Agenda Document Pack - Planning and Regulatory Services Committee - 22/10/2024
Moray Council · 22 October 2024
Back to Planning and Regulatory Services Committee — 22 October 2024 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 Tuesday, 22 October 2024 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 Tuesday, 22 October 2024 at 09:30. BUSINESS 1 Sederunt 2 Declaration of Group Decisions and Members Interests * 3 Minute of meeting dated 13 August 2024 7 - 18 4 Written Questions ** 5 Notice of Motion - Short Term Lets Councillors Fernandes and Coull 19 - 20 Guidance Note 21 - 22 6 Planning Application 23/02239/AMC Report by Appointed Officer Approval of Matters specified in conditions 1-19, 23, 25-58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 148 homes including affordable housing with landscaping parking access and associated works within part of Area 1 at Site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Elgin Moray for Barratt North Scotland 23 - 92 7 Planning Application 24-00986-APP 93 - 120 Page 1
Page 2
8 Planning Application 24/00705/APP Report by Appointed Officer Revised proposals for R2 site consisting of residential development and associated landscape and infrastructure on R2 Bilbohall Elgin Moray for Moray Council 121 - 176 9 24/01139/PAN Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) Proposed expansion of maltings production capacity and associated roads drainage and infrastructure at Portgordon Maltings 177 - 182 10 24/01424/PAN Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) Proposed two borrow pits within the site of Berryburn Windfarm Extension 183 - 188 11 Consultation on Section 36 Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) Variation to consented Rothes III Wind Farm to increase height of 3 wind turbines from 149.9 metres to max 200 metres (turbines numbered 9, 13 and 14) 189 - 232 12 Employment Land Audit 2024 Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) 233 - 276 13 Moray Development Plan - Planning Policy Guidance Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) 277 - 318 14 Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan 2024-2025 Report by Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) 319 - 348 Page 2
Page 3
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 do so, please come to the High Street entrance door and a member of staff will be let into the building. 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 12 noon two working days prior to the day of the meeting. A copy of any written answer provided by the Chair will be published on the Council’s committee management system by 4pm the day before the meeting. The Member who has put the question may, after the answer has been published, 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 Marc Macrae (Depute Chair) Councillor Neil Cameron (Member) Councillor Theresa Coull (Member) Councillor John Cowe (Member) Councillor John Divers (Member) Councillor Amber Dunbar (Member) Councillor Jérémie Fernandes (Member) Councillor Donald Gatt (Member) Councillor Sandy Keith (Member) Councillor Scott Lawrence (Member) Councillor Paul McBain (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, 13 August 2024 Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX PRESENT Councillor Neil Cameron, Councillor Theresa Coull, Councillor John Cowe, Councillor John Divers, Councillor Amber Dunbar, Councillor Jérémie Fernandes, Councillor Donald Gatt, Councillor David Gordon, Councillor Sandy Keith, Councillor Scott Lawrence, Councillor Marc Macrae, Councillor Paul McBain, Councillor Draeyk van der Horn, Councillor Sonya Warren ALSO PRESENT Councillors Bloomfield and Williams IN ATTENDANCE Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, Mr N MacPherson, Acting Development Management and Building Standards Manager, Mr R Smith, Principal Planning Officer, Mr A Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer, Strategic Planning and Development Manager, Mr J Killeen, Engineer (Transportation), Ms E Webster, Principal Planning Officer (Strategic Planning and Development), Mr D Westmacott, Planning Officer, Mr K Henderson, Planning Officer, Legal Services Manager and Mrs L Rowan, Committee Services Officer as Clerk to the Committee. 1 Chair Councillor Gordon, being Chair of the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee, 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 Resolution The meeting resolved that in terms of Section 50A (4) and (5) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, as amended, the public and media representatives be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the items of business appearing at the relevant paragraphs of this minute as specified below, so as to avoid disclosure of exempt information of the class described in the appropriate paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 7A of the Act. Item 3 Page 7
Page 8
Paragraph No. of Minute Paragraph No. of Schedule 7A 14 6 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person(s) 9 – Information on terms proposed or to be proposed by or to the Authority 15 12 – Information relating to instructions to counsel any opinion of counsel, and any advice received, information obtained or action to be taken in connection with any legal proceedings. 16 12 – Information relating to instructions to counsel any opinion of counsel, and any advice received, information obtained or action to be taken in connection with any legal proceedings. 17 12 – Information relating to instructions to counsel any opinion of counsel, and any advice received, information obtained or action to be taken in connection with any legal proceedings. 4 Minutes The Minutes of the meeting of this Committee dated 28 May 2024 and the special meeting of this Committee dated 13 June 2024 were submitted and approved. 5 Written Questions The Committee noted that no written questions had been submitted. 6 Planning Application 24/00408/APP Ward 4 - Fochabers Lhyanbryde Development of a cemetery, soft and hard landscaping, access parking and associated development at land to the east of Linkwood Road and north of Hallowood Road, Elgin, Moray for Moray Council. The Committee had before it a report by the Appointed Officer recommending that, for reasons detailed in the report, planning permission be granted for the development of a cemetery, soft and hard landscaping, access parking and associated development at land to the east of Linkwood Road and north of Hallowood Road, Elgin, Moray for Moray Council. The meeting noted that the application had been referred to Committee in terms of the Scheme of Delegation as it is a departure from the Moray Local Development Plan 2020. During discussion, concern was raised in relation to the loss of up to 35 trees identified as ancient woodland which is considered to be irreplaceable and, given Page 8
Page 9
that the site is also constrained by a high-pressure gas pipeline to the east, it was queried whether this site was suitable. In response, the Strategic Planning and Development Manager advised that colleagues from several services had given careful consideration to choosing a suitable site for the cemetery which is greatly needed in Elgin and assured the Committee that all options had been considered. Councillor Macrae, having considered the planning application in detail noted that National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is not entirely against development in ancient woodland and acknowledged that there may be circumstances when the removal of ancient woodland would be acceptable if there is a significant public benefit, and moved that the Committee grant planning permission in respect of Planning Application 24/00408/APP subject to the conditions detailed within the report. Councillor Divers seconded this. During further discussion surrounding parking within the cemetery, it was queried whether there was sufficient car parking available and seeking confirmation that there would be no over-spill of cars parking on the main road. In response, Mr Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer advised that an informative could be added asking for signage to be installed indicating that no parking should be undertaken on Linkwood Road (to the immediate west of the cemetery). This was unanimously agreed. The Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development acknowledged the concerns of the Committee in respect of the loss of ancient woodland and drew attention to an informative in the report which stated that Transportation would visit the site during clearance works with a view to minimising the loss of trees and suggested that this be included as a condition rather than an informative. This was unanimously agreed. Thereafter, the Committee unanimously agreed to grant planning permission in respect of Planning Application 24/00408/APP, as recommended, subject to: i) an informative asking for signage to be installed indicating that no parking should be undertaken on Linkwood Road (to the immediate west of the cemetery); ii) a condition being added to ensure that Transportation visit the site during clearance works to minimise the loss of trees; and iii) the following conditions and 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 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. No development shall commence until a visibility splay 2.4m by 215m has been provided in both directions at the new access onto the public road with all boundaries set back to a position behind the required visibility splays; and Page 9
Page 10
maintained thereafter at all times free of any obstruction greater than 0.6m in height measured from the level of the carriageway (as shown on submitted drawing reference “40186-IFL-A1-RD-C-00-002-P06”.) 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. 3. Prior to the first use of the cemetery a new 2.5m wide cycle path to Moray Council specification shall be provided along the eastern side of the C20E Linkwood Road, linking the existing southernmost pedestrian crossing point (grid reference 323530, 860852 just north of Thistle Drive) to the new site access. The new cycle path shall be set back from the edge of the public carriageway by a minimum distance of 1.5m. The provision of the new cycle path shall require the re-location of an existing sign and existing street lighting column(s). Reason: To ensure that the development provides safe and suitable access for pedestrians to reduce the impact of travel and transport on the environment. 4. Prior to the first use of the cemetery a minimum of the first 15m of the new access track, measured from the edge of the public carriageway, shall be constructed to the Moray Council specification, and surfaced with bituminous macadam. The width of the new vehicular access shall be 6.0m metres for a minimum of the first 10m and have a maximum gradient of 1:20 measured for the first 5.0m from the edge of the public carriageway. Access radii shall be as shown. Reason: To ensure acceptable infrastructure at the development access. 5. Prior to the first use of the cemetery the two existing field accesses (Grid refs 323571,860746 and 323598,860682), and the existing access to the gas distribution station shall be to Moray Council specification and surfaced in bituminous macadam from the edge of the public carriageway to a minimum distance of 5.0m beyond the eastern edge of the new cycle path. The width of the upgraded field accesses shall be minimum 5.0m and have a maximum gradient of 1:20 measured for the first 5.0m from the edge of the public carriageway. The width of the access to the gas distribution station shall be as existing. Reason: To ensure acceptable development that does not create any hazard to road users in the interests of road safety. 6. Parking shall be the following: 55no parking spaces 5no disabled parking spaces 6no cycle parking spaces The parking shall be provided prior to the first use of the cemetery and thereafter be retained throughout the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council as Planning Authority. Page 10
Page 11
Reason: To ensure the permanent availability of the level of parking necessary for staff/visitors/others in the interests of an acceptable development and road safety. 7. No water shall be permitted to drain or loose material be carried onto the public carriageway. Reason: To ensure the safety and free flow of traffic on the public road and access to the site by minimising the road safety impact from extraneous material and surface water in the vicinity of the new access or as a result of the regrading works. 8. A turning area shall be provided within the curtilage of the site to enable vehicles to enter and exit in a forward gear. Reason: To ensure the provision for vehicles to enter/exit in a forward gear in the interests of the safety and free flow of traffic on the public road. 9. Prior to any development commencing, the tree protection measures as shown in the approved drawing number 40186 IFL A1 DR C 30 003 P02 ‘Tree Works Plan’ shall be provided in full and retained until the completion of development works, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure timeous delivery of tree protection measures. 10. All landscaping proposed as part of the approved landscaping scheme shall be provided in the first planting season following implementation of the development relevant to each phase (as identified in the approved plans) hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed with the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter the landscaping shall be maintained in accordance with the approved maintenance schedule. Reason: To ensure timeous delivery and suitable maintenance of the approved landscaping, in the interests of the character of the proposed cemetery and that of the wider area, and to ensure biodiversity enhancement measures are provided. 11. The development shall progress in accordance with the recommendations in the approved “Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) and Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment (PRA), Proposed cemetery at Linkwood Road, Elgin, Moray” by Rachael Thwaites dated 29 December 2022 unless otherwise approved in writing by Moray Council as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the development progresses in accordance with the recommendations of the ecological survey, in the interests of the environment. 12. No trees shall be felled until the further Bat Survey as required under the approved “Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) and Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment (PRA), Proposed cemetery at Linkwood Road, Elgin, Moray” by Rachael Thwaites dated 29 December 2022 has been submitted to an approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall proceed in accordance with any suggested mitigation measures within the approved final survey. Page 11
Page 12
Reason: To ensure the preservation of bats and their habitats. 13. Prior to any works commencing (including tree removal) a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority, that demonstrates the extent of tree loss to achieve the visibility splay required under condition 2 has been minimised as far as possible, and the position of the approved cyclepath has been microsited/diverted to avoid/minimise tree removal or adverse impacts on trees. Thereafter, only those trees that have been identified for removal shall be removed, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority, in consultation with the Transportation Manager. Reason: To minimise tree loss necessary to achieve the necessary visibility splay for the proposed access point, in the interests of the environment and character of the surrounding area. 7 Proposal of Application Notice 24/00382/PAN Proposed residential led mixed use development (including retail and the school site), landscaping and associated infrastructure on land at Elgin South Phase 3, adjacent to A941, Elgin The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) advising that a Proposal of Application Notice had been submitted on 6 March 2024 on behalf of Springfield Properties PLC. During discussion, the Committee asked that the Applicant consider the following points when submitting the formal application: the provision of active travel routes and infrastructure; sustainable architecture; and whether the attractive gateway detailed in the Open Space Map in the Moray Local Development Plan Settlement Statement will have any bearing on the development. Thereafter, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to note the terms of the report and asked that the following provisional views/relevant issues be recorded and forwarded to the Applicant in order to inform the development of their proposed formal application for planning permission: the provision of active travel routes and infrastructure; sustainable architecture; whether the attractive gateway detailed in the Open Space Map in the Moray Local Development Plan Settlement Statement will have any bearing on the development; and ii) that 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. Page 12
Page 13
8 Proposal of Application Notice 24/00873/PAN Proposed erection and operation of anerobic digestion facility on land at Long 2, March Road, Buckie The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) advising that a Proposal of Application Notice had been submitted on 28 May 2024 on behalf of Acorn Bioenergy. During his introduction of the report, the Chair stated that the location of the proposal should read Buckie and not Elgin as printed. This was noted. During discussion, the Committee asked that the Applicant consider the following points when submitting the formal planning application: impact of the proposal on the already busy A98 and whether traffic calming measures can be introduced; how to mitigate against the increase in HGV traffic; control of odorous materials; impact on health of toxic waste and gases produced to the surrounding area; safety concerns in relation to the use of hazardous materials; what the plant will be used for; and minimise the visual impact of the proposal. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to note the terms of the report and asked that the following provisional views/relevant issues be recorded and forwarded to the Applicant in order to inform the development of their proposed formal application for planning permission: impact of the proposal on the already busy A98 and whether traffic calming measures can be introduced; how to mitigate against the increase in HGV traffic; control of odorous materials; impact on health of toxic waste and gases produced to the surrounding area; safety concerns in relation to the use of hazardous materials; what the plant will be used for; minimise the visual impact of the proposal; and ii) that 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. 9 Proposal of Application Notice 24/00880/PAN Proposed erection of warehouse development (class 6) and ancillary buildings/structures (up to 50,000sq m), with access and engineering works, including bridge over core burn, cut and fill land engineering and landscaping on land to south/west of Crisp Maltings, Portgordon, Buckie Page 13
Page 14
The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) advising that a Proposal of Application Notice had been submitted on 29 May 2024 by agents on behalf of William Grant and Sons Distillers Limited. During discussion, the Committee asked that the Applicant consider the following points when submitting the formal planning application: the introduction of traffic calming measures on the A98; continued consultation with members of the public; concern regarding industrialisation of the countryside; concern regarding agricultural land being used for industrial development; ensure that the design reduces the visual impact of the proposal e.g. colour of paint used on the outside of the warehouses; create nature networks on the site; and consider archaeological value of the site and highlight any findings within the development. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to note the terms of the report and asked that the following provisional views/relevant issues be recorded and forwarded to the Applicant in order to inform the development of their proposed formal application for planning permission: the introduction of traffic calming measures on the A98; continued consultation with members of the public; concern regarding industrialisation of the countryside; concern regarding agricultural land being used for industrial development; ensure that the design reduces the visual impact of the proposal e.g. colour of paint used on the outside of the warehouses; create nature networks on the site; consider archaeological value of the site and highlight any findings within the development; and ii) that 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. 10 Proposal of Application Notice 24/00955/PAN Proposed development comprising a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with associated infrastructure with capacity up to 49.9mw on land at Loanhead Farm, Elgin The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) advising that a Proposal of Application Notice had been submitted on 10 June 2024 on behalf of OPDE UK Limited. During discussion, the Committee asked that the Applicant consider the following points when submitting the formal planning application: Page 14
Page 15
ensure engagement with Scottish Fire and Rescue Services in relation to potential fire risk associated with the proposal; concern in relation to the loss of prime agricultural land; concern in relation to potential disruption on a small country road; encourage consultation with the local community; and ensure conditions associated with “run off” from the development are enforceable. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to note the terms of the report and asked that the following provisional views/relevant issues be recorded and forwarded to the Applicant in order to inform the development of their proposed formal application for planning permission: ensure engagement with Scottish Fire and Rescue Services in relation to potential fire risk associated with the proposal; concern in relation to the loss of prime agricultural land; concern in relation to potential disruption on a small country road; encourage consultation with the local community; ensure conditions associated with “run off” from the development are enforceable; and ii) that 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. 11 Economic Growth and Development Service Plan 2024-25 The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) which presented the Economic Growth and Development Service Plan for 2024-25. It was noted that the Service Plan for Financial Services had been considered by the Corporate Committee on 11 June 2024, the Housing and Property Services Plan by the Housing and Community Safety Committee on 25 June 2024, and the full Economic Growth and Development Services Plan by the Economic Development and Infrastructure Services Committee on 18 June 2024, each within their respective remits. Following consideration and in terms of its remit, the Committee unanimously agreed to approve the Service Plan for the priority areas relating to Planning and Regulatory only included in the Economic Growth and Development Service Plan. 12 Moray Housing Land Audit 2024-25 The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) which summarised the housing land supply situation in Moray and asked the Committee to agree the final version of the Moray Housing Land Audit (HLA) 2024/25. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to note the housing land supply in Moray; Page 15
Page 16
ii) the Council’s responses to the consultation on the draft Moray Housing Land Audit 2024/25, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report; iii) to note the current positions regarding Lochyhill (Forres) and Buckie LONG1 as detailed at Paragraphs 4.6 and 4.7 of the report; and iv) the finalised Moray Housing Land Audit 2024/25, as set out in Appendix 2 of the report. 13 Conservation Area Designation Review 2023 Under reference to paragraph 7 of the Minute of the meeting of this Committee dated 24 October 2023, a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) summarised the representations received to the public consultation on the Archiestown, Portknockie, Cullen, and Findochty conservation area character appraisals and boundary changes. The report also asked the Committee to approve the responses, character appraisals and final boundary changes as material considerations in the determination of planning applications from the date of this Committee. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed to: i) note the responses to the public consultation as set out in Appendix 2 of the report; ii) the final boundary changes as set out in Appendix 3 for the Archiestown, Findochty, Portknockie, and Cullen Seatown, and Cullen Planned Town Conservation Areas; and, iii) approve the final Cullen, Archiestown, Portknockie, and Findochty Conservation Area Character Appraisals as set out in Appendix 1 as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications from the date of this Committee and for future planning policy for the Local Development Plan 2027. 14 Review of Developer Obligations [Paras 6 and 9] The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) asking the Committee to note the update on developer obligations received and spent during the financial years of 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 and approve the revised Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance for public consultation. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed to: i) note the content of the report and the update on Developer Obligations received and spent during the financial years 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 set out in Appendix 1; ii) approve the revised Developer Obligations Supplementary Guidance set out in Appendix 2 for public consultation for a 6 week period; and Page 16
Page 17
iii) note that the representations to the consultation with the Council’s response and finalised Supplementary Guidance will be reported to a future meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Services committee. 15 Breach of Planning Condition at site in Fochabers [Para 12] Under reference to paragraph 8 of the Minute of this Committee dated 15 February 2024, the Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) providing an update regarding a breach of a planning condition at a site in Fochabers. The Legal Services Manager explained that this was a unique case whereby, if the Committee agreed to pursue enforcement action, this would mean serving an enforcement notice on all home-owners/interested parties which could result in excess of 100 notices being served and it was noted that this would take up a significant amount of officer time. Concern was raised that, by not pursuing enforcement action, this could set a precedent and, in order to avoid this happening again in the future, it was queried whether a bond could be taken to secure landscaping provision on residential sites. In response, the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development agreed to give this further consideration. Councillor Gatt welcomed the suggestion of taking a bond from Developers to secure landscaping provision on residential sites in future and moved that, with regard to this breach in planning condition, no further action be taken. Councillor Macrae seconded this. There being no-one otherwise minded, the Committee unanimously agreed to: (i) take no further action in relation to this breach of planning condition; (ii) note that consideration would be given to taking a bond from Developers to secure landscaping provision on residential sites in future. 16 Breach of Planning Control encompassing land at Elgin, Moray [Para 12] Councillor van der Horn left the meeting at this juncture. The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) informing of unauthorised development at Pluscarden Road, Elgin. Following consideration, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to officers serving an Enforcement Notice to remedy the breaches of planning control detailed in the report and to restore the land at Pluscarden Road, Elgin to its former condition by removing all unauthorised storage of vehicles and containers; and Page 17
