gradient street - accessible access to plots accessible access accessible access Page 269
Page 270
p 62 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Learning from Dufftown A series of house types should be developed that have characteristics that are distinctly ‘Dufftown’. These will be orientated to suit the site topography and to make characterful spaces in between. Larger homes to the East and West will have strong fronts to the streets and lanes, with informal backs and wide views towards the landscape. Key marker buildings should be located at the northern and southern gateways from the Market Green and Hill Street. “Distinctive: Supporting attention to detail of local architectural styles and natural landscapes to be interpreted, literally or creatively, into designs to reinforce identity.” - NPF4, Policy 14 Prominent elevations diagram Individual dwellings Combined dwellings Key Street Elevations Markers N Hill Street Hillside Avenue Kinivie Court Page 270
Page 271
p 63 July 2025 Collective Architecture Making places for people Streets will be formed with a focus on people and social activities with a varied form in line with the aspirations of Designing Streets and NPF4. The network of routes will allow for differing surface treatments suitable to their locations and to adoptable standards. The hierarchy of streets will force cars moving through spaces to slow down with differing widths acting to create informal parking or passing places. “ Provide a clear hierarchy of streets reinforced through street width, building density and street and building design, materials, hard/soft landscaping and a variety of approaches to tree planting and shrubs.” - LDP2020, PP1 (iv) Street Layout and Detail Street hierarchies diagram Lanes with steps Shared surface streets N Hill Street Hillside Avenue Kinivie Court Page 271
Page 272
p 64 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 02.11 Character Areas Ben Aigan View sits on the western perimeter of the development site and provides a new visual and physical edge to Dufftown. Characterised by the existing heritage tree-belt, Ben Aigan View will form a new landscaped space with wetlands alongside formal and informal landscaping. Homes will sit away from the site boundary, fronting onto a lane, with back gardens defined by native hedges and low fences addressing the views to the landscape both near and far. Community activities, from play in the south, via community growing to a picnic area in the north which will provide activity across this new landscape. Area 1 - Ben Aigan View Hillside Farm will have three different character areas. These areas have been arrived at following site analysis as outlined in Chapter 1. The access road into the site forms a spine from which a dense set of streets will span, stepping down the hillside. These will closely resemble the street and built character of historic Dufftown. Homes will sit close to the street, with long elevations and prominent gables. Variation in the street width will allow for street trees and car parking to be carefully integrated into the street scene. The Lanes, running North-South through the site, will provide green corridors and opportunities for rain-gardens where these cross the street. Area 2 - The Lanes and Spine Dense streets terminate in courtyards, where dwellings are arranged in groupings around shared surface streets. Entrances should be considered in relation to each other to create interactive outdoor spaces. Lanes weave between the courtyards, connecting them together and introducing greenspace into the harder surfaces. This character area provides connecting routes into the adjacent neighbouring housing and wider town via the heritage trees and Hillside Avenue. Area 3 - Eastern Courtyards Page 272
Page 273
p 65 July 2025 Collective Architecture Character Area 1 - Ben Aigan View Character Area 2 - The Lanes and Spine Character Area 3 - Eastern Courtyards N Character Areas diagram Hill Street B9009 Conval Street Kinivie Court Hillside Avenue Hillside Farm Character Area Existing homes Character Area Market Green Character Area Page 273
Page 274
p 66 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Housing at Hillside Farm should be formed around a number of low-car shared surface streets, their scale, form and character in close alignment with the ambitions and principles of Designing Streets and Cycling by Design. These streets will prioritise pedestrians and those wheeling whilst also allowing for easy access to homes for those with disabilities. The streets and lanes should be formed from a series of typologies which are indicated in the diagrams opposite. These show a rich tapestry of spatial conditions which will support social interaction, becoming the heart of a great place which will strengthen the health and wellbeing of the community. The network of streets and lanes should support opportunities for growing, active play and access to private gardens of varying sizes. House types should vary to allow for different rooms to face onto streets - with some providing kitchen spaces and others supporting living rooms. Water management, in the form of rills, swales and rain-gardens will be integrated in to strengthen the quality of the place. The outlined strategy for streets has been tested for vehicular movements of emergency vehicles and local refuse collections vehicles to meet standards. Streets should support and enhance daily life, not merely be corridors for vehicle movements. Streets should facilitate encounters, foster a sense of neighbourliness and provide the foundations of a healthy community. A network of shared surface streets and lanes will make homes accessible to all residents. 