Page 18
ii) that in the event the Enforcement Notice is not complied with to authorise officers to take Direct Action to remove the necessary vehicles and containers and restore the land to its former condition. Councillor van der Horn re-joined the meeting at this juncture. 17 Breach of Planning Control encompassing land at Buckie, Moray [Para 12] The Committee had before it a report by the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance) informing of an unauthorised development at Broadley, Buckie. Councillor Macrae moved that the Committee agree the recommendations as printed within the report. There being no-one otherwise minded, the Committee unanimously agreed: i) to Officers serving an Enforcement Notice to remedy the following breaches of planning control and to restore the land at Attin Wood, Broadley, Buckie to its former condition via removal of: a. Unauthorised development of a dwelling. b. Unauthorised development of fence. ii) that the Enforcement Notice if not complied with remains as a charge on the land. Page 18
Page 19
__________________________________________________ NOTICE OF MOTION TO PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES 22 OCTOBER 2024 Preliminary issues Committee recognises the declaration of a Scotland-wide Housing Emergency in May 2024. It also notes that, according to the most recent public register, 730 Short Term Let licences have been applied for. The majority of these licences are for Secondary Lettings along the Moray coastline and in Speyside, reducing the number of homes available for long-term residents and adding pressure to the local housing market in these areas. Background Committee notes that Highland Council has effectively used the planning system to establish a short-term let control area in Badenoch and Strathspey in March 2024 and is now exploring the possibility of extending this control to the entire local authority. Committee also notes that the previous UK Government introduced legislation in England to “protect communities and keep homes available”, requiring short-term let operators to obtain planning permission for their activities. Action Committee instructs officers to produce a report to Moray Council within 18 months on the feasibility of introducing Short-Term Let control areas in Moray, identifying specific areas where such controls might be appropriate. Financial implications None. However, it is recognised that this request will impact on officers’ workload and capacity, hence the 18-month timescale. Proposed By: Cllr Jérémie Fernandes Seconded By: Cllr Theresa Coull Date Motion Submitted: 15/09/2024 Item 5 Page 19
Page 20
Page 20
Page 21
GUIDANCE NOTE PRODUCED FOR PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF 22 OCTOBER 2024 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 21
Page 22
Page 22
Page 23
WARD 05_17 23/02239/AMC 10th January 2024 Approval of Matters specified in conditions 1 - 19, 23, 25- 58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 148 homes including affordable housing with landscaping parking access and associated works within part of Area 1 at Site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Elgin Moray for Barratt North Scotland Comments: • Application is a major development as defined under the Hierarchy Regulations 2009 for a development of more than 50 houses, and the site exceeds 2ha. • Advertised for neighbour notification purposes - notification not possible because no premises situated on land to which notification can be sent. • No representations have been received. Procedure: • None. Recommendation Grant planning permission – Subject to the Following: 1. Adoption of “appropriate assessment” (Appendix 1) prior to issue: and 2. The following conditions: Conditions/Reasons 1. Unless otherwise agreed, no development shall commence until details of the affordable housing delivery have been submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Head of Housing and Property Service regarding the detailed arrangements for the long-term delivery and provision of the affordable housing accommodation on the site. This shall include evidence to confirm the identity of the organisation (or other similar agency) responsible for the provision and management of all affordable housing provided on the site, and thereafter evidence of a signed contract between the organisation and applicant which is to be submitted to the Council prior to start of construction of the proposed apartment building (affordable flats) hereby approved, unless Item 6 Page 23
Page 24
otherwise agreed by the Council. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the required provision and delivery of affordable housing within the site, and that it is managed accordingly for the lifetime of the development. 2. The accessible housing units (minimum 12) shall be provided in accordance with the submitted drawing numbers 17045(PL04)007_B and 5 Type K, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the units shall at all times remain as accessible housing and capable for adaptation for accessible housing needs unless otherwise agreed with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the required provision and delivery of accessible housing on the site. 3. All surface water drainage arrangements for the development site shall be in accordance with the submitted report Drainage Impact Assessment and Stage 1 Flood Risk Assessment (Version P03) by Goodson Associates, dated 16 August 2024, and associated drainage drawing numbers 13779 - 3500 P08 and 13779 – 650 N submitted with this application. All measures for the management of surface water as outlined within the abovementioned DIA (including maintenance) shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of any residential unit hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that surface water drainage is provided timeously, complies with the principles of SuDS and in order to protect the water environment; and to mitigate against potential birdstrike risks to aircraft operations at RAF Lossiemouth (by ensuring that the SuDS detention is generally dry, holding water only during and immediately after extreme rainfall events). 4. All foul water drainage arrangements for the development site shall be in accordance with the submitted report Drainage Impact Assessment and Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (Version P03) by Goodson Associates, dated 16 August 2024, and associated drainage drawing 13779 - 3500 P08 submitted in support of this application. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the provision of foul drainage infrastructure for the development. 5. 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). 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. Page 24
Page 25
Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance in ensuring the construction phase is restricted within permitted hours. 6. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the construction phase of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details in the supporting document by KSG Acoustics, dated 21 August 2024, and titled “Findrassie residential development: Construction noise and vibration.” Reason: In order that environmental emissions are considered and managed at the construction phase, to protect local residents. 7. Dust emissions associated with the development shall be suitably managed and mitigated by adhering to the submitted scheme in the supporting document by Enviro Centre on behalf of Barratt Homes, dated August 2024, and titled “Findrassie, Elgin – Area 1 (E3 and E4) Dust Management Plan”, excepting section 3.4 on “Specified Working Periods” is not applied and covered by condition 5 above. Reason: In order that environmental emissions are considered and managed at the construction phase, to protect local residents. 8. Details of enhanced glazing and ventilation for habitable room windows to those properties identified on the blue facades on page 23, Appendix A, of the noise impact assessment supporting document by KSG Acoustics, dated 21 August 2024 (rev2), and titled “Findrassie Area E3 and E4. Noise Impact Assessment addressing Planning Conditions 9 and 53 relating to Planning Consent reference 19/01085/APP”, shall be provided in writing and agreed with the Planning Authority prior to development commencing on those properties. The agreed mitigation shall thereafter be maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance from the adjacent existing Elgin substation. 9. No development shall not commence until further details including a plan confirming the provision of a 2m high acoustic fence of minimum surface density 15 kg/m2 around the substation as detailed in page 22 and 23 of the noise impact assessment supporting document by KSG Acoustics, dated 21 August 2024 (rev2) and titled “Findrassie Area E3 and E4 Noise Impact Assessment addressing Planning Conditions 9 and 53 relating to Planning Consent reference 19/01085/APP” and a timescale for its erection, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. The acoustic fence shall thereafter be provided and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance from the adjacent existing Elgin substation. 10. The temporary external construction lighting arrangements for the development shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted details, as shown in the plan titled Compound Layout – Lighting. No further lighting shall be provided, Page 25
Page 26
installed or used within this phase except where otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in particular to minimise the potential for light pollution including light glare/spill and disturbance impacts upon the visual amenity and appearance of the surrounding area, including any existing or proposed neighbouring residential property. 11. The mitigation measures as detailed within the submitted documents titled ‘Condition 43 Mitigation Statement’ dated 19 August 2021 and ‘Findrassie E4 & E4 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP, Issue 3)’ dated 22 August 2024 prepared by Enviro Centre shall be fully adhered to by the developer and appointed contractor during the construction period and operational life of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. This shall include implementation of all measures to protect the water environment, as stipulated by SEPA. Reason: In order to protect the water quantity and quality of Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar Site and SSSI and to prevent adverse impacts on the integrity of these protected areas and the water environment. 12. The pre-work checks and mitigation as detailed within the submitted documents titled ‘Findrassie E3 & E4 Ecological Constraints Survey dated August 2024’ and ‘Findrassie E3 & E4 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)’ dated 22 August 2024 prepared by Enviro Centre shall be fully implemented by the developer and appointed contractor, unless otherwise agreed in writing with this Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development taking into account the need to afford protection to all protected species identified as using the site or adjoining land. 13. Condition 51 of the Planning Permission in Principle (application number 17/00834/PPP) and related Section 42 approval (application number 19/01085/APP) regarding implementation and completion of a Programme of Archaeological Works is discharged for this application for approval of matters specified in conditions (AMC) only, and shall continue to remain applicable to any future AMC applications for development within the wider Area 1 development, granted under application 17/00834/PPP and associated Section 42 application 19/01085/APP. Reason: To safeguard and record the archaeological potential of the area. 14. No development shall commence until details confirming the installation of fibre broadband connection for each residential unit (to be provided prior to occupation of each unit) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with these approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council. Page 26
Page 27
Reason: To ensure the residential units hereby approved are served by appropriate high speed internet connections. 15. No trees other than those identified for removal in the submitted Tree Survey Report and associated Tree Protection Plans prepared by Envirocentre dated 4 September 2024 shall be removed without the prior written approval of the planning authority. Reason: In order to ensure tree removal is adequately controlled. 16. The mitigation and enhancement recommendations as set out within Chapter 4 of the Tree Survey Report, prepared by Envirocentre updated 4 September 2024 shall be fully adhered to by the developer and appointed contractor, unless otherwise agreed in writing by this Council, as Planning Authority. Any protection measures shall be implemented prior to any development commencing within that part of the site and retained until completion of that part of the development. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development is provided in accordance with the submitted landscape plans and tree survey, and that suitable protection is afforded to existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows. 17. The mitigation, planting and habitat establishment/management measures as set out within the submitted Biodiversity Plan Statement, Placemaking Statement and accompanying drawing titled “Landscape Proposals Sheet 1 of 6”, number 415.48.01b shall be fully implemented by the developer and appointed contractor, unless otherwise agreed in writing with this Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To retain, protect and enhance biodiversity interests on the site and adjoining the site. 18. No development shall commence until a phasing delivery plan which shows the provision of the expanded equipped play area upon completion of 50% of the character area to which it pertains has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as planning authority. This relates to the area defined as Character Area 2, in the submitted Placemaking Statement and Site Layout and Materials Plan number 17045(PL04)010 D, and the approved expanded equipped play area shall be provided by the completion of the 25th residential unit within this character area. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with these approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the adequate and timeous provision of the expanded equipped play area. 19. Unless otherwise agreed, no development shall commence until the following information has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority: a) Details (scaled drawings 1:100 and equipment specification schedule) of the proposed expanded equipped play area and surfacing, including maintenance arrangements, which shall be inclusive for all abilities (to be Page 27
Page 28
agreed in consultation with ParentAble Moray). This shall include 3 additional pieces of equipment which must be inclusive. Sensory panels and/or instruments must also be provided. The accessibility of the expanded play area, including consideration of the surfaces, slopes, paths and benches, must be suitable for all ages and abilities; b) Details of all public artwork on the site, which shall reflect local and cultural associations with Thomas Telford and/or Pitgaveny’s farming legacy, including timescale for delivery; c) Details of all seating, benches and litter bins to be provided on the site, including timescale for their provision; d) Details of railings to the corner plots in Character Area 1; e) Details regarding the future delivery mechanism of the allotments, including water servicing arrangements and timescale for delivery; f) Updated landscape plans and planting schedule detailing fruit/orchard plants within the central open space identified for community growing; and g) Phasing plan including timescales for provision of all landscaping works (hard and soft) and biodiversity measures, which shall be carried out upon completion of each character area. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with these approved details, plans and timescales. Any trees or plants which (within a period of 5 years from the 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 species unless this Council, as Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation of this planning condition. Reason: To ensure that the works to install the approved equipped expanded play area, landscaping, benches/picnic tables, seating, bins and allotments are timeously carried out and properly maintained for the lifetime of the development; that the expanded play area is inclusive, providing equipment so the facility is for every child/young person regardless of ability; and to ensure distinctive urban form with public art to provide good orientation and navigation. 20. No development shall commence until revised plans and drawings showing the insertion of additional windows into the side elevations of the houses on Plots 111, 113, and 117 to overlook the adjacent parking court have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with these approved details. Reason: To enhance overlooking and natural surveillance of the adjacent parking court. 21. Condition 15 of the planning permission in principle (application number 17/00834/PPP) and related Section 42 approval (application number 19/01085/APP) regarding off-site junction works on the A96 trunk road network is not discharged by this application and is reapplied as a condition of this approval: Page 28
Page 29
No more than 350 dwellings shall be occupied until: i) details (which may include evidence from Transport Scotland) have been submitted to and approved by the Council as Planning Authority to confirm that the Trunk Roads Authority has completed the upgrading and realignment of the A96 (T) Hardmuir to Fochabers section of the A96 Dualling programme; or ii) the works to the A96 East Road/Maisondieu Road/Pansport Road roundabout have been implemented generally in accordance with Goodson Associates Drawing reference P13779 SK001; or iii) a Transport Assessment or Addendum Report has been submitted to the Planning Authority and that any trunk road mitigation measures necessary to offset the impact of the area have thereafter been implemented in accordance with a timescale identified by the Transport Assessment to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland. Reason: To ensure that the scale and operation of the proposed development beyond 350 dwellings does not adversely affect the safe and efficient operation of the A96 trunk road network. 22. Development shall not commence until a construction management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority covering the application site and any adjoining land which will be used during the construction period. Such a strategy shall include the details of cranes and other tall construction equipment (including the details of obstacle lighting). The approved strategy (or any variation approved in writing by Moray Council) shall be implemented for the duration of the construction period. Reason: To ensure that construction work and construction equipment on the site and adjoining land does not obstruct air traffic movements or otherwise impede the effective operation of air traffic navigation transmitter/receiver systems. 23. No boundary fences, hedges, walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 1.0m in height and fronting onto the public road shall be within 2.4m of the edge of the carriageway, measured from the level of the public carriageway, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Reason: To enable drivers of vehicles leaving driveways 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. 24. No walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 0.6m measured from the level of the public carriageway shall be permitted within any 'forward visibility' areas or any visibility splays crossing plot boundaries within all areas of the residential development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Reason: To enable drivers of vehicles to have an acceptable clear forward visibility, in the interests of road safety for the proposed development and other road users. Page 29
Page 30
25. Driveways over service verges shall be constructed to accommodate vehicles and shall be surfaced with bituminous macadam. Reason: To ensure acceptable infrastructure is provided at the property accesses. 26. Parking provision shall be provided and made available for use at all times to the Moray Council Parking Standards for the houses and flats hereby approved together with provision for secure cycle parking and facilities for electric vehicle charging. The standards for parking as applied at the time of any application for development shall be in accordance with Policy T5 Parking Standards of the Moray Local Development Plan 2015 and any associated guidance setting out the standards of parking including any equivalent planning policy and/or guidance which supersedes or replaces the identified provisions of the development plan during the life-time of the permission hereby approved. Reason: To ensure the permanent availability of the level of parking necessary for residents/visitors/others in the interests of an acceptable development and road safety. 27. Prior to the commencement of any part of the development, the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority, and Moray Access Manager: In accordance with Supplementary Guidance: Findrassie Masterplan principles to enhance connectivity between the proposed and existing development to the south, • detailed drawings (scale 1:500 minimum) for that phase of development showing the location, design specifications (including detailed construction drawings and sections of steps, ramps, footpaths etc.) and timescale for the provision of active travel corridors and connections between the development and Elgin Core Paths EG31 and EG33; and • drawings (scale 1:1000 minimum) showing an indicative network of active travel corridors including that phase of development and the remaining phases and connections to the existing/committed network in accordance with the principles set out in the Supplementary Guidance: Findrassie Masterplan. Thereafter, the proposed foot and cycle connections, crossings and corridors shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and agreed timescales. Reason: To ensure the provision of a safe and suitable access routes for pedestrians and cyclists both within and to/from the development, in the interest of road safety. 28. No works shall commence on any phase of the development until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority regarding: Page 30
Page 31
a) A Construction Traffic Management Plan which shall include the following information: • duration of works; • construction programme; • number of vehicle movements (i.e. materials, plant, staff, components); • anticipated schedule for delivery of materials and plant; • full details of construction traffic routes from the Strategic Road Network (A941/A96) to the site, including any proposals for temporary haul routes and routes to be used for the disposal of any materials from the site; • measures to be put in place to prevent material being deposited on the public road; • measures to be put in place to safeguard the movements of pedestrians; • traffic management measures to be put in place during works including any specific instructions to drivers; and • parking provision, loading and unloading areas for construction traffic. and b) Details of any required/proposed temporary construction access which shall include the following information: • a drawing (scale 1:500 minimum) regarding the location and design specifications of the proposed access(es); • specification of the materials used for the construction access(es); • all traffic management measures required to ensure safe operation of the construction access(es); • details, including materials, for the reinstatement of any temporary construction access(es); and • details regarding the timescale for the opening up and closure of any temporary access(es) together with the time period over which the temporary access(es) will be used. Thereafter, the development of that phase(s) 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, road safety and the amenity of the area/adjacent properties. 29. Prior to the commencement of any part of the development a Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit for the internal road layout and any offsite works required, shall be submitted including details for any mitigation works or revised layouts for approval in writing by the planning authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Thereafter the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved in writing by the planning authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Page 31
Page 32
Reason: In the interests of road safety, an acceptable form of development and the submission of details currently lacking from the submission. 30. Prior to the completion of any house or flat within Phases E3 or E4 of the development the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority, and Moray Access Manager: i. detailed drawings (Scale 1:500 minimum) showing the location, design specifications and timescale for the provision of a cycleway connection alongside Covesea Road to the south of the development, linking to the existing cycleway or other cycle link to Moray Council adoption standards to provide a continuous adopted cycle route from the development to Sey Burn Wynd and Myreside Circle and extending to the existing remote cycle track at the Lossiemouth Road/Covesea Road junction. Thereafter, the proposed foot and cycle connections, crossings and corridors shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and agreed timescales. Reason: To ensure the provision of a safe and suitable access routes for pedestrians and cyclists both within and to/from the development, in the interest of road safety. 31. No development shall commence within Phase E3 or E4 of the development until the following information has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority: a) Details (Plans 1:500 min and Specifications) showing the design of an enclosed bus shelter, flags to be provided at the bus terminus location as shown on drawing 13779-SK074 Rev P02. b) Details (Plans 1:1000 min) showing the extents of all roads and paths which shall be completed prior to the completion or occupation of the first house within E3 or E4 to enable access to be provided to the bus terminus. c) Evidence of a written agreement with local bus operators for the provision of bus services to serve the bus terminus, including the extension/enhancement of existing bus services and/or the provision of new dedicated bus services to provide a minimum level of service operating from 7.00am to 6.00pm at a half hourly frequency, Monday to Friday inclusive, and from 8.00am to 6.00pm at an hourly service on Saturday, for a minimum duration of two years or as otherwise agreed by the planning authority in consultation with transportation. Thereafter, the bus stop infrastructure, and roads required to access the infrastructure from the A941 shall be completed and bus services shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the completion of the first house within the development (E3 or E4). Reason: To ensure the satisfactory provision of public transport infrastructure to serve the development. 32. No house or flat shall be completed or occupied within Phase E3 or E4 of the development until the works to upgrade the A941/Morriston Road junction as Page 32
Page 33
approved for planning application 21/00961/AMC, have been completed in accordance with the approved details or unless otherwise approved in writing by the planning authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Thereafter the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure off site works required to accommodate the development traffic are completed in the interests of an acceptable development, junction capacity and road safety. 33. No house or flat shall be occupied until parking has been provided and made available for use by that house or flat and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority the parking arrangements shall be retained and maintained in perpetuity as parking spaces for use in conjunction with that house or flat hereby approved. Reason: To ensure the permanent availability of the level of parking necessary for residents/visitors/others in the interests of an acceptable development and road safety. 34. Visitor EV charging infrastructure within communal parking areas shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the completion of any house which shares the communal parking area. Thereafter the EV charging infrastructure shall be maintained and available for use 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. 35. Prior to development commencing an updated version of the submitted Sustainability Statement, Low Zero Carbon, Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Statement which is to include a carbon assessment of all proposed landscaping for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with these approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development proceeds in accordance with the submitted updated Carbon Statement, to ensure compliance with National Planning Framework 4 Policy 2 - Climate Mitigation and Adaptation. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are:- The proposal accords with the provisions of the development plan and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Page 33
Page 34
List of Informatives: THE DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT & BUILDING STANDARDS MANAGER has commented that:- A Building Warrant will be required for the proposals. Should you require further assistance please contact the Building Standards Duty Officer between 2pm and 4pm or telephone on 03001234561. No appointment is necessary. Alternatively e- mail buildingstandards@moray.gov.uk This application is covered by the existing S75 legal agreement associated with the planning consent 17/00834/PPP and Section 42 application 19/01085/PPP. Developer obligations relating to primary education facilities, secondary education facilities, healthcare, transportation and sports and recreation facilities will be secured through this agreement in accordance with the triggers set out within the agreement. SCOTTISH WATER, has commented that:- See attached consultation responses dated 22 January 2024. THE TRANSPORTATION MANAGER, DIRECT SERVICES, has commented that:- Notwithstanding the details submitted on the following engineering plans which have been included with the planning submission. These will be subject to a Road Safety Audit and require separate statutory approval through the Roads Construction Consent process. Before commencing development, the applicant is obliged to apply for Construction Consent in accordance with Section 21 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 for new roads. The applicant will be required to provide technical information, including drawings and drainage calculations, and provide a Road Bond to cover the full value of the works in accordance with the Security for Private Road Works (Scotland) 1985 Regulations. Advice on this matter can be obtained from the Moray Council web site or by emailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk. Additional Road Safety Audit requirements for the proposed development shall be determined through the Road Construction Consent process as required. Construction Consent shall include a CCTV survey of all existing roads drainage to be adopted and core samples to determine the construction depths and materials of the existing road. Requirement for any traffic calming, road construction materials and specifications and any SUDs related to the drainage of the public road must be submitted and approved through the formal Roads Construction Consent process. Page 34
Page 35
Planning consent does not carry with it the right to carry out works within the public road boundary and the applicant is obliged to contact the Transportation Manager for road opening permit in accordance with the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. This includes any temporary access joining with the public road. If any street furniture will need to be repositioned or any existing roadside ditch requires a pipe or culvert these works shall be at the expense of the developer Advice on these matters can be obtained by e-mailing transport.develop@moray.gov.uk Street lighting will be required as part of the development proposal. Private Roads - A responsible party, constituting the road manager, must be nominated for a private road and this information included within the National Gazetteer through the Scottish Road Works Register (SRWR). The developer shall ensure that no water or loose material shall drain or be carried onto the public footpath/carriageway. No building materials/scaffolding/builder's skip shall obstruct the public road (including footpaths) without permission from the Roads Authority. 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. No retaining structures or embankments shall be constructed along the edge of the road, whether retaining the public road or ground adjoining the public road without prior consultation and agreement of the Roads Authority. POLICE SCOTLAND, has commented that:- We recommend to applicant that Section 4.13 of the SG Domestic Technical Handbook is followed as a minimum for security of individual properties within the development. (i.e. PAS024 2022 standards for all windows and doors on domestic dwellings). The developer give consideration to applying for Police Secured by Design accreditation for all domestic dwellings and estate layout. This can be done through an application made through web application on www.securedbydesign.com/services/developersaward Page 35
Page 36
LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description Compound layout - lighting P13779-SK01 Pansport roundabout mitigation 13779-3712 District heating plan 17045(OS)013 Location plan 17045(PL)130 B Single garage - elevations and floor plan 17045(PL)190 Feature boundary wall 17045(PL)193 700MM wall DET/07/03/01 1800MM screen fence 13779 - SK25 G Flooding layout 17045-PL-109-6 B Type J - elevations and floor plans CA2-K 415.48.06 B Landscape proposal (Sheet 6 of 6) 13779 - 650 N Surface water drainage strategy 13379-3500 P08 Drainage Layout - Phase E3 and E4 13379-3522 B Proposed flooding extent 13779-3550 P05 Site levels - Phase 3 13779-3570 P05 Burn plan and sections 13779-3712 P02 Street lighting - Phase E3 and E4 13779-650 N Volumetric Analysis E3-E4 13779 - SK55 P02 E3 E4 Basin review 13779-3551 P06 Site levels-Phase 4 13779 - 3700 P04 Roads general arrangement plan - Phase E3 4 13779 - 3701 P04 Roads general arrangement plan Phase E3 4 13779 - 3708 P01 Road construction details 13779 - 3710 P03 Tracking plan - Phase E3 4 13779 - 3713 P03 Kerbing plan - Phase E3 E4 17045-PL-102-3 B Type B- elevations and floor plans - CA3-K 17045-PL-102-5 A Type B - elevations and floor plans - CA3 white 17045-PL-104-6 D Type D_CA3 - Cream- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-104-8 B Type D - elevations and floor plans - CA2- cream 17045-PL-105-4 B Type E - elevations and floor plans - CA2-K 17045-PL-105-5 B Type E - elevations and floor plans -CA3-K 17045-PL-108-1 A Type H - elevations and floor plans -CA3-Cream 17045-PL-109-4 C Type J - elevations and floor plans - CA3-K 17045-PL-112-2 A Type M - elevations and floor plans - CA3-K 17045-PL-112-5 B Type M - elevations and floor plans _CA3-White 17045-PL-112-6 C Type M - elevations and floor plans - CA2-Pink 17045-PL-113-5 K Type D Craigend DET - elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-208-1 B Type W - elevations and floor plans -CA2-Pink Page 36
Page 37
17045-PL-301 B Type 1 semi_CA1- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-304 A Type_1_CA2-Cream- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-306 A Type 1_CA2-K- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-324 B Type 2- elevations and floor plans-CA1 17045-PL-325 Type 2 detached - CA1 - elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-34 B Type 4 plans- elevations and floor plans-CA1-K 17045-PL-358 A Type 5 - elevations and floor plans -CA1-K 17045-PL-365 B Type 7 elevations and floor plans - CA1 17045-PL-386 B Type 9 - elevations and floor plans-CA1 17045-PL-393 A Type 10 elevations and floor plans - CA1-K-Peach 17045-PL-395 Type 10- elevations and floor plans - CA1-K 17045(PL04)001 C Presentation layout 17045(PL04)002 E Site layout 17045(PL04)003 B Site layout + TOPO 17045(PL04)004 B Electric vehicle charging - Sheet 1 of 3 17045(PL04)005 B Electric vehicle charging - 2 of 3 17045(PL04)006 B Electric vehicle charging - sheet 3 of 3 17045(PL04)007 B Accessible Housing locations 17045(PL04)008 B Parking schedule 17045(PL04)010 D Materials 415.48.02 B Landscape proposals (sheet 2 of 6) 415.48.03 B Landscape proposal (sheet 3 of 6) 415.48.04 B Landscape proposal (sheet 4 of 6) 415.48.05 B Landscape proposal (sheet 5 of 5) 415.48.01 B Landscape proposal (sheet 1 of 6) 13379 - SK073 P01 Bus stop coverage 17045-PL-114-12 Type K- Glen_Ter_CA3-white - elevations 17045-PL-114-3 A Type K - Gylen-CA2-Cream - elevations 17045-PL-118-5 B Type BB elevations and floor plans -CA3-Cream 17045-PL-145-1 B Type AA - elevations and floor plans -CA3-White 17045-PL-145-2 Type AA cupar semi-CA3-White-elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-200-6 B Type N_Spynie CA3-Cream- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-202-3 A Type Q plans - elevations-CA2-Pink 17045-PL-204-1 B Type S_CA2-K- elevations and floor plans 17045-PL-205-3 A type T - elevations and floor plans_CA2-Cream 17045-PL-206-6 B Type U - elevations and floor plans-CA2-Pink Supporting documents to be stamped approved with decision: 1. Drainage Impact Assessment and Stage 1 Flood Risk Assessment report (Version PO3) by Goodson Associates, dated 16 August 2024 Page 37
Page 38
2. Findrassie residential development: Construction noise and vibration. Construction Environment Management report by KSG Acoustics, dated 21 August 2024 3. Findrassie, Elgin – Area 1 (E3 and E4) Dust Management Plan, dated August 2024 4. Findrassie Area E3 and E4. Noise Impact Assessment addressing Planning Conditions 9 and 53 relating to Planning Consent reference 19/01085/APP”, KSG Acoustics, dated 21 August 2024 (rev2) 5. Condition 43 Mitigation Statement’ dated 19 August 2021, by Enviro Centre 6. Findrassie E4 & E4 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP, Issue 3), dated 22 August 2024 prepared by Enviro Centre 7. Findrassie E3 & E4 Ecological Constraints Survey dated August 2024, by Enviro Centre – must remain sensitive 8. Findrassie E3 & E4 Tree Survey Report, prepared by Envirocentre updated 4 September 2024 9. Biodiversity Plan Statement, by Barratt Developments PLC dated 29 April 2024 10. Findrassie E3 & E4 Placemaking Statement, by EMA, dated August 2024 11. Sustainability Statement, Low Zero Carbon, Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Statement, prepared by Barratt Developments PLC dated 10 September 2024 Page 38
Page 39
Plans, drawings and other material submitted to the local authority are protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (section 47). You may only use material which is downloaded and/ or printed for consultation purposes, to compare current applications with previous schemes and to check whether developments have been completed in accordance with approved plans. Further copies must not be made without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Maps shown in the Planning Committee Report can only be used for the purposes of the Planning Committee. Any other use risks infringing Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Maps produced within this Planning Committee Report can only be reproduced with the express permission of the Moray Council and other Copyright holders. This permission must be granted in advance. PLANNING APPLICATION COMMITTEE SITE PLAN Site Address: Site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Elgin Planning Application Ref Number: 23/02239/AMC Location Plan Applicant Name: Barratt North Scotland Page 39
Page 40
Site Location Page 40
Page 41
Site layout 16/01664/APP Page 41
Page 42
Site layout & M aterials 16/ Page 42
Page 43
16/ Page 43
Page 44
Photo 1 16/ Page 44
Page 45
Photo 2 16/ Page 45
Page 46
Photo 3 16/ Page 46
Page 47
Photo 4 16/ Page 47
Page 48
Photo 5 16/ Page 48
Page 49
Photo 6 16/ Page 49
Page 50
Photo 7 16/ Page 50
Page 51
PLANNING APPLICATION: 23/02239/AMC 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 AMC application seeks approval of matters specified in conditions 1 - 19, 23, 25-58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 148 homes, including affordable housing with landscaping, parking, access and associated works within Phase E3 and E4 of Area 1 at site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Site and I8 Newfield Elgin. • The housing layout comprises a series of roadways, served by three vehicular accesses from the east, connecting into the adjacent E1 and E2 phases of housing currently under construction. Footpath and cycle path connections are proposed to the east, north, south and west. The layout also includes areas of open space, landscaping, street trees, a community growing area, allotments and an expanded play area. • 111 residential units would be private/open market and 37 would be affordable. • Twenty-one open market house types are proposed, comprising 2, 3 and 4 bedroomed units (detached, semi-detached and terraced houses). • Eight affordable types are proposed, comprising 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroomed units (flats, detached/semi-detached houses and bungalows). • 10% of the private dwellings would be accessible units (12). • The site layout would comprise three character areas – Hub and Central Open Space, North South Connections and Character Area 3, with each distinguished by different material finishes to the houses and flats. These include smooth and drydash renders, in white, pink, cream, champagne, earthy red, and blue, cast/precast stone, re-constituted slates/concrete grey roof tiles and window/doors in various colours. • Surface water drainage infrastructure would consist of SuDS measures including roadside swales, tree pits, a bio retention system (rain garden) and roads drainage which would discharge to detention basins within the northeastern and southwestern parts of the site (with outfalls to the adjacent watercourse (Sey Burn)). • The houses and flats would be connected to the public sewer and water supply network. • Detailed landscaping plans for the site set out species, sizes, spacing and maintenance information across the site. • Supporting information includes: • Design and Compliance Statement • Placemaking Statement • NPF4 Compliance Statement • Biodiversity Plan Statement • Landscape Scheme, Planting Specification and Maintenance Information Page 51
Page 52
• Off Site Traffic Impact Assessment • Drainage Impact Assessment and Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment • Noise Impact Assessment • Construction Noise and Vibration Management Document • Construction Environmental Management Plan • Air Quality Assessment and Dust Management Plan • Geotechnical Design and Environmental Risk Assessment • Tree Survey Report • Mitigation Statement detailing measures to protect the Loch Spynie SSSI, SPA and Ramsar Sites • Ecological Constraints Survey Report • Archaeological evaluation (Data Structure Report) • Post Excavation Research Design (PERD) • District Heating Report • Public Art Brief • Sustainability Statement, Low / Zero carbon, Climate Mitigation and Adaptation report • Community Wealth Building Statement • Planning Conditions Tracker 2. THE SITE • The application site extends to 7.24 hectares and comprises housing for phases E3 and E4 at Findrassie. • It forms part of Area 1, an irregular shaped area of land of 48.6 hectares (with planning permission in principle 17/00834/PPP and 19/01085/APP) which forms the south-eastern part of the Elgin R11 Findrassie Site and western edge of the I8 Newfield Elgin designations (Findrassie Masterplan), identified in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020. • The site currently comprises grassland, a construction compound and stored material associated with the adjacent ongoing construction site at E2. • The Sey Burn runs west-east along the north boundary of the site which then joins the Loch Spynie Special Protection Area 2.5m northeast. • Agricultural land lies the north, new housing and housing currently under construction to the east/southeast (phases E1 and E2), established housing (Myreside Circle) to the south and Covesea Road Sub-station to the east. Myreside farm lies to the northeast. • The SEPA flood map indicates that a localised area within the northern part and small central of the site is at risk from surface water flooding. • An overhead electricity power line runs west-east though site. • The site is not subject to any landscape or natural or cultural heritage designations except in relation to known areas of archaeological interest located over parts of the site. 3. HISTORY 21/00961/AMC - Application for Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions 1- 17, 19, 25-34 and 36-58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to Page 52
Page 53
S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 156 homes and 570sqm flexible retail/commercial floor space (potential Class 1, 2, 3, & 10) including affordable housing with landscaping parking access and associated works within Phase E2 of Area 1 at site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Site and I8 Newfield Elgin. Construction works commenced in early 2021 and are ongoing. 20/00753/AMC - Application for Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions 1- 17, 19, 25-34 and 36-58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 113 homes including affordable housing with landscaping parking access and associated works within part of Area 1 (E1) at Site R11 Findrassie/Myreside and I8 Newfield, Findrassie. Consent issued 27 January 2021. Construction works commenced early 2021 and are complete. 19/01085/APP - Application approved under Section 42 to vary conditions 1-12, 14-16, 18, 20, 21, 23-25, 31, 32, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-51, 53-58, 60-62 and 65 (total 46 of 65) of planning consent 17/00834/PPP to allow for development of the site and associated infrastructure to be built in phases through submission/approval of details of elements (including triggers for infrastructure requirements) in accordance with an overall phasing plan at Site R11 and I8 Newfield, Findrassie. Consent issued 18 August 2020. 19/01220/AMC - Application for Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions 1- 17, 19, 23, 25-30, 37-44, 45-47, 52, 53 and 58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP for proposed residential development of 92 homes including affordable housing with landscaping, parking, access and associated works within part of Area 1, R11 Findrassie/I8 Newfield – this extends to 5.3ha, forms the southern corner of the Area 1 site. Application withdrawn 29 June 2020. 17/00834/PPP - Planning permission in principle for "mixed use development" with Class 9 residential development including affordable housing and student residential accommodation, community facilities including a primary school with playing fields, associated neighbourhood uses within Class 1 (Shops), Class 2 (Financial, professional and other services), Class 3 (Food and drink), Class 4 (Business), Class 7 (Hotel), Class 8 (Residential institutions) and Class 10 (Non-residential institutions) (Use Classes Order 1997 refers) together with associated infrastructure, for example, roads, drainage, services, open space, and landscaping including advance landscaping at sites R11 Findrassie/Myreside Site and I8 Newfield Elgin. This was granted subject to 65 conditions and a S75 legal agreement requiring developer obligations towards primary education facilities (2.5ha serviced site for a primary school), secondary education facilities, healthcare, transportation and sports and recreation facilities; and delivery of positive boundary treatment to western edge of existing electricity sub-station. Consent issued 1 July 2019. 16/01374/SCN - Screening Opinion for mixed use development comprising Class 1 Shops, Class 2 Financial, professional and other services, Class 3 Food and drink, Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industrial, Class 6 Storage and distribution, Class 7 Hotel, Class 8 Residential institutions, Class 10 Non- residential institutions (Use Classes Order 1997 refers) sui generis student residential accommodation and associated infrastructure works (including roads Page 53
Page 54
drainage open space and landscaping) at Findrassie - formal Screening Opinion adopted/issued (17 October 2016) confirmed that the proposed development was not EIA development. 4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 Sustainable Places NPF1 - Tackling the Climate NPF2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation NPF3 - Biodiversity NPF4 - Natural Places NPF5 - Soils NPF6 - Forestry, woodland and trees NPF7 - Historic assets and places NPF11 - Energy NPF12 - Zero waste NPF13 - Sustainable transport Liveable Places NPF14 - Design, quality and place NPF15 - Local living NPF16 - Quality homes NPF18 - Infrastructure first NPF20 - Blue and green infrastructure NPF21 - Play, recreation and sport NPF22 - Flood risk NPF23 - Health and safety NPF24 - Digital Infrastructure NPF19 - Heating and cooling Productive Places NPF25 - Community wealth building Moray Local Development Plan 2020 Primary Policies PP1 – Placemaking PP2 – Sustainable Economic Growth PP3 – Infrastructure and Services Development Policies DP1 – Development Principles DP2 – Housing Environment Policies EP1 Natural Heritage Designation EP2 Biodiversity EP5 Open Space EP7 Forestry Woodland and Trees Page 54
Page 55
EP8 Historic Environment EP13 Foul Drainage EP14 Pollution Contamination Hazards EP15 MOD Safeguarding Settlement Statements Elgin - R11 Findrassie 5. ADVERTISEMENTS 5.1 Advertised for neighbour notification purposes. 6. CONSULTATIONS Strategic Planning & Delivery: Provides policy and urban design comments in relation to the R11 Site Designation and Findrassie Masterplan, and on topics including placemaking and design/site layout, local living, open space and recreation, biodiversity, quality homes, climate change, trees and community wealth building. Design issues are addressed in detail within the Quality Audit carried out in relation to the application, which has been the subject of several meetings with officers and submission of revised plans to achieve ‘green’ in all categories (see observations section). Recommends conditions to address revised landscaping plans identifying fruit bearing species within community growing area, allotment delivery, expanded play area details and delivery, public art, inclusion of additional side facing windows to improve overlooking of parking court, delivery of affordable housing, updated/finalised carbon statement and adherence to tree survey recommendations. The proposal is considered to comply with the Findrassie masterplan and relevant policies set out in response. The application is supported on the basis that the proposal complies with all relevant NPF and LDP policies which other consultees have commented upon. Estates Manager: No objection. Developer Obligations: Developer obligations for Area 1 of the Findrassie development were secured via a s75 legal agreement under planning application 17/00834/PPP and the legal agreement was subsequently modified under planning application 19/01085/APP. Obligations will be secured through this agreement in accordance with the triggers set out within the agreement. This AMC application does not trigger further developer obligations or modifications to the existing s75 legal agreement. Environmental Health Manager: No objection subject to conditions regarding construction hours, adherence to agreed details within submitted Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation Document, adherence to measures set out in the Dust Management Plan, submission/approval of details of enhanced glazing Page 55
Page 56
and ventilation to properties with habitable room windows along the western perimeter of the site facing the Elgin Substation (as identified in the Noise Impact Assessment) and submission/approval of further details confirming the provision of a 2m high acoustic fence of minimum surface density 15 kg/m2 around the substation as detailed in the submitted Noise Impact Assessment. Environmental Health, Contaminated Land: No objection. Environmental Health, Private Water: No objection. Environmental Protection Manager: No comments received. Moray Access Manager: No objection. Proposed layout is acceptable from a public access standpoint with good connectivity to neighbouring core paths. Transportation Manager: No objection subject to the re-application of conditions 26, 27, 28, 30, 31(b), 32(a, b) attached to 19/01085/APP, and additional conditions to address specific details of the application, namely: 1. Submission/approval of Stage 1 / 2 Road Safety Audit; 2. Provision for third parking space for Plot 130; 3. Provision of public transport infrastructure; 4. A941/Morriston Road junction improvement; 5. Parking provision for houses and flats; and 6. Provision of EV charging infrastructure within communal parking areas. Recommends that planning conditions 17, 18, 19, 23(i, ii, iii), 24, 29, 33, 34, 35i and 36 as per 19/01085/APP should be discharged in respect of the current application (Phase E3 and E4 of the Masterplan). Further recommends that the following conditions 16(i, ii, iii, iv), 25, 31(b), 35ii can be discharged subject to the inclusion of additional suspensive conditions for Phase E3 and E4 set out above (points 1 to 6). Transport Scotland: Does not propose to advise against the granting of permission. Confirms the requirements of Condition 15, which restrict development of Findrassie Area 1 to a maximum of 350 residential units, remain applicable, and therefore cannot be considered discharged at this stage. Moray Council, Housing Strategy & Development Manager: No objection subject to conditions regarding submission/approval of details of delivery arrangements of 37 units of affordable housing, and provision of the accessible housing as per the submitted plans. Moray Council, Education: No comments. Moray Flood Risk Management: Following submission of revised drainage information, no objection. Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA): No objection, SEPA has reviewed the information provided and considers this sufficient to discharge the following conditions in terms of its interests. Page 56