02.12 Designing Streets “Development proposals that include new streets and public realm should be inclusive and enable children and young people to play and move around safely and independently,maximising opportunities for informal and incidental play in the neighbourhood.” - NPF4, Policy 21 Typical Street Pattern 5.5m shared surface varies parking building line trees trees trees trees 2m service strip trees trees trees trees trees trees lane lane 2m service strip varies min. 10.5m building line trees varies min. 10.5m building line min. 1.5m private garden from street to building line Page 274
Page 275
p 67 July 2025 Collective Architecture Streetscape approach accommodating both people, landscape and vehicles Indicative pedestrian lane through green crosses Street widening for parking behind the building line, parking surface distinguished differently to shared surface Parking Courts alongside North / South Lanes, screened by trees Pleasant and connected path network Pedestrian and cycle routes that are safe and well connected Page 275
Page 276
p 68 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The diagram opposite demonstrates the vehicular hierarchy across the site. This indicates primary and secondary streets. The primary street provides the main vehicular circulation routes to link Hillside Farm to the immediate context and beyond. The secondary vehicular circulation provide drop off, delivery and light infiltration of cars into the streets for resident parking. Private car parking provision will be kept as low as possible across the site, with provision in line with the table below. This will be supported by the promotion of the active travel options and public transport links. Where parking is provided, it must be designed to be integrated with the streetscape and landscape features to avoid cars dominating the street scene. Larger homes are provided with in-curtilage parking whilst smaller homes will be provided with parking alongside homes in small clusters. Parking bays should be provided in groups of up to four spaces, with clusters broken up by planting and mature trees. At least 50% of parking should be located behind the principle street building line. Visitor parking should be integrated into the street. All parking spaces must be provided with electric charging provision. Final parking numbers must meet Moray Council standards to ensure they are appropriate to the site location, house typologies proposed and tenure of these. These specific requirements will be subject to scrutiny as part of any future planning applications. How vehicles move around the site, and where these park, has a major impact on the quality of the place for residents and visitors alike. The masterplan provides a balanced approach to reduce the impact of vehicles on the visual quality of streets and spaces. 02.13 Vehicular Movement and Parking Hillside Farm Masterplan Parking Standards Type Requirements Location Private Car Parking In line with NRDG standards In-curtilage or in parking clusters to meet needs of house sizes Visitor Car Parking In line with NRDG standards On-street provision across site Note that where accessible bungalow house types are provided these should also be provided with at least one parking bay within a car port within the curtilage of the property. The masterplan acknowledges that NPF4 promotes an aspirational approach to low car developments and opportunities for more active travel. There is opportunity for future applications to seek to address these aspirations in line with developing national and local standards. Any potential Electric Car Club Provision, in line with the aspirations of providing a Mobility Hub, should be provided on the basis of 5 to 6 spaces per 150 dwellings as per the recommendations of CoMoUK. Page 276
Page 277
p 69 July 2025 Collective Architecture “Development proposals which are ambitious in terms of low/no car parking will be supported ... where they do not create barriers to access by disabled people.” - NPF4, Policy 13Cluster parking provision In-curtilage parking provision Visitor Parking Primary Street Key Secondary Street (light infiltration) Service / Emergency Access Only Farm vehicles access Parking and vehicular access diagram N Page 277
Page 278