Page 57
• Conditions 37 Foul drainage: No comments raised in in relation to foul drainage scheme. • Condition 38 Surface water drainage scheme and construction phase surface water management plan: No comments raised on surface water drainage scheme and provides comments on construction phase surface water management plan (see condition 45 CEMP comments below). • Condition 39 Flood Risk: Following review of updated flood / drainage plans SEPA confirms sufficient information has been submitted in relation to fluvial flood risk and that discharge of this condition is acceptable in terms of SEPA interests. • Condition 40 Water Engineering: No comments raised as no engineering activities are to be undertaken within the water environment as part of this phase. • Condition 45 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP): Confirms that the CEMP and condition discharge is acceptable in terms of SEPA interests. Also confirms that a CAR license covers the site and requests that measures to protect the water environment as outlined within the CEMP are implemented prior to commencement i.e., silt fencing and bunds, installation of emergency filtration systems, pumps, silt fences and sandbags and implementation of a construction plan/method statement incorporating above and wet weather working plan. • Condition 46 Groundwater Abstractions: Evidence provided that no private water supplies are within 250m of the phase. • Condition 47 Schedule of Green Measures: Evidence provided that a 10m buffer is outlined on site layout drawing and this condition discharge is acceptable to SEPA. • Condition 49 District Heating: Notes that an indicative trench location for district heating pipework is provided. This condition discharge is acceptable to SEPA. NatureScot: The submitted information meets conditions 43, 44 and 45 which relate to Loch Spynie’s protected status, protected species and environmental management in general. Condition 43: NatureScot notes that the developer has submitted a Mitigation Statement which summarises detailed plans that have been prepared in support of this development to mitigate the risk of a deterioration in water quality and quantity emerging from the development site both from construction and operation of the site. This statement also confirms that there will be no river engineering during this phase of the development. Such plans include, the CEMP and pollution prevention plans for the construction phase and the SUDS design for the operation of the site. Moray Council will need to be satisfied, through consultation with other agencies, i.e., SEPA and the Flood Risk Management Team, that these technical SUDS plans are appropriate. This may already be the case and if so, these will provide protection for the water environment and Loch Spynie’s protected interests. Condition 44: Notes that the developer’s ecological survey work has informed a suite of measures to ensure that the pre-construction surveys/checks are timed and carried out accordingly and that mitigation measures where necessary, or likely, have been worked into plans. The developer’s CEMP includes details that address conditional requirements, for example, the detail provided in Page 57
Page 58
CEMP tables 7.2, 7.5 and 7.13 will assist in minimising the risk to protected species on site during construction activities and help promote recovery and benefits following construction. The details also include measures to reduce risk of impacts to bat species, such as sensitive design and placement of construction site lighting and operational street lighting. Condition 45: Notes that most points in condition 45 generally cover aspects of development that are best advised upon by agencies other than NatureScot (i.e. SEPA) however, we have reviewed the detail and throughout are references to ensure that sensitive ecology and the water environment are afforded appropriate measures to avoid impacts during construction and that responsibilities for monitoring and reporting events and incidences will be in place. This should afford a good level of protection. Aberdeenshire Archaeology Service: Notes that Condition 51 cannot be discharged in full at this time, but this can however be partially discharged in respect of this part of Area 1 (of which the current application form’s part) where archaeological mitigation has been carried out. Recommends that a further condition is taken forward on the application to cover the remainder of necessary archaeological mitigation, confirming that condition 51 shall continue to remain applicable to any future AMC applications for development within the wider Area 1 development, granted under application 17/00834/PPP and associated Section 42 application 19/01085/APP. Ministry of Defence: No safeguarding objection (following submission of further information from the applicant to address MOD queries regarding construction management and drain down times for the attenuation basins), subject to a condition regarding a construction management strategy to ensure that construction work/equipment (cranes or other tall equipment including details of obstacle lighting) on the site and adjoining land does not obstruct air traffic movements or otherwise impede the effective operation of air traffic navigation transmitter/receiver systems. Scottish Water: No objection, however, this does not confirm that the proposed development can currently be serviced. In terms of water supply, Scottish Water is unable to confirm capacity currently to service the development, and to facilitate appraisal suggests that the applicant submits a Pre-Development Enquiry to Scottish Water. With regard to foul drainage, there is currently sufficient capacity at the Moray West Waste-Water Treatment works to service the development, but further investigations may be required once a formal connection application has been submitted to Scottish Water. We are unable to reserve capacity at our water and/or waste-water treatment works for this development. Once a formal connection application is submitted, after full planning permission has been granted, Scottish Water will review the availability of capacity at that time and advise the applicant accordingly. According to our records the development proposals impact on existing Scottish Water assets; the applicant must identify any potential conflicts and contact Scottish Water to apply for a diversion. Scottish & Southern Energy: No objection. Notes that proposed layout would ensure sufficient distance is maintained between dwellinghouses north and south of the “pylon corridor” and the nearest conductors running on the SSEN Page 58
Page 59
overhead line to ensure the housing within the development would not adversely affect the continued safe operation of the overhead line and substation. Initial concerns regarding the siting of allotments affecting/restricting operation of overhead tower (pylon) have been addressed by relocating the allotments to the east away from the tower. Similarly, concerns regarding the proximity and species of tree planting with the existing substation have been addressed by revised plans showing more appropriate smaller species set further from the station. Scottish Gas: No comments received. Elgin Community Council: No response received. Heldon Community Council: No comments received. Innes Community Council: No comments received. ParentAble Moray: No comments received. (Officer Note: ParentAble to be reconsulted upon submission of the equipped expanded play area details in line with condition 21 in recommendation). Moray Disability Forum: No comments received. Police Scotland: Recommends that comments be passed to applicant regarding adherence to Scottish Government Domestic Technical Handbook in relation to security of individual properties (standards for windows and doors) and consideration be given to applying for Police Secured by Design accreditation for all domestic dwellings and estate layout. 7. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS No representations have been received. 8. OBSERVATIONS 8.1 Section 25 of the 1997 Act as amended requires applications to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan i.e., the adopted National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and adopted Moral Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8.2 The main planning issues are considered below: 8.3 Planning History Planning permission in principle (17/00834/PPP) was granted on 1st July 2019 for a "mixed use development" on Area 1 at site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Site and I8 Newfield Elgin. This comprises residential development, including private/affordable housing and student residential accommodation, community facilities including a primary school with playing fields, associated neighbourhood uses within Class 1 (Shops), Class 2 (Financial, professional and other services), Class 3 (Food and drink), Class 4 (Business), Class 7 Page 59
Page 60
(Hotel), Class 8 (Residential institutions) and Class 10 (Non-residential institutions) (Use Classes Order 1997 refers) together with associated infrastructure, for example, roads, drainage, services, open space, and landscaping including advance landscaping. This was granted subject to 65 conditions requiring approval of matters regarding layout, design and materials of all buildings, transport and drainage infrastructure and open space/landscaping. 8.4 A subsequent Section 42 application (19/01085/APP) was granted on 18 August 2020 for the variation of 46 of 65 conditions of this planning permission in principle to allow for development of the site and associated infrastructure to come forward in a phased manner through submission/approval of details of elements (including triggers for infrastructure requirements) in accordance with an overall phasing plan, which was also submitted and approved as part of the application. 8.5 This AMC application seeks approval of matters specified in conditions 1-19, 23, 25-58 of these consents, which require submission of the following information to support the development proposal (in line with the approved phasing plan): • detailed drawings of the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings, structures/boundary treatment, access thereto, drainage, and landscaping/open space (conditions 1-13); • design statement to demonstrate compliance with place-making principles and Design Codes/Character Zones within the Findrassie Masterplan (conditions 8, 9 and 12); • details of provision of transportation infrastructure/information (roads, junctions, improvements to the local road network, footpaths/cycleways including route(s) to school(s), pedestrian crossings, bus laybys, construction traffic management plan etc.) (conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 15-19, 25-36); • details of provision of drainage infrastructure/information (foul and surface water SuDS, and levels/details to address flood risk) (conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 37-40, 46 and 47); • detailed landscape scheme(s) which accord with approved Masterplan requirements (conditions 7, 9, 12 and 41); • provision of affordable and accessible housing (condition 8); • pre-construction species surveys and mitigation measures to protect the Loch Spynie SSSI, SPA and Ramsar Sites to the north (conditions 43-45). • Construction Environmental Management Plan (condition 45); • mitigation measures to protect private water supplies (condition 46); • details for the provision of a 10m buffer for watercourses and other green measures (condition 47); • sustainability statements to demonstrate compliance with sustainability objectives (condition 48); • details demonstrating the potential or otherwise for installation of district heating (condition 49); • contaminated land assessment (condition 50); • archaeological investigation works (condition 51); and • updated noise impact assessments, external lighting, dust and air control measures and noise emission limits (conditions 52-58). Page 60
Page 61
8.6 This AMC application is not a planning application but the second part of the two-stage planning permission in principle process and relates solely to the site/phases identified within the application documents. The application specifically covers the abovementioned conditions, and assessment is therefore restricted to assessing the detail of these conditions against the policies of National Planning Framework 4, adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) and Findrassie Masterplan Supplementary Guidance. 8.7 Environmental Impact Assessment The proposed development has been screened in relation to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 as it is a Schedule 2 development in terms of the regulations. Having considered the characteristics of the development, the location of the development and characteristics of the proposed development it has been concluded that the proposal is not an EIA development. 8.8 Development on land at Findrassie R11 (NPF Policy 14, 15 and 16; MLDP 2020 - Elgin R11, DP2, PP1 and DP1) (Conditions: 1-12, 25-30, 37, 38 and 41) This AMC application site occupies part of Area 1 which forms the eastern area of the Elgin R11 Findrassie and western edge of I8 Newfield designations, as identified in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020. This land allocation is subject to the Findrassie Masterplan Supplementary Guidance which sets a framework, including design and siting principles and codes for the delivery of development at Findrassie. Development requires to be provided in accordance with this supplementary guidance, site-specific requirements for these designations and other development requirements as identified within planning policy. 8.9 The Findrassie Masterplan seeks to create a mixed-use neighbourhood that will provide facilities such as a school, community hub, retail/commercial space, as well as a significant central open space for residents to enjoy. The whole masterplan area is identified in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 as being effective for the plan period and has an indicative capacity of 1500 units. This site represents the third and fourth phases of Zone E of Area 1 of the Findrassie Masterplan and is located within the North / South and Hub and Central Open Space Character Zones. 8.10 Site development requirements for Elgin R11 include compliance with the Findrassie Masterplan Supplementary Guidance and Masterplan layout of the designation within the settlement plan for Elgin. These include provision of open/green space in accordance with the Masterplan (Neighbourhood Park, series of pocket parks, and allotments), on and off-site transportation infrastructure and improvements, footway/cycleway and public transport infrastructure/connections, proposals to demonstrate no adverse effect on the integrity of Loch Spynie SPA by minimising/preventing pollution reaching watercourses during construction and requirements for a Transport Assessment, Flood Risk and Drainage Risk Assessments and a Phase 1 Habitat Survey. Page 61
Page 62
8.11 The proposed layout and supporting submissions provide sufficient information to inform assessment against the designation requirements and relevant development plan policies. 8.12 From detailed assessment below, the development satisfies siting, design and servicing requirements, provides acceptable open space/landscaping, sustainable urban drainage arrangements and avoids any adverse effects on environmental interests in accordance with the abovementioned PPP conditions and NPF and MLDP policies 14, 15, 16 and PP1 and DP1. It also includes provision of appropriate levels of affordable and accessible housing provision in line with policy DP2. 8.13 The proposal would bring investment to the Elgin area through construction of new homes in a sustainable location that makes efficient use of land and infrastructure, supported by PP2 Sustainable Economic Growth. 8.14 The application is also supported by a Utilities Plan and complies with the requirements of PP3 Infrastructure and Services. 8.15 Placemaking, Design and Site Layout (NPF Policy 14, 15 and 16; MLDP - Elgin R11, DP1, DP2, EP2 and EP5) (Conditions: 1-13) In line with the PPP and S42 conditions, applications for approval of matters specified in conditions are required to demonstrate compliance with the Masterplan Guidance and how the Masterplan principles and place-making principles have informed the development. To this end, the conditions identified above require submission/approval of site layout plans, detailed designs, open space/landscaping, transport and drainage infrastructure and supporting information including design statements to demonstrate compliance with placemaking principles and Design Codes/Character Zones within the Findrassie Masterplan. 8.16 Conditions 1 to 13 – Specified matters in relation to siting and design: These conditions require approval of specified matters including the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings, boundary treatment/structures, access thereto, routes to schools of including walking and cycling infrastructure, and drainage and landscaping proposals within that phase as identified on the approved phasing plan. Further requirements include provision of section plans, details of earthworks/levels taking account of flood risk and submission of supporting information including design statements to demonstrate compliance with place-making principles and Design Codes/Character Zones within the Findrassie Masterplan (conditions 8, 9 and 12). 8.17 NPF4 Policy 14 Design Quality and Place seeks to ensure that development is well designed and makes successful places by adopting a design led approach and applying the place principle. Policy 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods seeks to create connected development where residents can meet the majority of their daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home. Policy 16 Quality Homes supports development proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in Local Development Plans. Page 62
Page 63
8.18 MLDP Primary Policy PP1 Placemaking contains design criteria which all residential development must meet, with significant emphasis on placemaking, biodiversity and promoting health and well-being through good urban design. Policy DP1 Development Principles sets out the need for the scale, density and character of development to be appropriate to the surrounding area. 8.19 A Placemaking Statement and Design and Compliance Statement have been submitted with the application to demonstrate how it meets the requirements of the Masterplan and relevant policies. These set out that the proposal has been designed to create a high quality modern placemaking focused development that residents would wish to live in, will be well-connected with good pedestrian links throughout the site and connecting into existing networks, and will provide opportunities for recreation through provision of open space and landscaped areas. 8.20 The proposal has been the subject of a Quality Audit to assess its conformity against the placemaking principles of NPF4 Policy 14, MLDP PP1, DP1 and the Findrassie Masterplan. To comply with PP1 and the Masterplan and deliver a distinctive place with all the health and environmental benefits associated with this the proposal should achieve green in all categories of the QA. 8.21 Early discussions with the applicant in respect of the layout and high-level design principles helped ensure that the initial Quality Audit (QA) was focused on detailed aspects of the design, with limited mitigation required on fundamental aspects of the layout. Despite this, the need for mitigation on some aspects of the design was identified through the QA, with the design scoring “red” initially in all categories. Officers continued to work constructively with the applicant following the QA and several meetings took place to discuss changes to the proposals. This exercise has resulted in the revised design scoring “green” in all categories and demonstrates that the proposal complies with policies PP1, DP1 and 14, and that the layout delivers the aims of the masterplan. 8.22 The completed QA highlights aspects that require to be conditioned. A summary of the key placemaking principles along with comments setting out how the proposal complies with these policies and the masterplan is set out below: Placemaking Criteria Comments Character & Identity • The layout complies with the design principles of the wider masterplan and for the two-character zones for which this application covers (North/South Connections and Hub & Central Open Space). • To provide further variation the applicant has split the layout into 3-character areas. Each character area reflects the respective character zone in the masterplan that they are within. However, they are slightly different from each other in terms of materials and landscaping to provide further variation. Page 63
Page 64
• Key buildings have been introduced within each character area to add distinction and improve legibility. Different coloured renders and boundary treatments have been used from other houses in the layout. • A strong and distinct northern frontage has been provided through the introduction of 3 variations of key buildings and estate style railings on corner plots. Healthier & Safer Environments • The street layout reflects the grid pattern as set out in the masterplan. As set out in the Placemaking Statement a clear street hierarchy has been provided through designs, widths, and use of shared surfaces on sections. • Active travel connections and natural desire lines have been provided to existing phases ensuring permeability throughout the masterplan area. This includes the future retail area in E2 which supports the principle of local living. Information has been submitted outlining an indicative network of active travel connections between the site and future phases. • Several plots were reorientated to improve natural surveillance provided on all streets. • A condition is being sought for additional windows to be put into Plots 111, 113, and 117 so that improved overlooking is provided over the parking court. The applicant has confirmed they are agreeable to this. • Public art will be provided within this phase. A condition regarding the detailed design of the proposed art will be conditioned. Housing Mix • 25% of the layout will be for affordable homes. • 10% of private homes will be wheelchair accessible. • Affordable properties will be tenure blind by using the same materials and finishes as private dwellings. • Detailed delivery arrangements will be subject to condition. Open Space & Landscaping • A central area of open space has been provided as per the masterplan. The open space contains a variety of planting as well as blue infrastructure through the introduction of swales. Benches have been provided throughout to offer opportunities for rest and relaxation. • The detailed landscape plan shows that a variety of shrubs, plants, trees, and hedges will be provided across the development supporting biodiversity and adding to the character of the Page 64
Page 65
development. • Hedging has been used as boundary treatment throughout. Different species have been used to add variety between streets and character areas, and support biodiversity. • Semi-mature trees have been planted throughout the development adding to the character of the development and streetscene. • A condition will be sought requiring the submission of a revised landscape plan identifying a schedule of fruit growing plants within the central area of open space that is proposed for community growing. • Advanced planting will be provided around the substation to the west. Revised landscape plans have sought to address SSEN’s comments on planting and this provision shall be addressed by condition. • Allotments have been provided within the open space which is a masterplan requirement. Details of delivery will be dealt with by condition. • An expanded play area will be provided in line with the masterplan providing a mix of play equipment. A condition is required to ensure that additional play equipment (minimum 3 pieces) will be accessible / inclusive in line with the Council’s Planning Policy Guidance. Sensory panels and/or instruments will also be provided. A condition will be required to ensure that the expanded play area is delivered upon completion of 50% of the units within the character area to which it pertains. A condition will also be required regarding maintenance arrangements for the play equipment, seating, paths, bins and landscaping. Car Parking • The applicant has provided a parking plan demonstrating that 50% of spaces on each street are to the side and rear and behind the building line. • Hedging, street trees and planted build outs have been incorporated extensively throughout the development further mitigating the visual effect of parked cars. Biodiversity • A variety of planting has been provided across the development. This includes trees, shrubs, hedging, wildflower meadow and wetland mixes. • Blue infrastructure features (swales and rain gardens) are incorporated which will support biodiversity. • Insect hotels, bird/bat boxes, hedgehog highways, swift bricks have been included Page 65
Page 66
throughout the development to support biodiversity. Street structure, layout, and detail • As above, a clear street hierarchy has been provided in line with the masterplan. Landscaping and character area variation creates defined streets within each character area. • Details relating to drainage and SUDs have been provided. 8.23 Local Living (NPF4 Policy 15) Policy 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods aims to promote compact neighbourhoods where people can meet a majority of their needs within a reasonable distance of their homes. The proposed location of this development has the potential to meet some of the daily needs of residents due to its location including proximity to proposed retail and commercial units currently under construction in phase E2. An active travel network will be provided that connects to existing and future phases of the masterplan. 8.24 Open Space & Recreation (NPF4 Policy 21 Recreation and Sport; MLDP Policy E5 Open Space) Under the terms of Policy EP5 new development must provide an appropriate quantity and quality of open space. Developments of 51-200 homes must provide 20% open space. Proposals must also comply with the qualitative aspect of this policy to ensure that proposal deliver high quality, usable, and multi-functional open space. The layout will also be assessed against the Quality Standard criteria set out in the policy and must score no less than 75%. 8.25 Open Space Provision and Landscaping The application proposes a central area of open space which reflects the masterplan. In addition, the application also includes an expanded play area to the east, and other spaces of open space on the northern, western, and eastern edges of the layout. All areas of open space across the development will be planted with a variety of species of shrubs, trees, hedges, and plants all of which is set out in the detailed landscape plan. This will ensure that all open spaces are visually attractive and support biodiversity. In addition, blue infrastructure such as rain gardens, swales, and SUDs ponds will be incorporated and planted to further support biodiversity and create habitats. Benches will be provided across all areas of open space to provide opportunities for relaxation and socialising. A community growing area within the western part of the central open space for fruit growing plants will also provide foraging opportunities. 8.26 The application meets the quantitative aspect of the policy as over 20% of the layout is open space. The layout scored 84% against the quality criteria of the policy demonstrating that it complies with the qualitative aspect of EP5 to deliver a quality functional open space. 8.27 A condition shall be attached to confirm the timeframe for delivery of the landscaping/open space in each character area (to be undertaken upon completion of each area). Page 66
Page 67
8.28 Play Area An expanded play area is proposed within the eastern area of the site, which was previously proposed as part of the E1 application. As part of this application, the applicant is proposing to increase the number of pieces of equipment and the level of inclusive play opportunities for this play area in line with the Council’s Planning Policy Guidance. 8.29 As this is classed as a “pocket park”, in line with the guidance a minimum of 6 pieces of equipment is required offering six different play values (i.e. climbing, swinging, sliding, balancing, crawling, jumping rocking, gliding, rotating/spinning or running/skipping/hopping). For a pocket park 3 pieces of equipment must be inclusive, and sensory panels and/or instruments should also be provided. The accessibility of the play area, including consideration of the surfaces, slopes, paths and benches, must be suitable for all ages and abilities. 8.30 Policy 21 requires that effective management and maintenance plans covering the funding arrangements for the long-term delivery and upkeep and parties responsible for these be set out. The applicant has confirmed agreement to these requirements and a condition regarding design, delivery, and maintenance of the expanded play area shall be attached. Conditions are also required to ensure that the expanded play area is delivered upon completion of 50% of the units within the character area they pertain to and that the play equipment will be inclusive and accessible in line with the Council’s Planning Policy Guidance. 8.31 Allotments For this phase the masterplan requires the provision of allotments. This requirement has been met and sixteen allotments are proposed on the eastern side of the central area of open space (as shown in revised plans), which will become a key feature of the open space. Concerns raised by SSEN regarding the siting of the allotments initially shown further to the west affecting and restricting operation of the tower (pylon) 269 have been addressed by relocating the allotments to the east away from the pylon tower. Visitor car parking spaces have been provided and the applicant has confirmed that the allotments will have a water supply. A condition requiring submission and approval of details regarding the future delivery mechanism of the allotments shall be applied. 8.32 Subject to the conditions highlighted above regarding the detailed design of the expanded play area and timing of its delivery, allotment delivery, and landscape planting the proposal is considered to comply with Policies 21 and EP5, and relevant conditions in 17/00834/PPP and S42 application 19/01085/APP. 8.33 Biodiversity (NPF4 Policy 3; MLDP Policy EP2) NPF4 Policy 3 and MLDP Policy EP2 require new developments to retain, protect and enhance features of biological interest and provide for their appropriate management. Promoting biodiversity enhancement can make a valuable contribution to the character of developments through the creation of new habitats and connecting into existing ones. Page 67
Page 68
8.34 The applicant has submitted a Biodiversity Statement and Placemaking Statement which includes a biodiversity plan. When read in conjunction with the detailed landscape plans this demonstrates how the layout will support and enhance biodiversity. Measures comprise the following: • All plots will have “hedgehog highways” to create permeable boundaries. • Swift bricks will be introduced on several properties across the whole phase. • Insect hotels, bird and bat boxes to be located across the development as shown in the detailed landscape plan. • Blue infrastructure such as swales and rain gardens are incorporated into the layout. These will be planted to create new habitats and support biodiversity. • The detailed landscape plan shows that a wide variety of species of planting, pollinators, shrubs, trees, and hedging will be provided across the development. This not only enhances the character and appearance of the development but will also support and enhance biodiversity. 8.35 Based on the biodiversity and detailed landscape plans provided the layout is deemed to comply with Policies EP2 and 3. 8.36 Quality Homes (NPF4 Policy 16 Quality Homes, MLDP DP2 Housing) (Condition 8) Condition 8 requires that 25% of residential units in each AMC housing application are affordable and that 10% of private sector units are to wheelchair accessible standard. 8.37 Policy 16 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes, in the right locations. In terms of the policy criteria, part a) states that proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in LDP’s will be supported. Criteria c) and e) relate to the provision of affordable housing and housing that is adaptable to changing and diverse needs. 8.38 Policy DP2 is similar in that it supports the provision of housing on identified sites subject to a comprehensive layout being provided that addresses infrastructure, access for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and service vehicles, landscaping, drainage, affordable and accessible housing. The policy also contains criteria relating to the provision of affordable and accessible housing. This states that 25% of the total number of units must be affordable. 8.39 In line with this policy requirement 37 affordable units are being proposed as well as 10% of the private sector homes being wheelchair accessible (twelve). The proposed units will also be tenure blind by using same materials/finishes as the private dwellings found elsewhere on the site. The Housing Strategy and Development Manager has confirmed that the proposed mix is acceptable subject to conditions to address detailed delivery arrangements of the affordable housing and provision of the accessible housing. 8.40 The layout is considered to comply with policies DP2 and 16, and address condition 8 of planning consent 17/00834/PPP and S42 application 19/01085/APP. Page 68
Page 69
8.41 Residential Amenity (NPF Policy 14 and MLDP DP1) NPF4 Policy 14 and Policy DP1: Development Principles require proposals not to detract from the amenity of the surrounding area and to avoid adverse amenity impacts in terms of privacy, daylight or overbearing effects. The proposed development would be sited sufficiently far from existing residential properties to the east, southeast and south such as not to give rise to unacceptable amenity impacts (overlooking or loss of light). On this basis the proposal accords with policy DP1. 8.42 Transport and Access (NPF Policy 13 and 18; MLDP R11, PP1, PP3, DP1 and DP2) (Conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 12, 15-19, 25-36); The previous Transport Assessment (TA) which accompanied the PPP and S42 applications identified that the development would have an impact upon the local and trunk road networks and the need for transport infrastructure. The applications were approved subject to conditions and developer obligations requiring the provision of transport infrastructure both on and off-site, and mitigation measures to address the development traffic impacts on the wider local and trunk road networks. 8.43 The submitted AMC application supported by transportation drawings and a Traffic Impact Assessment seeks to discharge several of these transport related conditions for this site/phase and proposes a number of off-site junction improvements at various triggers. This information has been assessed by the Transportation Section and observations are set out below. 8.44 NPF Policy 13 Sustainable Transport seeks to encourage and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel, and to reduce the need to travel unsustainably. NPF Policy 18 supports proposals which provide infrastructure in line with that identified as necessary in LDP's and for any impacts on infrastructure to be mitigated. 8.45 MLDP Policies PP3 Instructure and Services and DP1 Development Principles (ii) Transportation require development to be planned and co-ordinated with infrastructure to ensure places function properly, and proposals are adequately served by infrastructure and services. 8.46 Policy PP1 Placemaking and DP2 Housing require proposals on designated sites to be supported by Placemaking and a design statement addressing roads infrastructure, access for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and service vehicles. 8.47 The Elgin R11 designation contains several transport requirements. These include compliance with the Findrassie Masterplan Supplementary Guidance and Masterplan layout of the designation, off-site road improvements, the requirement for a Transport Assessment to assess impacts on junctions in the surrounding area to determine the level of developer obligations for any necessary mitigation, footway/cycleway and public transport infrastructure/connections. Page 69
Page 70
8.48 Conditions 1, 2, 4, 9(b) and 25 to 30 - Site layout and transportation infrastructure: These conditions require submission of site layout information for each AMC proposal/phase of development, including provision of access junctions onto the surrounding public road network, internal transport network arrangements for road, footpaths and cycle networks, parking provision and details of routes to schools including walking and cycling infrastructure (on and off-site), to be in accordance with the Findrassie Masterplan. Conditions 25 to 30 for each development proposal set out specifications/requirements regarding positioning of fencing/hedges/walls in relation to the edge of carriageways, visibility, parking, secure cycle parking and electric vehicle charging. The submitted site layout and associated engineering plans detailing the transport infrastructure for the development have been assessed by the Transportation Section and confirmed as acceptable subject to conditions, as set out below. 8.49 Condition 16 requires details of the provision for public transport for each phase including bus stop infrastructure (laybys, shelters and flags within the 400 metre walking isochrones for that phase), widening of road bends and provision for bus services. Details for i) and ii) a, b, (laybys, shelters, flags, road widening etc.) are as approved for phase E1 and E2. Part iii) of the condition requires a timescale for the delivery of public transport infrastructure for each phase. The applicant has indicated in their submission that the infrastructure will be completed prior to the completion of Phase E1 however that has not yet occurred. To address this matter, the Transportation Section has recommended that a suspensive condition is required for the delivery of the infrastructure prior to completion or occupation of the first house of the first house completion within either E3 or E4. Part iv of the condition requires evidence of a written agreement with local bus operators for the provision of bus services to serve that phase. The applicant has advised in the condition tracker that “the bus service quotation in line with agreed service requirements for Moray Council Roads Dept as agreed has been re validated Barratt North Scotland (BNS) to arrange implementation with Stagecoach. Stagecoach to confirm timescales”. The Transportation Section has recommended that a suspensive condition is required for the provision of the agreed bus services prior to completion or occupation of the first house within Phase E3 or E4. 8.50 Condition 17 – Southern access from the A941 Elgin to Lossiemouth Road. This condition was satisfied by the phase E1/E2 applications. 8.51 Condition 18 – Northern access from the A941 Elgin to Lossiemouth Road: This condition was satisfied by the phase E2 application. 8.52 Condition 19 - Emergency access (provision of second access onto Lossiemouth Road after 50 housing units built): This condition was satisfied by the phase E2 application. 8.53 Condition 23 refers to the submission of details for the design of modifications to Myreside Road which are required prior to the northern A941 access becoming operational. This condition has been partially satisfied by the E2 application. The design of the works was granted RCC approval on 15/02/23. These works have not commenced as they are dependent on the conclusion of a Traffic Regulation Order which is currently out for consultation. The Page 70
Page 71
requirements for this condition will be discharged as part of the Phase E2 consent (21/00961/AMC). 8.54 Condition 26 requires that no boundary fences, hedges, walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 1.0m in height and fronting onto the public road shall be within 2.4m of the edge of the carriageway, measured from the level of the public carriageway unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. The Transportation Section recommends that this condition be reattached to any consent. 8.55 Condition 27 requires no walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 0.6m measured from the level of the public carriageway shall be permitted within any 'forward visibility' areas or any visibility splays crossing plot boundaries within all areas of the residential development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. This condition shall be reattached as recommended. 8.56 Condition 28 requires that driveways over service verges shall be constructed to accommodate vehicles and shall be surfaced with bituminous macadam. This condition shall be reattached to any consent as recommended. 8.57 Condition 29 requires houses requiring 2 parking spaces shall have a driveway length of 6.0m minimum in front of any garage to permit a second car to park, unless alternative parking arrangements are provided. No part of the driveway shall be included in the public road. The Transportation Section recommends that this condition can be discharged for the current application. 8.58 Condition 30 – This condition requires provision of car parking, secure cycle parking (i.e. flats) and EV charging facilities to satisfy current parking standards. The current standards are taken from the 2020 Moray Local Development Plan. 8.59 The development includes 26no., 3 bed houses which include rooms designated as a home office/study. The Transportation Section notes that 20 of these plots include provision for 3 parking spaces which would meet the number required for a 4+ bed house, albeit that 13 of these include a ‘stacked’ parking arrangement. The 6 plots (all type J) have 2 parking spaces which meets the requirement for a 3 bed house. These also include integral garages, but these do not meet the minimum dimensions to count towards parking as they are too short or narrow. 8.60 Whilst there is a shortfall in the number of visitor spaces provided within the parking court serving plots 126-134, there are 2 additional visitor spaces provided in the opposite parking courtyard which serves 113-118 and 3 spaces adjacent to the nearby allotments which could also be accessed. This is considered an acceptable mitigation. 8.61 Plot 130 is a Type W (5 Bed House) which requires 3 parking spaces. Only 2 spaces have been allocated within the communal parking area. There is scope to provide additional parking in this area either by reconfiguring and adding an adjacent bay or by stacking spaces at the southeastern corner. The Page 71
Page 72
Transportation Section recommends that a suspensive condition is added to address this issue. 8.62 The Transportation Section considers the parking provision for the development overall to be acceptable, subject to the above-mentioned condition regarding Plot 130. 8.63 Electric Vehicle (EV) locations been shown for all plots and are acceptable. The proposed communal car parking and EV charging arrangements for plots indicates that the infrastructure being provided would enable each plot to install a future charging unit with an output of 7Kw. The communal parking areas also include provision for 22Kw rapid charging serving the visitor spaces. The proposed provision for EV charging and plot infrastructure for future EV charging is considered acceptable subject to an additional condition and trigger for the delivery. 8.64 Condition 31 – Active Travel: This requires for each phase/application, the submission of details and timescales for provision of active travel corridors and connections between the development and Elgin Core Paths EG31 and EG33 to the south of the current AMSC application site, and an indicative network of active travel corridors linking that phase and remaining phases with the wider existing/committed network. The site layout plans include information outlining an indicative network of active travel corridors between the application site and future phases/wider area and adjacent core paths. The Street Engineering Review (SER) submitted in support of the application notes that access to the corepath will be via steps. The submission and approval of details of these works shall be addressed by condition, in consultation with the outdoor access manager. 8.65 There is a section of existing footway on the eastern side of Covesea Road from the substation southwards to a point approximately 65m south of the Myreside Circle Roundabout which will require widening to 3 metres shared use cyclepath as part of the proposed development to meet the requirements of part b(i) of the condition. Further provision for dropped kerbs tactiles etc will be required for the cyclepath crossings at the roundabout. Additionally, a new cyclepath crossing will be required on West Covesea Road to connect the development to the existing path on the west side. 8.66 The Transportation Section has recommended that the condition 31 (a) should be reattached to any consent for phases E3 and E4 for the design and delivery of active travel infrastructure necessary to support the development and condition 31(b) should be modified to clarify that the requirement for details and provision of the infrastructure will be associated with Phases E3 and E4. 8.67 Condition 32 - Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP): This condition seeks submission and approval of a CTMP to address construction traffic management, road safety and amenity impacts during works. A ‘Traffic Plan’ which details the temporary site compound and operational details has been submitted with the application but is based on a superseded layout plan. Insufficient details are provided to support the discharge of the condition. To address this, the Transportation Section has recommended that the condition should be reattached to ensure the details are updated and missing details Page 72
Page 73
(construction programme, duration of works, measures to be put in place to prevent loose material being deposited on the public road) are provided and agreed. 8.68 Condition 33 - This condition requires submission of details and delivery timescales for improvements to the Morriston Road/Duffus Road Junction prior to commencement of any development. The Transportation Section notes that the development of the masterplan has not been brought forward as anticipated, this phase would not have access from Duffus Road through the Findrassie masterplan as part of the current application, and that the Transport Assessment submitted indicates a negligible impact on this junction with no existing capacity issue or additional pedestrian demand. The Transportation Section considers it reasonable to exclude the requirements of this condition for the current application. The requirement for improvements at this junction are therefore not triggered by the current application and the need for mitigation will be re-visited when future applications are submitted. The Transportation Section recommends that this condition remains applicable to the wider PPP development. 8.69 Condition 34 - This condition requires submission of design details and delivery timescales for improvements to the A941/Morriston Road junction prior to commencement of any part of the development. The Transportation Section notes that the requirements to discharge this condition shall be met by the existing Phase E1 and E2 consents. 8.70 Condition 35 - This requires, prior to the commencement of the 50th residential unit, submission of evidence to demonstrate control of the land through ownership or legal agreement to deliver the junction improvements at the A941/Morriston Road (Condition 34), delivery timescales and thereafter provision of the improvements prior to commencement of the 100th residential unit. The Transportation Section considers that condition 35 (i) (evidence of control) has been met. Transportation further notes that the trigger for the junction improvement has been reached and that works have commenced on the demolition of the properties required to facilitate the junction improvement works. The Transportation Section recommends that a suspensive planning condition is attached to any consent which requires the junction improvement works to be completed prior to the completion of the first house within phase E3 or E4. 8.71 Condition 36 – Covesea Road/A941 Junction: This refers to the Covesea Road/A941 priority junction and the submission of design details and delivery timescales prior to the commencement of any part of the development. Modelling information within the Transport Assessment indicates there to be no capacity issues with this junction for the current AMC application and the Transportation Section considers it reasonable to exclude the requirements of this condition for the current application. The requirement for improvements at this junction is not triggered by the current application and the need for mitigation will be re-visited when subsequent applications are submitted. The Transportation Section recommends that this condition remains applicable to the wider PPP development and future applications. Page 73
Page 74
8.72 Condition 15 - Trunk Road improvements: This condition requires, upon completion of 350 residential units, either confirmation of completion of the A96 (T) Fochabers to Hardmuir A96 dualling programme, provision of improvements to the A96 trunk road network (Pansport Roundabout) in accordance with details approved under the S42 application or submission/approval of a revised Transport Assessment identifying implemented trunk road mitigation measures to offset the impact of the development. The current AMC application for 148 residential units taken together with the 113 and 156 units approved in phases E1 and E2 will increase the total number of units approved in Area 1 to 417 residential units in Area 1 (beyond the 350 trigger). Following consultation, Transport Scotland, noting that the condition restricts development of the Findrassie Area 1 to a maximum of 350 residential units has confirmed that this still remains applicable and cannot be considered discharged at this stage. This shall be reattached to the decision notice. At this time records show that 190 units have been completed. 8.73 Based on the above considerations, and subject to the conditions identified, the proposal would accord with the transport requirements of NPF policies 13, 18, and MLDP R11, PP1, PP3 and DP1 and would satisfy the relevant conditions for the current AMC application. 8.74 Water Supply, Drainage and Flooding (NPF Policy 20 and 22: MLDP - R11, Policy PP3, DP1 and EP12) (Conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 11, 37, 38 - 40, 46 and 47) In line with the PPP and S42 application(s), the proposed development would be served by a public water supply and connect to the public foul drainage network via a new rising main that connects to the Moray West Water Treatment Works at Lossiemouth installed by the applicant. The development would have a surface water drainage system incorporating SuDS integrated within the development area involving roadside swales, bio retention system (rain garden), gravity piped drainage and SuDS detention basins, together with associated landscape treatment. 8.75 As previously identified, development in this area also requires to take account of flood risk from the Sey Burn which flows along the northern edge of the site; as mitigation, the Drainage and Flood Risk Assessment accompanying the PPP and S42 applications recommended that housing development is directed away from these areas and that proposed finished floor levels are set 1m above specified flood event levels (1 in 200/and or 1 in 1000). The need for mitigation measures to address potential surface water flooding, protection of private water supplies/abstractions in the area and for provision of a 10m buffer between development and the water course was also identified. 8.76 To address the above, conditions require the submission/approval of details for the provision of foul and surface water drainage infrastructure for each development proposal (conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 37 and 38), construction phase surface water management plan(s) (condition 38), finished floor levels to be set above specified flood event levels (as shown in the submitted Drainage Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment) (condition 39) and mitigation measures to protect private water supplies and the water course (conditions 40, 46 and 47). Conditions 37- 40, 46 and 47 were imposed upon the recommendation of SEPA. Page 74
Page 75