p 70 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Placemaking principles will support the development of a community centred around recreational spaces for new and existing residents in the area, with places for leisure, informal play and growing food. These will be interspersed amongst a diversity of housing options that meet local need, are accessible, affordable and can allow people to age in place. Spaces and places will sustain an environment that encourages chance encounters. Routes, journeys and street making should facilitate interactions between neighbours in the spaces between buildings. A range of community spaces should be formed at the earliest opportunity, with the development of infrastructure network (green and blue), landscaping and light touch community structures. These will open up accessibility to the site for all. Places to meet are located across all character zones and act as anchors for the neighbourhood. Within each character area places like communal recycling, tool libraries, bike stores and bike tool stations, delivery lockers, locally sourced food and vending machines could be co-located to support a local circular economy as well as being places where people bump into one another during their daily lives. The detailed planning application stage and phasing of the project should ensure that communal spaces and facilities are designed and located where there is a proven need and want from the local community to ensure their long term use and maintenance. Housing diversity is critical to the success of forming a truly sustainable community. New homes should provide a balanced mix in each area. Phasing of the development should allow for this mix to grow organically over time. A mixed community can help combat feelings of loneliness, provides a support network an a greater sense of purpose. Younger neighbours can help residents with tasks that have become harder. There are social benefits for both old and young, through increased social interactions. Spaces shared by children and elderly adults provides a perfect opportunity for young and old to learn new skills, especially communication and technology skills, from one another. Alongside new homes at Hillside Farm, there is the opportunity to provide a liveable and sustainable neighbourhood, creating an environment where a variety of home types and tenures are supported for a mixed community that grow together over time. 02.14 Places for Community Page 278
Page 279
p 71 July 2025 Collective Architecture Examples of spaces for community activity, for illustrative purposes Page 279
Page 280
p 72 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The strategy should provide space for play and community interaction through the landscape edge, lanes and central green. This will provide opportunities for community stewardship or volunteering in the landscape, skills development and lifelong learning. A community space could provide sheltered space for meetings, a community kitchen or an outdoor classroom for a nursery group. Spaces should be allocated for food growing, so that this can be accommodated if there is a desire for future community gardens or within individual home plots. An edible landscape is possible through the planting strategy. Hubs, for active travel and shared resources within well connected and central locations could provide focal points for community activities. Formal Play Examples of places for community activities Play Play Play Play Play Hub Opportunities for Allotments Orchard Raised beds in shared gardden Play Page 280
Page 281
p 73 July 2025 Collective Architecture The location of routes and parking spaces will make active travel the easiest option to move within the site and into Dufftown. These routes will animate lanes and provide movement and activity. A variety of external spaces of different forms and scales between buildings foster opportunities for different types of play and interaction. Informal Paths Walking routes Wetlands Hub Recycle Recycle The series of shared space streets and pedestrian lanes will facilitate and encourage active and liveable streets. Low boundaries between properties allow neighbourliness and engagement across the garden fence, hedge or wall. Water management is integrated and opportunities for shared recycling and a mobility hub can encourage neighbourhoods to form within individual streets. to Park Examples of places for community activities “Development proposals that will have positive effects on health will be supported. This could include, for example, proposals that incorporate opportunities for exercise, community food growing or allotments.” - NPF4, Policy 23 Walking routes to Bus to Town Landscape walks Recycle Recycle Recycle to School Recycle Recycle Hub Page 281
Page 282
p 74 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 02.15 A Place to Play and Grow A strong driver of the landscape strategy is to seek ways to encourage frequent social moments, with opportunities for shared refuse stores, cycle storage and shared gardens, community growing spaces, seating areas and linking paths. It is important that in the design of external social spaces consideration is given to the varied needs of a diverse and intergenerational community, so these spaces can be enjoyed by all. For example; • To help create a dementia and autism friendly environment, it is important to have recognisable and describable meeting points. Clear character areas with distinct colours, materials and house types can aid navigation. • The location and shape of seating structures is important; a good seating arrangement can help encourage face-to-face dialogue. • Space for teens to be out of the house, in the fresh air and interacting with their peers in a safe and supportive environment will help build open and healthy communities. • Ensuring that benches are located regularly on key paths will allow for those who may need to rest more often on walks. The play strategy for the site allows for a larger ‘primary play’ space in the central greenspace with more incidental opportunities for interaction elsewhere. Outdoor play is a great way to get exercise and form social bonds. The Dufftown landscape should incorporate play areas, safe lanes which prioritise people and playful elements next to key walking or cycling routes. “Play-on-the- way” which features balancing and hopping opportunities near key pedestrian routes is helpful to encourage residents to embrace a more active lifestyle and could work well with the primary school nearby, whilst providing a safer alternative to the surrounding busy road network. These interventions will be low-key and of a natural quality. Closer to homes, play areas can be more structured and provide simple play for younger children, as well as being places for young people of all ages to hang out with good passive surveillance. Inclusive and accessible play space provision should be provided for all ages and abilities. Planting associated with the play spaces is key to ensuring that they are rich and dynamic. Seasonal change provides the opportunity for nature to be a part of the play offering. As encouraged by national policy, a food growing strategy for Hillside Farm should offer opportunities for people to grow fruit and vegetables near to their homes, as well as larger allotment / community gardens. A variety of fruit trees and fruiting hedges that are native to the area and suitable for the climate should be incorporated into a planting proposal. External social spaces provide safe locations for people to meet and get fresh air, no matter what age you are. They are important to encourage intergenerational relationships by creating opportunities for incidental meets. Such spaces are embedded throughout the masterplan. Page 282
Page 283
p 75 July 2025 Collective Architecture Opportunities Fruiting Hedgerows Orchard Planting Opportunities for Composting Primary Play Key On-the-go play / play trail Opportunities for Allotments Shared Garden / Planters Examples of growing places Productive site diagram Page 283
Page 284
p 76 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Future development must take a joined up and integrated approach that fully considers flexibility, adaptability, energy and climate change when designing resilient housing models for the future. Warm, energy-efficient homes that are cost-effective to heat in winter and easy to cool in summer should be provided. “Underpinned by the vision and the mission of the UN Agenda 2030 and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, the Climate Framework is organised around six overarching themes...which can be influenced most directly by the built environment” Passivhaus, refers to buildings created to rigorous energy efficient design standards so that they maintain an almost constant temperature. Passivhaus buildings are so well constructed, insulated and ventilated that they retain heat from the sun and the activities of their occupants, requiring very little additional heating or cooling. 02.16 Sustainability and Energy Strategy Hillside Farm will positively face the need for climate resilience by taking a low carbon approach to design, development, energy strategy and resident behaviour. Future proposals should illustrate how they support this Energy Strategy as outlined below: • All development should apply a ‘fabric first’ approach, where the envelope of new buildings is designed and constructed to be energy efficient. • All homes should aspire to Passivhaus standard or exceed the building regulations to reduce energy demand of new buildings. • De-carbonised Energy Systems: All development should support the transition to a de-carbonised energy system to heat and power new buildings, reflecting the national energy strategy. • Renewable Energy: Where possible opportunities to maximise inherent site opportunities for renewable energy generation – from water, solar, ground, sewage, air and wind should be considered. • Deliverable: sustainable solutions should be developed that are practical and deliverable, in line with the phased delivery of the site. • A transition to low carbon transport: Development should support low carbon transport with integrated cycle use, ‘charge at home’ electric opportunities, ‘ fast charging points and car share being prioritised. Climate Framework Themes Page 284
Page 285