8.77 NPF Policy 20 Blue and green infrastructure seeks to ensure that such infrastructure is an integral part of design and development processes, and designed to deliver multiple functions including climate mitigation, nature restoration, biodiversity enhancement, flood prevention and water management. Policy 22 Flood Risk & Water Management seeks to strengthen resilience of development to flood risk through avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing/future development to flooding. It advocates use of SuDS to ensure surface water does not increase flood risk to itself and others and supports connection to public water mains unless this is not feasible. 8.78 MLDP policies PP3 Instructure and Services and DP1 Development Principles (iii) Water Environment, Pollution, Contamination require development to be planned and co-ordinated with infrastructure to ensure places function properly, and proposals are adequately served by infrastructure and services in terms of foul and surface water drainage and water supply. Policy EP12 Management and Enhancement of the Water Environment requires surface water from development to be dealt with in a sustainable manner (SuDS) that has a neutral effect on the risk of flooding or which reduces the risk of flooding, including temporary/construction phase SuDS. The R11 designation requires submission of Flood Risk and Drainage Impact Assessments to support applications. 8.79 The submitted application supported by drainage layout drawings, a Drainage Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment (DIA/FRA) and Construction Environmental Management Plan provide the necessary information required to meet the abovementioned conditions and policy requirements for these phases. 8.80 Conditions 1, 2, 4, 9, 37 - Foul Drainage: Submitted layout plans/information show the proposed foul drainage network along with connections between the development and public foul drainage network. Scottish Water has raised no objection to this drainage infrastructure, subject to advisory comments regarding capacity, application procedures and asset protection. Similarly, SEPA and Flood Risk Management have raised no objection to these elements. These include a permanent pumping station and rising main to the northeast of phase E2 which was completed in 2023 and connects to the Moray West Water Treatment Works at Lossiemouth. 8.81 Conditions 1, 2, 4, 9 and 38 - Surface water drainage: Surface water drainage arrangements as detailed on layout plans and supporting information would consist of a series of roadside swales, a bio retention system within the central open space, gravity piped drainage and two SuDS detention basins which would discharge to the adjacent watercourse at an agreed attenuated rate without detriment to the watercourse or surrounding area. These proposals and information have been assessed by SEPA and Moray Flood Risk Management and confirmed as acceptable. A condition requiring adherence to the submitted drainage details shall be attached. 8.82 Condition 38 b) - Construction Phase Surface Water Management Plan (CPSWMP): A CPSWMP contained within the Construction Environmental Management Plan and an associated pollution prevention plan (CAR licence) set out measures to ensure protection from surface water run-off during Page 75
Page 76
construction. SEPA has reviewed and is content with this information and requested that these are implemented prior to commencement. The abovementioned condition shall require adherence to these submitted details. 8.83 Condition 39 - Flood Risk: The application includes a Flood Envelope plan and site level plans; these show that no development is proposed within the flood risk area and that finished floor levels of the proposed housing which lies to the south of the area are to be set above specified flood event levels (as detailed in the submitted Drainage Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment). SEPA and Moray Flood Risk Management have reviewed this information and have raised no objection in terms of flood risk. 8.84 Condition 40 - Engineering activities in the water environment: The current application proposes no work to the water environment other than discharge pipes from the SuDS detention basins to the adjacent burn. SEPA, following consultation, notes that no engineering activities are to be undertaken within the water environment as part of this phase. 8.85 Condition 46 - Groundwater Abstractions: This condition seeks submission/approval of details which demonstrate that there are no private water supplies within 250m of the phase. SEPA has raised no objection in this regard as information has been provided confirming that there are no current private water supplies within the 250m limit identified relevant to this phase. 8.86 Condition 47 - Schedule of Green Measures and 10m buffer (between watercourse and development): Landscape proposals and a Biodiversity Plan submitted with the application include the use of tree, shrub, hedgerow, meadow and wet meadow mix, emergent and marginal species around the rain garden. The proposals include provision of a 10m buffer between the development and adjacent Sey Burn, which reduces to 8m along a short section in front of plots 69 to 72. SEPA has confirmed that this is acceptable. 8.87 On the basis of the above, the proposal would accord with NPF Policies 20 and 22 and MLDP designation R11 requirements, and policies PP3, DP1 and EP12 of the MDLP 2020 and would satisfy the conditions insofar as they relate to the current site/phase(s) of development. 8.88 Pollution Control (NPF Policy 23; MLDP - R11, Policy DP1 and EP14) (Conditions 45, 50, 53 – 58) Conditions 45, 50, 53 to 58 seek to address potential pollution impacts from development on the environment and amenity for each phase of development. These include the requirement for applications to be supported by Construction Environmental Management Plans (CEMP) to address potential pollution risks from development that might adversely affect the environment and amenity (condition 45), contaminated land assessments (condition 50), updated noise and construction noise impact assessments (conditions 53, 55 and 58), and measures to control external lighting (condition 54), dust (condition 56) and air quality (condition 57). Page 76
Page 77
8.89 NPF Policy 23 Health and Safety seeks to protect people and places from environmental harm; this includes requirements for applications to be supported by a noise impact assessment where effects are likely. 8.90 MLDP policies DP1 Development Principles (iii) Water Environment, Pollution, Contamination and EP14 Pollution, Contamination and Hazards seek to ensure that new developments do not create pollution which could adversely affect the environment or local amenity, and where impacts are identified these include appropriate mitigation. The R11 designation requires proposals to demonstrate no adverse effect on the integrity of Loch Spynie SPA by minimising/preventing pollution reaching watercourses during and post construction. 8.91 The application and supporting information comprising Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), Geotechnical Design and Environmental Risk Assessment Report, Noise Impact Assessment and measures to control external lighting and air quality provide the information required to meet the above conditions and policy requirements. 8.92 Condition 45 – Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP): The application is supported by a site-specific Construction Environmental Management Plan. This details measures that will be adopted/implemented by contractors, including best practice to manage/mitigate the impact of the construction phase upon the environment together with account of materials, soil, waste, surface water run-off water quality and quantity) and ecological mitigation measures. SEPA has reviewed this information and confirmed that it is satisfied that the measures outlined would minimise impacts of the development upon the environment. It also confirms that a CAR license covers the site and requests that measures to protect the water environment as outlined within the CEMP are implemented prior to commencement i.e., silt fencing and bunds, installation of emergency filtration systems, pumps, silt fences and sandbags and implementation of a construction plan/method statement incorporating above and wet weather working plan. Adherence to this plan and SEPA’s request regarding early implementation shall be addressed by planning condition. 8.93 Condition 50 – Contaminated Land Assessment: The Geotechnical Design and Environmental Risk Assessment Report accompanying the application has established that the site is not subject to land contamination and is suitable for residential development. The Contaminated Land Section has reviewed this information and has raised no objection to the proposed development. 8.94 Condition 53 (and 9) - Noise Assessment (for development in proximity to sub- station): A Noise Impact Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. This considers potential adverse impacts of substation noise on the closest dwellings (acknowledged through the provision of a 65m standoff zone from the substation and minimising the number of units potentially exposed) and concludes that with adoption of mitigation measures set out in the report, the proposal will meet the requirements of the relevant planning conditions and ensure that residents will be protected from noise nuisance from the adjacent substation. The Environmental Health Section is content with this information and has raised no objection subject to conditions controlling construction hours, adherence to agreed details within the submitted Construction Noise and Page 77
Page 78
Vibration Mitigation Document, and measures set out in the Dust Management Plan, and submission/approval of details of enhanced glazing and ventilation to properties with habitable room windows along the western perimeter of the site facing the Elgin Substation (as identified in the Noise Impact Assessment), and of further details confirming the provision of a 2m high acoustic fence of minimum surface density 15 kg/m2 around the substation as detailed in the submitted Noise Impact Assessment. 8.95 Condition 54 - Lighting: Temporary external lighting during construction is proposed around the site compound and this comprises lighting positioned to minimise light spill or glare exiting the site. The Environmental Health Section has assessed these arrangements and is satisfied that no significant light pollution would occur. A condition is recommended requiring implementation of these details, with no further lighting permitted unless otherwise agreed. 8.96 Condition 55 – Construction Noise Impact Assessment: This is addressed by the provision of the CEMP which sets out a mitigation scheme to be adopted/ implemented by contractors, including employment of best practice and working within consented hours to ensure that noise and vibration generated is within acceptable parameters. The Environmental Health Section has reviewed this scheme and is content with the recommended mitigation subject to its implementation being covered by condition. 8.97 Condition 56 - Dust Control Measures (Construction): The submitted Dust Management Plan sets out a framework of dust construction management to ensure that construction levels at sensitive receptors remain within reasonable limits throughout the works. The Environmental Health Section has reviewed and is content with this information. A condition requiring adherence to the scheme is recommended. 8.98 Condition 57 - Air Quality Assessment: The submitted Air Quality Assessment covering phases E1 to E4 inclusive and associated information addresses impacts from potential traffic emissions upon future and existing residents close to road networks in the vicinity of the site; based on air quality modelling this predicts no significant air quality impacts on existing residents or future residents of the housing scheme as a result of the development. Following review, the Environmental Health Section is content with this assessment. 8.99 Condition 58 - Noise Impact Assessment (Road Traffic): The submitted Noise Impact Assessment addresses road traffic noise and noting the distance between the site and the A941 Lossiemouth Road to the east concludes that no impacts will arise requiring any specific mitigation for internal or external noise sensitive spaces. The Environmental Health Section has reviewed and is content with this information. 8.100 On the basis of the above, the proposal would accord with the requirements of policies NPF4 Policy 23 and MLDP R11 and policies DP1 and EP14 in relation to pollution control and satisfy the conditions insofar as they relate to the current site/phase(s) of development. Page 78
Page 79
8.101 Nature Conservation (NPF Policy 4; MLDP Elgin R11 and Policy EP1, EP14, PP1, DP1) (Conditions 43, 44 and 45) Conditions 43- 45 seek to protect nature conservation interests on the site and within the wider area. In this case these include natural heritage interests of national and international importance at the Loch Spynie Special Protection Area, Ramsar and SSSI, approximately 2.5 km to the north-east which is hydrologically connected with the site via the Sey Burn. The conditions require applications to be supported by a mitigation statement setting out measures to ensure that development does not adversely affect the integrity of the abovementioned protected areas (condition 43), pre-construction surveys for any protected species on/adjacent to the site (condition 44) and site specific Construction Environmental Management Plans (CEMPs) to address potential pollution risks to local ecological receptors during construction (condition 45). 8.102 NPF4 Policy 4 Natural Places and MLDP policy EP1 Natural Heritage Designations seeks to protect nature conservation interests from adverse development impacts, and where proposals are likely to have an effect on European Site designations (not connected with conservation management) for these to be subject to appropriate assessment which has ascertained that there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the site(s). It also seeks to avoid adverse impacts on protected species through submission of species surveys and mitigation of any identified impacts. DP1 Development Principles (iii) Water Environment, Pollution, Contamination and EP14 Pollution, Contamination and Hazards further seek to ensure that new development does not create pollution which could adversely affect the environment, and where impacts are identified, that these include appropriate mitigation. The R11 designation requires proposals to demonstrate no adverse effect on the integrity of Loch Spynie SPA by minimising diffuse pollution, preventing pollution reaching watercourses during construction, and connection of houses to mains water and sewerage and for applications to be supported by a Phase 1 Habitat Survey (Preliminary Ecological Appraisal). 8.103 Submitted supporting information comprising a Mitigation Statement, Ecological Constraints Survey Report and Construction Environmental Management Plan provide the information required to meet the above conditions and policies. 8.104 Condition 43 - Mitigation Statement: The submitted Mitigation Statement sets out a range of measures designed to prevent adverse impacts and protect the water quantity/quality of Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar Site and SSSI during construction and the operational life of the development. These refer to submission of a CEMP and Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP), good practice site management/staff training, employment of an Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW) to ensure the CEMP and PPP are being followed, provision/maintenance of a minimum 6m vegetated buffer between Sey Burn and construction works, silt fencing, and surface water mitigation strategies amongst other measures. These also set out that the overall design incorporating SuDS basins and swales to treat surface water run-off from the development and landscaping to further help reduce surface water run-off would ensure that the operational site will not result in pollution risks to Loch Spynie. SEPA is content with this information. NatureScot has also confirmed Page 79
Page 80
that the measures detailed in the statement would prevent risks of pollution to Loch Spynie and is sufficient to satisfy the condition. 8.105 Condition 44 - Pre-construction Species Protection Surveys: The Ecological Constraints Survey Report (Protected Species) and CEMP outline survey findings along with ecological mitigation and pre-construction checks to minimise adverse impacts on species during construction. The Protected Species Survey undertaken in August 2024 noted an active sand martin colony present on a soil bund in the centre of the site and the presence of other birds typical to the area, along with signs of brown hare and common toad. No other signs of species’ activity were found. 8.106 Implementation of the mitigation measures and recommendations identified shall be covered by planning condition. These include ensuring that contractors are made aware of known and potential presence of protected species in the locality; pre-works checks for otter, water vole, bats, red squirrel, pine marten, badger, hedgehog, brown hare, amphibians and reptiles; pre-work checks for invasive non native species (INNS) and implementation of good practice bio security measures; removal of topsoil associated with the bund containing the sand martin colony on the site not be during the nesting bird season (March – September Inclusive) and overseen by an ecologist, and implementation of a 10m exclusion zone around the colony during the nesting bird season; vegetation clearance to be undertaken outside the nesting bird season and the brown hare breeding season (should this not be possible then support from an ecologist to be provided in the form of pre-works checks); excavations created during works not left open for mammals to become trapped and appropriate covers to be fitted at the end of every working day; temporary lighting required during works not to illuminate habitat used for foraging (e.g. woodland, hedgerows, scattered trees and running water) and for permanent lighting to follow a sensitive lighting strategy to minimise impacts on bats. NatureScot has advised that it considers these measures are satisfactory in terms of protection of species and habitat, and that the condition is met for this application. 8.107 Condition 45 - Construction Environmental Management Plan: As already outlined, the submitted CEMP sets out pollution prevention measures to mitigate the impact of construction works upon the environment including Loch Spynie to the north, which is hydrologically connected to the site via the Sey Burn adjacent to the proposed SuDS detention basins (with outfalls to the burn). SEPA has confirmed that it is satisfied that the measures outlined (also addressed by the CAR licence) would minimise impacts of the development upon the environment and has requested that measures to protect the water environment as outlined within the CEMP are implemented prior to commencement. NatureScot has also confirmed that the plan would prevent impacts on the environment including Loch Spynie and its protected habitats/species. Adherence to this plan shall be addressed by planning condition. 8.108 Considering the above and subject to the conditions identified, the proposal would accord with policies NPF4, EP1, EP14, PP1, DP1 and the requirements of R11 of the MLDP 2020 and would satisfy the conditions insofar as they relate to the current site/phase of development. Page 80
Page 81
8.109 During the course of consideration of the PPP application (and S42 application) and in accordance with the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, as competent authority, Moray Council (in consultation with SNH) undertook an ‘appropriate assessment’ which concluded that the development would not adversely affect the integrity of Loch Spynie. A further ‘appropriate assessment’ has been undertaken in relation to the current AMC application. This concludes that, with implementation of the measures outlined in the abovementioned mitigation statement, CEMP and Pollution Prevention Plan the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of Loch Spynie and is supported/endorsed by NatureScot. The assessment to be adopted is attached at Appendix 1. 8.110 Cultural Heritage (NPF Policy 7; MLDP Policy EP8) (Condition 51) Archaeological interests and features are present within Area 1 at Myreside i.e. cropmarks of possible enclosures and as such mitigation is required by condition 51. This requires a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation to be undertaken for each phase of development, including a post-excavation research design (PERD) where the need for post excavation analysis is identified. NPF Policy 7 Historic assets and places and MLDP Policy EP8 Historic Environment seeks the preservation of sites of local archaeological importance, and the integrity of their settings. 8.111 An archaeological evaluation (Phase 1 Data Structure Report) and Post- Excavation Research Design (PERD have been submitted with the application which outline findings from extensive trenching evaluation and metal detector surveys. The Aberdeenshire Archaeology Service has reviewed and is content with this information and advises that condition 51 can be partially purified insofar as it relates to the current application but will continue to remain applicable to any future AMC applications for development within the wider Area 1 development, granted under application 17/00834/PPP and associated Section 42 application 19/01085/APP where mitigation has yet to be carried out. A condition to this effect shall be attached to the decision notice as recommended by the Archaeology Service and on this basis policy 7 and EP8 are met. 8.112 Forestry, Woodland and Trees (NPF Policy 9; MLDP Policy EP7) (Condition 41) Condition 41 requires AMC applications to identify trees and vegetation proposed for retention and removal, together with protection measures during construction. NPF Policy 6 Forestry, woodland and trees and MLDP Policy EP7 Forestry, Woodlands and Trees seek to protect existing woodland and trees. 8.113 There are several trees and areas of vegetation within and bordering the application site. These include trees within the northeast part of the site adjacent to the easternmost SuDS basin, trees within adjacent garden ground associated with the property ‘Myreside’ to the northeast and trees along / out with the southern boundary. Page 81
Page 82
8.114 To meet this condition and policy requirements, a Tree Survey Report including a Tree Constraints/Protection Plan has been submitted. This sets out potential constraints in relation to trees and vegetation affecting the proposed development and protection and enhancement measures. As noted from the report a total 52 trees were individually surveyed, with the dominant trees located east of the proposed northeastern SuDS pond and separating ‘Myreside’ from the site. Of these, three trees adjacent to the northwest corner of the SuDS basin require to be removed as part of the design to accommodate the basin and adjacent ground works (Tree ID 5533 a category C Sycamore, 5534 a category U Douglas For, and 5535 a category B Douglas Fir). This removal is acceptable and follows the submission of revised plans for a design change around the SuDS basin which has involved adjusting levels to reduce impacts to remaining trees and eliminate root protection area (RPA) infringement of trees immediately to the east. Several small trees (cherry) along the southern boundary may also incur infringement of their calculated RPA to create rear gardens and this area of groundworks will be guided by the project arborist to avoid and minimise impacts. Avoidance, mitigation and enhancement recommendations are included in this report and adherence to these shall be addressed by condition. 8.115 In light of the above, and subject to the above conditions the proposal accords with policy EP7 and would satisfy condition 41 for the current AMC application. 8.116 Sustainability, Climate and nature crisis, mitigation and adaptation (NPF Policy 1 and 2) (Conditions 48 and 49) Condition 48 requires each AMC application to be supported by a Sustainability Statement (checklist) which identifies all measures to be incorporated into the development to address objectives contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, in accordance with planning policy (previously PP2 Climate Change of the MLDP 2015, now replaced by DP1 Development Principles (i) Design j) of the MLDP 2020. 8.117 NPF4 Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crisis and Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation support development which addresses the global climate emergency and nature crises and minimises greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible. 8.118 The Sustainability Statement (contained within the NPF4 Compliance Statement) accompanying the application sets out how the proposed housing development meets these objectives through provision of a range of measures, and contains the information required to meet the condition and policy. These include adopting a ‘fabric first’ approach (i.e. designing homes that are energy efficient and low carbon, comfortable and economical to run), use of renewable technology (installation of photovoltaic panels, high performance windows and doors etc.), green infrastructure (open space and landscaping which contribute to biodiversity), active travel (cycle, pedestrian and other transport links to minimise car use), resource efficiency (minimising water consumption/maximising water recycling and waste management), climate change adaptation (designing buildings to accommodate possible future uses and mobility needs) and surface water management and flooding (development avoids flood risk areas and incorporates SuDS). Page 82
Page 83
8.119 An additional Sustainability Statement, Low / Zero carbon, Climate Mitigation and Adaptation report has been provided which sets out details of the methodology, embodied and operational carbon impacts, carbon management and reporting. This document has been reviewed by the Climate Change Officer and is considered to comply with NPF4 Policy 1 and 2 and associated Moray PPG subject a condition requiring submission of an updated version to include a carbon assessment of proposed landscaping for the development, which is still to be undertaken and confirmed. 8.120 Condition 49 requires that each AMC application include details to establish and demonstrate the potential or otherwise for district heating on that phase, to be met through connection to an existing heating network or implementation of an on-site district heating network, as envisaged by the Findrassie Masterplan, and recommended by SEPA. 8.121 The applicant has submitted information containing an assessment of the feasibility of installing such a network; this confirms that a standalone network for the development of the Findrassie E1 to E4 phase is not viable at this time, however it could be feasible in the future as development of the Masterplan evolves which includes commercial, leisure and educational facilities. A layout plan has been submitted which proposes to leave space within the below ground service zone to allow pipework to be laid in the future. SEPA has reviewed these details and associated plan and confirms that these are satisfactory in terms of addressing its interests about this aspect of the proposal. 8.122 Based on the above, the proposal would satisfy the conditions insofar as they relate to the current site/phase(s) of development and policy 1 and 2. 8.123 Community Wealth Building (NPF4 Policy 25) Policy 25 Community Wealth Building requires that proposals contribute to local or regional community wealth building strategies and are consistent with local economic priorities. 8.124 A Community Wealth Building Statement has been submitted which provides an overview of how the proposed development will support local employment and skills and opportunities and seek to maximise local spend in the area using local supply chains during construction where practicable. This has been assessed and is considered acceptable. 8.125 Developer Obligations (PP3) As part of the consideration of the PPP application, developer obligations were identified and secured by a legal agreement with an agreed schedule of payments related to progress in house completions. The obligations relate to primary education facilities (2.5ha serviced site for a primary school), secondary education facilities, healthcare, transportation and sports and recreation facilities. The subsequent S42 application allowing for the development to be delivered in phases required the legal agreement to be modified to reflect the new application details, with the same triggers and levels of contributions. Page 83