p 77 July 2025 Collective Architecture 02.17 Technical Requirements The Moray Local Development Plan 2020 outlines key requirements for future development of the Hillside Farm site, which this masterplan reflects and sets parameters for. Additional work will be required by future planning application(s) to build upon the masterplan principles in the following areas. Offsite works The masterplan indicates a number of areas where works will be required outwith the LDP2020 redline boundary for the site. These works will include: • Upgrading of the junction at Conval Crescent in line with the design in principle established by Narro Associates and agreed with Moray Council Transportation Service • Upgrading of the track through Market Green to a 5.5m carriageway with 2m footpath to provide the primary road access to the site. • New foul drainage connections into existing Scottish Water network with upgrade works to infrastructure as identified in Scottish Water response to the Pre-development enquiry • New surface water outflow to existing watercourse for the north of the site as outlined in Narro Associates indicative drainage strategy Diversions The existing water main running through the site will require to be diverted with all works to be agreed with Scottish Water. Automatic Fire Suppression Systems In line with Scottish Building Standards all new homes built for social rent after March 2021 must have automatic fire suppression systems installed. Early consideration should be made for the careful integration of any associated standalone water tank and pump structures that may be required to meet this requirement. Further Technical Reports The masterplan process has produced a number of baseline reports to support establishing the key design principles. These should be supplemented alongside future planning application(s) by the following reports: Site Investigations Narro Associates conducted initial trial pit investigations in August 2023, a summary of this is provided alongside recommendations for future site investigation works. Ecological Studies A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) was undertaken in September 2023 by Lunar Environmental. The recommendations of this PEA should be undertaken by future applicants. Tree Survey A tree survey should be commissioned and undertaken to assess the age, quality and future maintenance requirements of trees within and bordering the site. Requirements and scope for both a Drainage Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment should be agreed with Moray Council to meet LDP2020 requirements. Future planning applications should address the aims and principles established by the masterplan whilst also meeting a number of identified technical requirements. Key aspects are outlined below and further detailed within the associated appendices in Chapter 5. Page 285
Page 286
3.0 Design Code 3.1 Character Area 1 - Ben Aigan View 3.2 Character Area 2 - The Lanes and Spine 3.3 Character Area 3 - Eastern Courtyards 3.4 Architectural Guidelines 3.5 Landscape Guidelines The design guidelines in this chapter set out the design approach, quality and materials which are recommended for each Character Area of development at Hillside Farm. These set out how all new homes at Hillside Farm should look and feel to ensure a holistic approach is taken across each phase of development. 03 Design Code Page 286
Page 287
0003 Page 287
Page 288
p 80 Hillside Farm, Dufftown A new neighbourhood that is distinctly Dufftown. Eastern Courtyards Weaving Hillside Farm into wider Dufftown. Existing homes at Conval Crescent Existing homes at Hillside Avenue Existing homes at Kinivie Court Existing homes Hill Street Conval Street Page 288
Page 289
A new neighbourhood that is distinctly Dufftown. p 81 December 2023 Collective Architecture Ben Aigan View The western edge, addressing the landscape near and far. The Lanes and Spine A familiar place, with neighbourly streets and characterful homes. B9009 to the Gownie Hill Path Page 289
Page 290
p 82 Hillside Farm, Dufftown In Ben Aigan View, buildings are typically proposed to step down the hillside topography. Repeating house types will create a cohesive feel across the dwellings, but variations in roof form, materials and elevation detailing will be introduced to create a richer architecture. Key characteristics of the area are: • Placemaking, where spaces for neighbourhood and community are embedded across the character zone, at all scales and types. • Sustainable blue and green infrastructure is used to strengthen and enhance the existing landscape with formation of a new wetland to North and cascading basins to West that interpret the whisky distilling process that Dufftown is known for. • Pleasant and pedestrian prioritised streets and lanes. • Homes that are open and well connected to the environment - with views from their rear gardens out into the landscape beyond • Amenity provision that promotes health and well-being, and supports a sense of community. Typologies and Uses: • Homes along the western edge should typically be larger detached types with siting reflecting the edge condition found in the existing town. Gables to face the West tree line where possible. • Increased density of dwellings to the North to merge with the Lanes character area. • Homes along the Northern edge should consider the placement of entrances and rear gardens to ensure frontages onto the Wetlands. • Boundary treatments should reflect a rural edge condition, with low hedges and fences to gardens whilst retaining walls should be formed in gabion baskets. 03.1 Character Area 1 - Ben Aigan View 1. Wetlands for sustainable drainage with path network 2. Larger detached homes stepping down hillside accessed from lanes / court clusters with rear gardens facing onto landscape space with hedges and timber fencing not higher than 1200mm. Homes should be afforded unbroken views of landscape to the west. 3. New pedestrian lane lined with tree species native to Scotland, rain gardens to site south on stepped sections 4. Homes clustered around Wetlands with rear gardens facing onto the landscape space with native hedges and timber fencing not higher than 1200mm. Rear gardens should have gates into the landscape. Homes should be afforded unbroken views of landscape to the north 5. Existing tree buffer to west, succession planting of native mixed hedgerow and native field trees to maintain boundary, mixed hedgerow maintained to north 6. Formal orchard planting, fruiting trees. 7. Retained greenspace and view corridor. 8. Opportunities for community food growing, composting and allotment area. Views / surveillance Primary site access Lane Low hedge Fence Key Page 290
Page 291
p 83 July 2025 Collective Architecture 8 9 N Diagram view P.T.O Visual view (Cover) 5 5 5 4 61 2 3 8 Visual view P.T.O View Corridor 7 Page 291
Page 292
p 84 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Viewed through the existing tree lined edge to Dufftown the Character of the homes should integrate with the woodland setting. The homes step down the hill and provide a green outlook. Large west facing windows provide natural surveillance over the shared park space and bright doors face the lane. This character area mediates between the density of The Lanes character area and the rural edge of the town. Ben Aigan View Roof - Slate Cladding - Natural Timber Rainwater goods - Light grey metal Doors - Accent Colour Page 292
Page 293
p 85 July 2025 Collective Architecture Stepping roofs viewed through the Woodland edge Visual and physical connection to the parkland with passive surveillance Homes afforded views to the North Dwelling fronts to courts / streets View corridor to be maintained with opportunities for lookout point Lansdscape CharacteristicsBuilding Material Palette Page 293
Page 294
p 86 Hillside Farm, Dufftown The Lanes is a denser area of housing, clustered together with long street elevations and strong visible gables. Repeating house types and blocks will create a cohesive feel to the streets which step down the hillside punctuated by green view corridors thought the site. Key characteristics of the area are: • Placemaking, where homes sit close to the street creating an intimate neighbourly character. • Pleasant shared-surface shared space streets that run East West with pedestrian focused lanes running North South. • Green-blue infrastructure integrated into the lanes with raingardens and rills. • ‘Grid blocks’ of homes create enclosed and generous private back gardens that adsorb level changes. • Lanes provide active travel links into Hill Street and the Market Green. • A central park space provides a play central to the housing with passive surveillance from surrounding homes. Typologies and Uses: • The central site access road forms a spine through the lanes and housing. • Homes should be organised in dense clusters with long elevations forming strong street edges with opportunities for denser cottage flat house types to assist with level changes and shared garden spaces. • Boundary treatments to fronts should provide for low walls or birdsmouth fencing, with low native hedges at key corners and gardens that adjoin tree crosses. • Rear garden boundaries should be formed with low height timber fencing with retaining walls formed by gabions. 03.2 Character Area 2 - The Lanes and Spine 1. New pedestrian focused lane forming green corridor through the site lined with tree species native to Scotland and providing long views to the landscape to the north 2. Landscape buffer to site South to provide screening and improved habitat for wildlife 3. Rear garden courts (back to back) with low-height boundary fencing not higher than 1200mm and gabion retaining walls 4. Shared surface street with trees and hedging breaking down possible dominance of car parking 5. Green cross where shared surface streets are dissected by pedestrian lanes with opportunities for incorporating rain-gardens 6. Opportunities for cottage flat house types to densify lanes and possibility to introduce entrances to front and gable elevations 7. Smaller arrangement towards Hill Street, opportunities for smaller / bungalow dwellings 8. Marker buildings at site gateways 9. Formal play space 10. Entrance points to shared surface streets with raised table to prioritise pedestrian movement and slow traffic Views / surveillance Primary site access Lane Low native hedge Fence Retaining wall Low maintance grassland planting Key Page 294
Page 295
p 87 July 2025 Collective Architecture View Corridor N Marker View Corridor Marker Marker 1 1 1 2 5 5 3 3 4 6 7 Diagram view P.T.O Diagram view P.T.O 10 10 10 10 Page 295
Page 296
p 88 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Here vernacular materials are used in a formal setting. Corrugated or zinc metal forms a crisp outline and the street looks like a single metal wrap. An accent colour is used to distinguish key lane elevations, highlight areas that give passive surveillance as well as define street edges; recesses and gables. The Lanes Roof - Dark grey metal Cladding - Light grey or orange metal Rainwater goods - Dark grey metal Doors - Accent Colour Page 296