Page 84
8.126 The current AMC application is covered by the existing S75 legal agreement associated with the planning consent 17/00834/PPP and S42 application 19/01085/APP. Developer obligations are being secured through this agreement in accordance with the triggers set out within the agreement, the first payment having already been received towards transportation upon completion of the 130th house within this part of Area 1 (phases E1 to E4 inclusive). 8.127 MOD (MLDP Policy EP15) Policy EP15 MOD Safeguarding outlines that development proposals must not adversely impact upon Ministry of Defence safeguarding operations and that for certain categories of development within safeguarding zones/distances around RAF Lossiemouth (and Kinloss Barracks), consultation is required with the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO). This applies to a range of development proposals which could have implications for the operation of the airfield and includes aspects such as height of buildings/structures, use of reflective surfaces, refuse tips, nature reserves and other proposals which might attract birds and have an adverse impact on air safety. 8.128 The site falls within the safeguarding zone for RAF Lossiemouth and the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) has provided consultation comments. These confirm that it raises no safeguarding objection subject to a condition requiring the submission and approval of a construction management strategy to ensure that construction work/equipment (cranes or other tall equipment) on the site and adjoining land does not obstruct air traffic movements or otherwise impede the effective operation of air traffic navigation transmitter/receiver systems. It further notes, following clarification from the applicant that the surface water drainage scheme has been designed to ensure that the SuDS attenuation basins will be continually maintained to drain down effectively and not hold water on a permanent basis, so as not result in the creation of new habitats which may attract and support populations of large and, or flocking birds close to aerodromes. With the abovementioned condition imposed the proposal would meet policy EP15. 8.129 Information Communication Technology (NPF Policy 24; MLDP Policy PP3) NPF Policy 24 Digital Infrastructure seeks to encourage promote and facilitate the rollout of digital infrastructure across Scotland. Policy PP3 Infrastructure & Services vii) requires development proposals to incorporate the installation of Information Communication Technology (ICT) and fibre optic broadband connections (unless justification can be provided to show that ICT is technically unfeasible). The applicant has confirmed that IT cabling to the development will be Fibre Optic, the provision of which will be covered by planning condition. Conclusion and Recommendation The proposal is an acceptable housing development on Phase E3 and E4 of Area 1 of the Findrassie residential designation, as identified in the adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2020. The site layout and density are appropriate to the location and meets the principles of good placemaking and aims of the Findrassie Masterplan. The proposal would bring investment to the Elgin area through construction of new homes, deliver affordable housing and make efficient use of land and infrastructure. It can be adequately serviced and Page 84
Page 85
will not adversely impact the surrounding area in terms of amenity or environmental impact. The proposal is in accordance with the National Planning Framework 4 and Moray Local Development Plan 2020, and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. The proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposal accords with the provisions of the development plan and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer: Richard Smith Principal Planning Officer Ext: 01343 563256 Beverly Smith Development Management & Building Standards Manager Page 85
Page 86
Appendix 1 Appropriate Assessment for Application 23/02239/AMC Application for Approval of Matters specified in conditions 1 - 19, 23, 25-58 on planning consent 17/00834/PPP and in relation to S42 application reference 19/01085/APP for a proposed residential development of 148 homes including affordable housing, with landscaping, parking, access and associated works within part of Area 1 at Site R11 Findrassie/Myreside Elgin Moray. Impact of proposed mixed-use development as proposed at Findrassie upon Loch Spynie Special Protection Areas, Ramsar sites and Site of Special Scientific Interest European Sites (formerly Natura 2000 sites) include Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Ramsar sites and any component Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 require that certain proposals which are likely to have a significant effect on a ‘Natura 2000’ site must be subject on ‘Appropriate Assessment’ by a competent authority. These requirements apply to applications for planning permission and planning permission in principle, including applications for approval of matters specified in conditions. In undertaking this assessment, account has been taken of • the development as described within application 23/02239/AMC comprising application form, drawings and supporting information including the applicant’s Condition 43 Mitigation Statement detailing measures to mitigate the impact of the development upon the integrity of the Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar Site and SSSI, and Ecological Survey (updated June 2021); • consultation responses received from NatureScot, SEPA and the Moray Flood Risk Management Section; and • the Council’s Screening Opinion as adopted for this development, wherein no significant environmental effects are considered likely after taking into account the character and location and potential characteristics of impact; and In terms of the Regulations and where a development proposal unconnected with the nature conservation management of a Natura 2000 site is likely to have a significant effect on that site, the competent authority must undertake an “appropriate assessment” of the implications for the development upon the conservation interests for which the site has been designated. The assessment extends to proposals outwith the boundary of the Natura 2000 site in order to determine their implications for the interests protected within the site. As competent authority, Moray Council can only agree to the proposal under Regulation 48 after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. If this is not the case, and there are no alternative options, the proposal can only be allowed to proceed if there are imperative reasons to over-ride public interest including those of an economic or social nature, after referral to Scottish Ministers. Loch Spynie European Interests Page 86
Page 87
Under the EC Directive 79/409/EEC, Loch Spynie is classified as a SPA based upon its internationally important populations of wintering greylag geese. This is also an SSSI feature. Loch Spynie is designated under the Ramsar Convention for its populations of wintering greylag geese and its range of vegetation communities representing all stages of hydro-seral succession (open water colonisation by vegetation) and it’s vascular plants, including nationally scarce plant species. The loch itself is an example of a meso-eutrophic loch surrounded by large area of open water transition mire (including SSSI features such as standing freshwater habitats; vascular plants; fen and swamp communities, and fen woodland). Loch Spynie is designated as an SSSI based upon greylag geese (as SPA above), plant species and as a eutrophic loch (as Ramsar above), and breeding birds. Conservation objectives for qualifying interests: Conservation objectives for Loch Spynie SPA are to avoid deterioration of habitats of, or significant disturbance to, the qualifying species (greylag geese), thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained. For the Ramsar designation, the conservation objectives for Loch Spynie are to avoid deterioration of, or significant disturbance to, qualifying habitats (including the meso-eutrophic loch surrounded by large area of open water transition mire), the habitats of qualifying species (wintering greylag geese and nationally scarce plant species), thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained and makes an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status for each qualifying interest. National Interests Under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 (Section 12), consultation with NatureScot (formerly SNH) is required where development is on, or affects, any land which is, or forms, part of an SSSI, and when exercising functions which might affect an SSSI, to further the conservation and enhancement of the protected natural features specified in the SSSI and maintain and enhance the representative nature of the SSSI as a whole. The appraisal for Natura 2000 interests (SPA and Ramsar) covers all interests of the SSSI except breeding bird interests, as a result of the habitats of Loch Spynie. The appraisal of the impact on habitats therefore indirectly covers this interest. Requirement for Appropriate Assessment Appropriate assessment is required in relation to the potential impact of the development upon Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar and SSSI interests. The development is hydrologically connected with Loch Spynie via the Sey Burn which runs along the north boundary of the development site and ultimately discharges to Loch Spynie. In this case, and without mitigation, the potential pollution of surface and ground water within and adjoining the development has the potential to impact upon the aquatic environment of Loch Spynie. Page 87
Page 88
There are no other Natura sites which could be impacted upon by this proposal. The development site itself is not subject to the Natura 2000 designations and does not directly affect, or impact upon, Loch Spynie. Indirect effects upon Loch Spynie relate to (a) the potential increase in sediment and/or other pollution effects during construction activity occurring on the development site, and (b) any potential change in surface water characteristics including greater volumes of water affecting rates of run-off and sediment reaching any watercourse including the Sey Burn which discharges ultimately to Loch Spynie. These indirect effects may occur individually because of this development or cumulatively in conjunction with other developments where surface waters discharge to the Sey Burn, for example from other residential development in the area to the east (Phase E2). Based on the requirements of the Habitat Regulations (Regulation 48): i) Is the development directly connected with or necessary for site management for nature conservation of Loch Spynie? No. The proposed development comprises the Phase E3 and E4 residential development which forms part of the mixed-use development approved applications 17/00834/PPP and 19/01085/APP. Land at Findrassie is the subject of a major land allocation for residential and employment use, designated as Elgin R11 and I8 within the Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) 2020. The proposal is neither directly connected nor needed for the nature conservation purposes and management of Loch Spynie. ii) Is the development likely to have a significant effect on Loch Spynie? Yes. The development does not have a direct effect but because it is hydrologically connected with Loch Spynie through the Sey Burn. With the potential for discharges from within the development area to the Sey Burn there is a potential risk of sediment and other pollutants to discharge to that watercourse during the construction process, with or without mitigation measures being in place, for example from any earth moving works and operations to re- contour the landform or from use of construction plant and machinery and storage and movement of materials, etc. within the site. During the operational period, there is potential for changes in surface water characteristics resulting from increased volume of water discharging to the Sey Burn affecting rates of run-off and sediment and pollution effects. A further (indirect) effect upon breeding birds is the disturbance and displacement of bird species and habitats during construction and operation of the development in terms of loss of land, a mixture of arable and improved grassland, to accommodate the development. This habitat can provide suitable foraging opportunities for a variety of breeding birds, including greylag geese. Post-construction, the increase in human population within the local area may give rise to an increase in recreational use of the surrounding countryside. Page 88
Page 89
From consideration of the development, the need to address any significant effect has been identified by: • NatureScot, who has advised that there is a potential for adverse effects to occur upon the aquatic environment at Loch Spynie. As required under the terms of the planning permission in principle and associated S42 consent for the development, there is a need to address and manage water quality and quantity during both construction and operation of the development; to this end conditions were attached to these consents requiring implementation of measures to mitigate the impact of the development upon the integrity of the Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar Site and SSSI. • SEPA, who highlight the need to consider pollution prevention, site waste management and other environmental issues including the management of surface water during both construction and operational stages of the development, notably in terms of water quality aspects and impacts upon the water environment. Consideration is also required over the risk of flooding from all sources including ground and surface water to mitigate rather than exacerbate the risk of flooding to the development or the surrounding area; • Moray Flood Risk Management, in terms of information to address operational and construction SUDs arrangements including attention to run-off and attenuation rates, overland flows, etc. to address water quantity and flooding issues associated with the development; and • Submissions from the applicant, which highlight the need to address water quality and quantity issues within the development: the Drainage Impact Assessment and Stage 1 Flood Risk Assessment, Condition 43 Mitigation Statement and Construction Environmental Management Plan. Effects on Loch Spynie Greylag geese depend on the Loch Spynie waterbody being present and providing a roost site (shelter and safety) from approx. September – April annually. They do not depend on the waterbody for food so water quality is less likely to be an issue unless water quality affects the extent of open water versus marginal habitats. Any potential impact on geese is likely from expansion of marginal vegetation, loss of water from the loch, significant disturbance (noise and human activity) when geese are present, and sediment and nutrient built-up on terrestrial habitats. With any water body, natural succession is an on-going process: Loch Spynie demonstrates the transition from open water habitats through to woodland, it is relatively shallow and lends itself to expansion of marginal habitats. Sediment and nutrient inputs influence change at Loch Spynie. Increased sediment can help to establish areas where, with reduced water depth, reed growth and encroachment can occur. Increases in nutrient levels increase biomass accumulations, thus increasing opportunities for vegetation to establish. Increased eutrophication leads to an increased rate of encroachment of vegetation on the waterbody. Natural fluctuations in water levels occur both within the loch and surrounding wetlands. However, this development does not propose any work at, or near, Loch Spynie resulting in a loss of water from the loch, so this is not of concern. A breach of the embankment dams holding water within the loch would have consequences Page 89
Page 90
upon the qualifying interests of the site but no works are proposed near Loch Spynie as part of this development, hence no significant disturbance to geese is expected. In relation to additional Ramsar interests, the nationally scarce plant species present are depend on the presence of the waterbody and wetland habitats. Regular inundation helps maintain the wet habitats, inhibiting growth of species that prefer drier conditions. Loch Spynie is a meso-eutrophic loch dependent upon the hydrology within, and acting upon, the site to maintain a variety of habitats. Loch Spynie is naturally susceptible to becoming too rich to maintain the important interests. Increased nutrients and sediments from external sources would increase the amount of marginal vegetation, help other species that do not normally tolerate wet conditions to become established, and reduce the open water habitat. Whilst naturally eutrophic, additional nutrient and sediment would enter the loch from existing drainage including the Sey Burn which has a direct route into the loch unchecked by control structures. Whether occurring under normal conditions and/or in larger quantities during increased run-off and flood conditions, such action could strip sediments on the bottom of the loch, causing resuspension of nutrients. iii) Can it be ascertained that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of Loch Spynie? Yes. • National Planning Framework 4 and the MLDP 2020 includes policies intended to safeguard the natural environment. These include NPF Policy 4 Natural Places and MLDP policies EP1 Natural Heritage Designations which seek to safeguard nature conservation interests and species, Policy EP6 Settlement Boundaries which defines the boundary for expansion of Elgin; Policy EP4 which defines a ‘Countryside around Towns’ buffer between Elgin and Loch Spynie. In addition, Policies DP1 Development Principles, PP3 Infrastructure and Services, EP12 Management and Enhancement of the Water Environment and EP14 Pollution, Contamination and Hazards (and related NPF policies 22 Flood Risk and Water Management and 23 Health and Safety) refer to matters regarding contamination, pollution, flooding, water engineering and drainage which are all relevant. EP12 and policy 22 requires provision of on-site SUDs as part of any development, thereby helping to protect against changes in drainage, run-off and water quality and quantity within the catchment; • notwithstanding the loss of land for foraging opportunities for breeding birds, the development site is not known as feeding grounds for geese and is currently subject of extensive construction activity. • to minimise impacts upon the water environment, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and Mitigation Statement have been submitted as part of the application which identifies construction pollution and environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to be adopted/implemented including construction working and pollution prevention practices and surface water quality issues. Additionally, details of all SUDs together with provision for buffers between development and the watercourse and measures to mitigate flood risk have been submitted. SEPA advise that it is content with this information and that subject to Page 90
Page 91
adherence to the measures outlined, impacts upon the environment will be satisfactorily mitigated. • NatureScot advise that the proposal would not adversely affect the integrity of Loch Spynie SPA and Ramsar and SSSI protected habitats and species provided appropriate mitigation as outlined with the applicants ‘Mitigation Statement (condition 43) combined with the CEMP is implemented. These require identification of all measures to address water quality and quantity during construction and operational of the development, pollution prevention and implementation of the CEMP, to ensure that internationally and nationally important nature conservation interests are duly recognised. • Moray Flood Risk Management have also reviewed and are content with details of SUDs infrastructure to be provided during both construction and operation of the development, particularly to address water quantity issues including the capacity of infrastructure to accommodate increased run-off from the site, on-site attenuation of run-off and regulation over the rate of discharge from the site. Conclusion Loch Spynie is designated for internationally and nationally important nature conservation interests, as reflected in its status as Loch Spynie SPA, Ramsar, and SSSI. The proposed residential development (Phase E3 and E4 - Findrassie) is not needed for nature conservation purposes, it will not directly affect Loch Spynie but it is hydrologically connected to Loch Spynie via the Sey Burn which runs along the northern boundary of the proposed development area. Together with potential for increased run-off, the potential risk of sediment or other pollutants on surface and ground water within and/or adjacent to the development has the potential to alter the existing eutrophic state of Loch Spynie. Its nutrient rich conditions favour vegetation growth and open water that it is important in providing a safe roost for wintering greylag geese and support a variety of designated species. Urban pollution from this (and other) development has the potential to alter the existing balance of conditions, accelerating vegetation growth at the expense of open water. Subject to conditions, including those recommended by consultees, to mitigate and manage surface water quality and quantity, etc. together with adoption, commitment to and implementation of all required/proposed mitigation measures, the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of Loch Spynie SPA, and the habitats and species protected by its Ramsar and SSSI status. Recommendation It is recommended that this assessment be adopted by the competent authority, Moray Council to enable Moray Council, as planning authority to proceed and determine application 23/02239/AMC. Page 91
Page 92
Page 92
Page 93
WARD 02_17 24/00986/APP 19th June 2024 Variation of conditions 6, 13, 15 and 18 imposed on 22/00067/S36 due to the change in bund dimensions at Blackhillock Electricity Substation Keith Moray for Zenobe Energy Ltd Comments: • The application is reported to Committee as it is a major application. Given that this is an application under section 42 of the planning act to vary the terms of an existing consent the pre application requirements for major applications are not required. • The application was advertised for Neighbour Notification. • One representation has been received. Procedure: • None. Recommendation • Grant Planning Permission - Subject to the following: Conditions/Reasons PART 2 – Conditions attached to the deemed planning permission. 1. Implementation in accordance with approved plans and requirements of this Consent (formerly condition 6 of deemed planning permission issued 30 September 2022 along with S36 consent (ECU reference ECU0003404)) (1) Except as otherwise required by the terms of this consent, the Development shall be undertaken in accordance with the Application, the planning drawings and all documentation lodged in support of the application as amended by this Section 42 Application reference 24/00986/APP. Reason: To ensure that the Development is carried out in accordance with the approved details. Item 7 Page 93
Page 94
2. Construction Hours (1) 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) shall construction works be undertaken except where previously agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority and where so demonstrated that operational constraints require limited periods of construction works to be undertaken out with the permitted/stated hours of working. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance in ensuring the construction phase is restricted within permitted hours. 3. Noise (1) The rating level of noise associated with the Development shall not exceed 36 dB at the nearest noise sensitive dwelling which is lawfully existing or has planning permission at the date of this permission. Measurement and assessment to demonstrate compliance with the rating level shall be undertaken in accordance with BS 4142: 2014 Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound. Reason: To protect local residents from noise nuisance due to the use of the Development. 4. Noise Impact Assessment (1) Prior to commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works, a further detailed Noise Impact Assessment shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, in consultation with the Environmental Health Manager, demonstrating that the predicted rating level of noise in the above condition 3 is to be met. (2) Prior to the commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works and unless an alternative mitigation is otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a 5m high acoustic barrier with a surface density of at least 10kg/m2 shall be provided on the north and west elevation of the transformer compound associated with the development as illustrated in Figure 2, page 9 of the Noise Impact Assessment supporting document by Apex Acoustics Limited and titled “Battery Storage, Blackhillock. Noise Impact Assessment. Dated 16 December 2021, Revision C. Document reference 9169.1.” Prior to the operation of development (Phase 5), the final selected acoustic barrier in terms of chosen material, design, surface density shall be submitted in a plan and agreed in writing with the Planning Authority and shall thereafter be installed and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Page 94
Page 95
Reason: In order to ensure that in the final design selected a further assessment of noise impact shall be undertaken and can demonstrate no noise nuisance to local residents, and to protect local residents from noise nuisance due to the use of the development. 5. Construction Environmental Management (1) No development shall commence unless and until a site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. The plan shall include measures to minimise construction related noise, dust, artificial lighting, and a pollution prevention plan to protect the water environment from construction activities. (2) 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 and the environment. 6. Lighting (1) Prior to the commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works details of the operational site lighting are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. (2) Thereafter, the agreed lighting details shall be maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: In order that in the final design selected, artificial light emissions are considered, in order to protect local residents. 7. Ecology and Biodiversity (1) The ecological mitigation measures and biodiversity enhancements as detailed within the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Section 5 refers), prepared by Arcus Consultancy Services dated November 2021 accompanying this application shall be fully adhered to by the Company, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development does not have an adverse impact on protected species or habitat, minimise disturbance to nature conservation interests and enhance biodiversity. 8. Landscaping and Biodiversity Plan (formerly condition 13 of deemed planning permission as referred to above) (1) Phase 3 of development shall take place in accordance with the submitted plan entitled Figure 4 Landscape Mitigation Plan (Revision N) showing the following information: Page 95