Page 297
p 89 July 2025 Collective Architecture Stepped lanes and view corridors linking focal green crosses Level Streets with primary elevations considered as a wrapping material Retention within back courts, slopes taken up by garden spaces Repeating block structure Landscape Characteristics Landscape CharacteristicsBuilding Material Palette Page 297
Page 298
p 90 Hillside Farm, Dufftown 03.3 Character Area 3 - Eastern Courtyards The Eastern Courtyards connect Hillside Farm into wider Dufftown through pedestrian routes into the adjacent neighbouring housing and wider town via the heritage trees and Hillside Avenue. Key characteristics of the area are: • Placemaking, where dwelling clusters terminate shared streets and create pedestrian and play friendly spaces. • New pedestrian connections to the neighbouring housing helps knit Hillside into Dufftown and create key routes to amenities and public transport options in the town centre. • Interwoven by the Western lane and view corridor, blue green infrastructure intersects the shared streets running East West. • Back-to-back garden arrangements with existing homes in Kininvie Court and Hillside Ave. create cohesion with the edge often town. • To the site South, the heritage tree gateway should be strengthened with succession planting and a native grass and wildflower planting strategy with on-the-go play incorporated. Typologies and Uses: • Homes should be organised in courtyard clusters reflecting the local rural steading typology. • Larger detached house types should be combined with other types to terminate the street and create variety. • In-curtilage parking should be encouraged to ensure the character of the shared street is a courtyard and not a parking court. • Rear garden boundaries should be formed with low height timber fencing with retaining walls formed by gabions. 1. New pedestrian focused link into Market Green with works undertaken to protect heritage trees. Succession tree planting with species native to Scotland. 2. Upgraded pedestrian connections into existing town and local amenities 3. Landscape buffer to provide improved habitat for wildlife, succession planting wild-flower meadow. 4. Opportunities for play-on-the-go within lanes and buffer landscape. 5. Parking courts adjacent to lanes assist with street density, provide turning space for refuse vehicles or connecting through routes on more gently sloping parts of the hillside. 6. Larger detached homes with in- curtilage parking provision and enclosed rear gardens. 7. Landscape buffer with native species hedging and tree planting to mirror trees within Market Green 8. Dwelling entrances onto lanes creating positive passive surveillance of outside spaces. Views Primary site access Lane Low native hedge Low maintenance grassland planting Connecting routes Key Page 298
Page 299
p 91 July 2025 Collective Architecture N View Corridor View Corridor View Corridor 2 2 Diagram view P.T.O 1 3 4 5 5 5 6 4 Diagram view P.T.O Page 299
Page 300
p 92 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Materially, this character area borrows from the crisp language of ‘the Lanes’ and central grid plan of housing whilst offering a softer and more sympathetic palette, to connect to the adjacent homes and existing edge of Dufftown. The wrapping language of the Lanes should continue into the courts to terminate the streets, highlighting key features and entrances. The combined material palettes of ‘The Lanes’ and ‘Ben Aigan View’ bring variety and character to the Eastern site edge create an eclectic mix of materials. Material should carefully consider street surfaces, furniture and wider path connections. Eastern Courtyards Roof - Dark grey metal or slate Cladding - Light grey metal or timber Rainwater goods - Light grey metal Doors - Accent Colour Page 300
Page 301
p 93 July 2025 Collective Architecture Landscape CharacteristicsBuilding Material Palette Path connections to existing housing and Highland Games pitch Existing 1.8m high fencing to gardens to site perimeter Connecting routes to wetlands through housing Active travel link through historic trees Perimeter housing Page 301
Page 302
p 94 Hillside Farm, Dufftown A series of guidelines for the architectural approach have been developed, to apply across the masterplan and should provide a coherence across the character areas. These design guidelines set the standard of design and quality for all scales of future development. Future proposals must accord with the guidance laid out in this section. However, final layouts and materials will be fully defined as part of the detailed planning design stages. Gateways and Thresholds Building colour ‘accents’ should be provided at key gateways and junctions. These can create markers, or identify important moments across the masterplan that help with wayfinding. Height and Differentiation Residential buildings can use height to create differentiation and a varied townscape. Roofscape and Setbacks The roofscape should be utilised to contribute to the townscape of the development, creating interest and variety in form. Connection to the Environment A variety of amenity spaces should be provided to offer residents many opportunities to connect to the natural environment. Natural Light Buildings should be designed to optimise natural light, capture solar gain and minimise overshadowing to external spaces. Consideration should be given to how internal spaces are orientated to take advantage of the sun path through the day. 03.4 Architectural Guidelines Balvenie Street Dufftown Collective Architeture Proctor & Matthews Collective Architecture Sponge Park BDP Allison Brookes Newhall Page 302
Page 303
p 95 July 2025 Collective Architecture Entrances Entrances should be designed to be recognisable elements that enhance the streetscape and create a welcoming sense of arrival. Flexibility Dwellings should have an integral flexibility about how they can be utilised by different households or at different stages of life Fabric First Buildings should be designed with a fabric first approach to minimise energy demand A Sense of Craft Recessed entrances and window openings should create a sense of craft in the finer detailing. Facade composition, window sizing and positioning should create rich and visually interesting buildings. Robust and Natural Materials A palette of materials should be developed that provides coherence across the character areas. Mixing materials with complimentary tones and contrasting textures is to be promoted. Sustainability and Locality The embodied energy, sustainability and environmental performance should be considered in line with NPF4 Policies 1 & 2 and Moray Council Policy guidance. Dufftown Heritage Consideration should be given to reflect the local heritage through the material palette and approach to forming façades such as incorporating relief and depth. Russwood Timber Local Stone Gabion Image Credits Houses in Dufftown Mikhail Riches Clayfields Goldsmiths (Passivehaus) Morris & Co W ildernesse Mews Shepardess W alk Page 303
Page 304
p 96 Hillside Farm, Dufftown Dwelling Boundaries Boundaries should be designed to offer views of the surrounding landscape and encourage day to day neighbourly encounters. Streets and Lanes These should be multifunctional, hardworking spaces that aim to be resource efficient in layout to reduce the extent of hard infrastructure. There should be a people first emphasis that promotes multi-use. Communal Amenity Spaces The gardens in the immediate surrounds of new homes should be for the enjoyment of residents, with lush planting, seating areas, well lit and paths for walking and bikes. Water Management Rainwater management should take the principal of allowing the landscape to manage rainfall and harness water in a creative, attractive and biodiverse way. SuDS features, such as rainwater swales, rain-gardens, basins and ponds, should be used to bring diversity into the heart of the development whilst providing effective management of rainfall. It is important that the SuDs features endeavour to avoid being separated by fences or hard surfaces to fulfil infrastructure functions without looking overly engineered. A series of guidelines for the landscape strategy have been developed in tandem with the architectural guide on the previous page. The following elements contribute to support development at Hillside Farm being a healthy and active place. In general, future proposals must accord with the guidance laid out in this section. However, final layouts and materials will be fully defined as part of the detailed planning design stages. 03.5 Landscape Guidelines Page 304
Page 305
p 97 July 2025 Collective Architecture Trees Succession planting should be planned for, alongside any new tree planting. Trees should be of medium or large-growing species for the parkland areas with medium / smaller sized trees for the streets, amenity and play spaces. Finishes Natural toned surfaces such as buff coloured asphalt should be considered to paths and cycleways. A simple palette, that is robust and easy to maintain. Allotments, Growing and Edible Landscapes Spaces for community food growing is to be promoted. The planting of fruiting landscapes should be incorporated into any planting plan, appropriate to the locale climate Lighting Lighting should be carefully designed to help people feel safe moving around at night without impacting nocturnal wildlife activity. New lighting will incorporate smart technologies to direct light where it is needed, in line with local authority requirements. Play Areas Play value does not derive just from the apparatus and a playful landscape approach should be promoted. Imaginative use of landform, vegetation, rocks, timber and sand shall provide an exciting setting for any apparatus that is included. External Furniture Seats should be provided in varied configurations for more varied use. Seating should be provided at approx. 50m intervals on key routes to provide rest stops for those requiring them. Seats should be associated with trees, planting or activity. Supporting Wildlife and Biodiversity New habitats will support biodiversity including wetlands, hedgerows and meadows. Timber bird / bat boxes / bug hotels should be mounting on existing mature trees or in line with ecological recommendations. RFB Image Credits Highline New York Causewayhead Park Page 305
Page 306
Company Registered in Scotland No. 240055 VAT Registration No. 703 5568 41 1805-001 Doc_A4-P Page 306