Page 96
(a) All soft landscaping and planting works, including plans and schedules detailing species, specifications, heights and numbers of trees within each proposed woodland block, shrub and species rich meadow areas; (b) Additional groups of tree planting to reinforce the proposed perimeter planting, wildflower planting and planting (emergent and marginal) to the SuDs basin; (c) Details of the arrangements for the protection and long-term maintenance of all landscaped areas; and (d) Details and location of bird nest, bat and insect boxes. (2) Thereafter the landscaping and biodiversity measures shall be implemented in accordance with these approved plans within the first planting season upon completion of the development. Any trees or plants which (within a period of 5 years from the 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 species unless as otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure an acceptable level of planting in the interests of the amenity and appearance of the surrounding countryside and to enhance biodiversity in the area. 9. Tree survey and tree protection plan (1) Prior to the commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works a Tree Survey and Tree Protection Plan shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Authority and shall include the following (but not limited to): (a) detailing trees that would be required to be removed to accommodate the grid connection cable; (b) measures to be taken to protect existing trees on that route; (c) any trees that are required to be removed as a result of the grid connection cable shall be replaced with the same species, with details to be shown on a detailed landscape plan; and (d) If no trees are to be removed this shall be demonstrated in this plan. (2) Thereafter the protection measures shall be implemented prior to any development commencing within that part of the site and be retained until completion of the development. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development is provided in accordance with the tree survey, and that suitable protection is afforded to existing trees. 10. Drainage (formerly condition 15 of deemed planning permission as referred to above) (1) Phase 3 of the programme of works shall take place in accordance with the Detailed Drainage Strategy prepared by Vazquez Besada Consulting, dated 05 April 2024, submitted in support of this application. Page 96
Page 97
Reason: To ensure that surface water drainage is provided timeously and complies with the principles of SUDs in order to protect the water environment. 11. Final Design Finishes (1) Prior to the commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works detailed scale drawings showing the final designs of the associated infrastructure/equipment, fencing and buildings (floorplans and elevations, and colour specifications) are to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The colours of these works shall be a recessive tone (green, brown or similar) as outlined within the submitted Landscape & Visual Appraisal (section 7 refers), as prepared by TGP Landscape Architects accompanying this application. (2) Thereafter all works shall be carried in accordance with these approved details. Reason: In order to ensure that the development integrates sensitively into the surrounding area and as these details are lacking from the application. 12. Private Water Supplies (1) Prior to the commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works a Private Water Supply Protection Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA if required: (a) detailing any existing groundwater abstractions within 500m of the Development; (b) detail measures to avoid any impact on existing private water supplies arising from the Development throughout the period from Commencement of Development until the Decommissioning Scheme has been implemented in full and condition 15 is discharged by the Planning Authority; and (c) detail mitigation measures for any impact on a public or private water supply arising from the Development, e.g. provision of new supplies. (2) Thereafter, the Private Water Supply Protection Plan shall be implemented in full. Reason: To ensure that an adequate and wholesome water supply to existing properties is maintained. 13. Access, Cable and Earthworks (formerly condition 18 of deemed planning permission as referred to above) (1) Phase 1 of the programme of works shall take place in accordance with detailed drawings and construction specification of the final access track and route, as indicated on drawing titled BLHK-PLA-Site_Layout_Plan-R1 – Site Layout Plan, 230203 Blackhillock Junction Design and Figure 1.5 – Grid Connection Route (Revision B) as submitted. (2) Phase 3 of the programme of works shall take place in accordance with detailed drawings of the final grid connection cable route between the Page 97
Page 98
development and the Blackhillock Substation, as indicated on drawing titled Drawing Number 70098686-WSP-CRL-001. (3) Phase 3 of the programme of works shall take place in accordance with the drawings and specification of the final bund design, as shown on drawings titled BLHK-PLA-REVISED_BUND-R2 and BLHK-PLA-Site_CS-R2. Thereafter all works shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development integrates sensitively into the surrounding area and as these details are lacking from the application. 14. Micro-siting (1) All infrastructure shall be constructed in the locations shown in the drawing titled Figure 1.2 – Site Layout. Infrastructure may be adjusted by micro-siting of no more than 100m from the original position shown on Figure 1.2 Site Layout. (2) No infrastructure is permitted outside of the fence line shown on the Figure 1.2 Site Layout regardless of the micro siting allowance. All micro-siting permissible under this condition must be approved in advance in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution. (3) No later than one month after the date of completion of the construction of the development the Company shall submit to the Planning Authority and Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution an ‘as built’ plan showing the final position of all infrastructure including areas where micro siting has taken place. Reason: To ensure that the development is built in accordance with the application plans and supporting information (Planning Statement Section 3.4 refers), to allow tolerance for re-siting infrastructure and flexible procurement of equipment. 15. Site Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare (1) The Development shall cease to operate and cease to connect to the grid network no later than the date falling forty years from the Date of Grid Connection. (2) No later than 38 years from the Date of Grid Connection or the expiry of the section 36 consent (whichever is earlier) a detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with NatureScot and SEPA. The detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan shall provide detailed proposals, in accordance with relevant guidance at that time, for the removal of the Development, the treatment of ground surfaces, the management and timing of the works and environment management provisions which shall include (but is not limited to): Page 98
Page 99
(a) a site waste management plan (dealing with all aspects of waste produced during the decommissioning, restoration and aftercare phases); (b) details of the formation of the construction compound, welfare facilities, any areas of hardstanding, turning areas, internal access tracks, car parking, material stockpiles, oil storage, lighting columns, and any construction compound boundary fencing; (c) a dust management plan; (d) details of measures to be taken to prevent loose or deleterious material being deposited on the local road network, including wheel cleaning and lorry sheeting facilities, and measures to clean the site entrances and the adjacent local road network; (e) a pollution prevention and control method statement, including arrangements for the storage and management of oil and fuel on the site; (f) details of measures for soil storage and management; (g) a surface water and groundwater management and treatment plan, including details of the separation of clean and dirty water drains, and location of settlement lagoons for silt laden water; (h) details of measures for sewage disposal and treatment; (i) temporary site illumination; (j) the construction of any temporary access into the site and the creation and maintenance of associated visibility splays; (k) details of watercourse crossings; and (l) a species protection plan based on surveys for protected species (including birds) carried out no longer than eighteen months prior to submission of the plan. (3) The Development shall be decommissioned, the site restored and aftercare undertaken no later than 43 years from the Date of Grid Connection and in accordance with the approved detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with NatureScot and SEPA. Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the Development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 16. Redundancy (1) The Company shall supply to the Planning Authority written reports every 3 years from the Date of Grid Connection of confirmation that electricity has been exported by the Development to the grid. (2) If no electricity has been imported or exported to the grid by the Development for a continuous period of 36 months, then unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the Company shall; (i) by no later than the date of expiration of the 36 month period, submit a scheme to the Planning Authority, which sets out how the battery energy storage facility and associated infrastructure will be removed from the site and the ground restored; and Page 99
Page 100
(ii) following written approval of the scheme by the Planning Authority, implement the approved scheme within twelve months of the date of its approval, all to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that if the Development becomes redundant the equipment is removed from the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 17. Construction Traffic Management (1) Prior to commencement of Phase 3 of the programme of works a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland. The CTMP shall contain: (a) Details of the traffic generation associated with the construction phase of the Development along with measures to minimise construction traffic levels and mitigate the impact of construction traffic; (b) Details of any additional signing or temporary traffic control measures deemed necessary due to the size or length of any loads being delivered or removed must be undertaken by a recognised QA traffic management consultant, to be approved by Transport Scotland before delivery commences; and (c) a vehicle wheel cleansing facilities is to be installed and brought into operation on the site, the design and siting of which shall be subject to the prior approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland if required. (2) Thereafter the CTMP shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise interference and maintain the safety and free flow of traffic on the road network as a result of the traffic moving to and from the development. 18. Abnormal Load Route Assessment (1) At least 3 months prior to the delivery of abnormal loads the Company shall undertake an Abnormal Indivisible Load Route Assessment (AILRA) which shall include a test run and submit a report describing the outcome of the AILRA together with any recommendations for the written approval of Planning Authority. (2) The proposed route for any abnormal loads on the trunk road network must be approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland prior to the movement of any abnormal load. (3) Details of all works and modifications to the local road network including the removal of street furniture, junction widening and traffic management shall also be included. (4) The AILRA shall include details of a public relation strategy to inform the relevant communities of the programme of abnormal deliveries. The recommendations shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with a programme to be approved by the Planning Authority and shall be implemented prior to the delivery of the abnormal loads. Page 100
Page 101
(5) Should the Abnormal Indivisible Load route include any bridge crossings, prior to the commencement of the development clarification on the Bridge Assessments require to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority, and recommendations shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved programme. Reason: In the interest of road safety and to ensure that abnormal loads access the site in a safe manner and/or materials will not have any detrimental effect on the road and structures along the route. 19. Gas Networks (1) Prior to the commencement of Phase 4 of the programme of works a report shall be submitted to the Planning Authority which shall demonstrate the assessment of the Development on the gas pipeline owned by Scotland Gas Networks. This shall detail the impacts and any mitigation required to ensure that the Scotland Gas Network gas pipeline and associated equipment is not adversely affected. The report shall be approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Scotland Gas Networks. (2) Thereafter the construction operations shall be carried out in accordance with the approved report unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the Development does not affect the safe operation of the public gas pipeline network. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are:- The proposal accords with the provisions of the development plan and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. List of Informatives: THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MANAGER, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, has commented that:- This development has been identified from Ordnance Survey Map data as being located on the site of a potentially infilled former mill dam. Moray Council does not have any further information as to whether the ground is contaminated. [Safe development is the responsibility of the developer]. You should consider investigating this matter further prior to proceeding with the proposed works. Should contamination be encountered, contact the Environmental Health section immediately (email contaminated.land@moray.gov.uk, tel 0300 1234561) to agree an appropriate course of action. Page 101
Page 102
LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description BLHK-PLA-SITE-LOCATION-PLAN-R1 B Location plan BLHK-PLA-REVISED_BUND-R1 B Site plan SC0022-RPS-SI-XX-DR-C-012 P02 Earthworks bund L01 N Landscape mitigation plan BLHK-PLA-SITE-LAYOUT-PLAN-R1 B Site layout plan BLHK-PLA-REVISED_BUND-R2 B Bund cross section BLHK-PLA-SITE_CS-R2 B Cross sections NG- 501 3 Junction design - drainage NG 1200 3 Junction design - lining NG 1500 Swept path analysis NG 2600 (2) 3 Swept path analysis NG 2600 (3) 3 Visibility splay NG 700 3 General arrangement NG 700 (2) Limits of adoption NG 702 3 Long sections and cross sections 900 3 Construction details Page 102
Page 103
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 Electricity Substation Keith Planning Application Ref Number: 24/00986/APP Location Plan Applicant Name: Zenobe Energy Ltd Page 103
Page 104
Location plan Page 104
Page 105
Site Location plan Page 105
Page 106
Landscape plan 16/01664/APP Page 106
Page 107
Cross section 16/01664/APP Page 107
Page 108
16/01664/APP Page 108
Page 109
Photo 1 16/01664/APP Page 109
Page 110
Photo 2 16/01664/APP Page 110
Page 111
Photo 3 16/01664/APP Page 111
Page 112
Page 112
Page 113
. PLANNING APPLICATION: 24/00986/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 Section 42 application seeks approval for a change to the design and dimensions of an earth bund and SuDS basin along the northern edge of the consented Blackhillock Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) development (increasing the height of the bund by between 2 and 2.5m, extending its width and modifying the shape of the SuDS basin). This was granted deemed planning permission along with consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 by the Scottish Government (Energy Consents Unit) on 30 September 2022. • The application also seeks approval for changes to landscaping arrangements and to revert to using an existing bellmouth junction onto the A96 trunk road to the east, which has been utilised during the construction phase and will be used thereafter for operations. • The application seeks to vary the following conditions to take account of these changes, by modifying previously approved details and altering condition wording where appropriate: • Condition 6: This requires implementation of the development in accordance with the approved plans and documentation lodged in support of the application, except as otherwise required by conditions of the consent. • Condition 13: Requires the submission and approval of a landscaping and biodiversity plan, and thereafter its implementation in accordance with the approved details. • Condition 15: Requires the submission and approval of all drainage arrangements and thereafter implementation in accordance with the approved details. • Condition 18: Requires submission and approval of details of access, cable, and earthworks, and implementation in accordance with the approved details. • Supporting documents accompanying the application comprise cover letters, a Planning Statement, Revised Noise Impact Assessment, Drainage Strategy and a Landscape and Visual Addendum. • As noted from the Planning Statement, the applicant’s rationale for making the application is to enable excess spoil from changes in cut and fill earthwork (volumes) to be re-used on site. Identified benefits are that this would also result in a reduction in off-site HGV vehicle movements, removing the need for transportation of the spoil off site and additional material to allow for a larger bund to be constructed to further help mitigate visual impacts. Page 113
Page 114
2. THE SITE • The site is the approved BESS development that is located on land 400m to the southeast of the Blackhillock Substation, and 2.2 kilometres south of Keith. • The BESS development is currently under construction and nearing completion. 3. HISTORY 22/00067/S36 - Application for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 to install a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) and associated infrastructure at this site, located 400m southeast of the Blackhillock Electricity Substation, Keith (ECU reference ECU0003404). This was approved along with deemed planning permission on 30 September 2022 by the Scottish Government (Energy Consents Unit). As part of this determination process Moray Council was consulted as the relevant local Planning Authority and raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. 4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 policies Policy 11 - Energy Policy 1 - Tackling the Climate Policy 3 – Biodiversity Policy 5 – Soils Policy 22 – Flood Risk and Water Management Policy 23 - Health and Safety Moray Local Development Plan 2020 policies DP9 – Renewable Energy PP3 - Infrastructure and Services DP1 - Development Principles EP2 – Biodiversity EP12 – Management and Enhancement of the Water Environment EP14 - Pollution Contamination Hazards 5. ADVERTISEMENTS • Advertised for neighbour notification purposes. 6. CONSULTATIONS Strategic Planning & Delivery: No objection. Page 114
Page 115
Environmental Health Manager: No objection subject to re-application of conditions regarding adherence to construction hours, noise limits and the approved Construction Environmental Management Plan. Environmental Health, Contaminated Land: No objection. Recommends that informative advice be passed to the applicant regarding the potential for ground on part of the site to be contaminated and advice to investigate this matter further. Environmental Health, Private Water: No objection. Transportation Manager: No objection. Transport Scotland: Does not propose to advise against the granting of permission. Moray Flood Risk Management: No objection. Developer Obligations: No developer obligations will be sought for the above proposal. Scottish Fire and Rescue Service: No response received. Energy Consents Unit: Provides comments in relation to the S42 application to vary the deemed planning permission, which it notes is separate from the Section 36 application process under the Electricity Act 1989. 7. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS NOTE: Following the determination of this application, name and address details will be/have been removed (i.e. redacted) in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulations (paragraph 3 of Minute, Planning & Regulatory Services Committee 16 September 2014). One letter of representation has been received. Issue: Supports application, notes that the developer has incorporated additional hard landscaping by increasing the bund surrounding the development to reduce visual impact on neighbours. Revised plans appear to show a reduction in the overall landscaping for the development and utilisation of a 'gorse hedge' in place of planted trees is not an appropriate means of screening. Comment (PO): The revised landscaping arrangements are acceptable. The planting proposals are broadly consistent with the consented Blackhillock BESS application and previous approved details, apart from a relocation of trees around the SuDS basin and to areas along the foot of the bund, and inclusion of native gorse planting in lieu of mixed hedgerow. Page 115
Page 116
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 Section 25 of the 1997 Act as amended requires applications to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan i.e. National Planning Framework 4 (NPF) and the adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8.3 The main planning issues are considered below: 8.4 Section 42 application In considering a Section 42 application the Planning Authority can only consider the conditions that are the subject of the application, although this does not preclude consideration of the overall effect of granting a new permission. The effect of granting a Section 42 application is the creation of a new planning permission and therefore all conditions of the previous consent must be reiterated to have effect. In this case it is recommended that the conditions subject of the application are altered where proposed and appropriate to require adherence to the submitted amended details, with all other conditions reiterated. 8.5 Design (NPF4 Policy 11 and 3: MLDP 2020 Policy DP9, DP1 and EP2) Condition 13 requires the submission and approval of a landscaping and biodiversity plan, and thereafter its implementation in accordance with the approved details. The submitted Landscape Mitigation Plan (LMP) accompanying the application has been updated to take account of the change in the design and incorporates the bund and SuDS basin and extends the groundcover treatment across these areas (wildflower meadow). Other planting and biodiversity measures are broadly consistent with the consented Blackhillock BESS application and previous approved details, apart from a relocation of the trees around the SuDS basin and to locations along the foot of the bund, and inclusion of gorse planting which is appropriate to the location. The landscape plan will assist to mitigate the visual impact of the bund and integrate the development into the surrounding landscape as planting matures. 8.6 The plan will also provide biodiversity enhancements as before through provision of a species rich meadow and native mixed species tree planting to the bund once constructed. 8.7 The condition shall be amended to require adherence to this plan and its implementation within the first planting season upon completion of the development. On this basis the proposal is considered to accord with NPF4 Page 116
Page 117
Policy 11 and 3, and MLDP 2020 Policy DP9, DP1 and EP2. 8.8 Landscape and Visual Impact (NPF4 Policy 11 and 5: MLDP Policy DP9 and DP1) Condition 18 requires the submission and approval of details of access, cable, and earthworks, and their implementation in accordance with the approved details. 8.9 The previously approved earthworks involved cut and fill work to accommodate the BESS development. Due to changes in volumes from the previously agreed calculations the application seeks to vary the bund dimensions to accommodate the excess spoil generated. As outlined within the Planning Statement transporting this excess spoil from the Consented Development to any nearby disposal location would result in a significant increase in HGV vehicle movements for the local community. The Proposed Development is considered a sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative, as this excess spoil will be reused on site and will also further help mitigate visual impacts. 8.10 The application seeks to increase the height of the bund by between 2 and 2.5 metres above its previously approved height. The topography where the development is located slopes down from the south to the north i.e., 225 m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) to 175 mAOD respectively. Given that main views of the BESS development are from north and the northeast, the proposed amended bund design of increased size and height would help to screen views of the development from these directions. 8.11 In addition, updated visualisations and a Landscape and Visual Addendum submitted in support of the application demonstrate that the revised bund design and landscaping would not result in adverse landscape impacts, and moreover would reduce the geographic spread of visual effects in comparison to those reported in the previous Landscape and Visual Appraisal due to its increased size which would result in almost full screening of the development from nearby dwellings to the north and road users. 8.12 As noted from the Planning Statement submitted in support of the application, best practice methods will be employed for the movement of any soils for the construction of the bund to ensure that there are no adverse impacts on soils. No carbon rich soils would be affected. 8.13 The condition shall be amended to require adherence to the submitted plan of the revised bund design. The proposal is considered to accord with NPF4 Policy 11 and 5, and MLDP Policy DP9 and DP1. 8.14 Drainage (NPF4 Policy 22 and MLDP Policy EP12) Condition 15: Requires the submission and approval of all drainage arrangements and thereafter their implementation in accordance with the approved details. 8.15 As part of the amended bund design, the application seeks to modify the shape and orientation of the SuDS basin, turning it 90 degrees; its location along the northern boundary would remain unchanged. The submitted Drainage Strategy Page 117
Page 118
concludes that no significant changes are proposed to the development areas of the BESS development and that Surface Water Drainage for the site has been designed to provide sufficient capacity to ensure that any potential surface water flooding will be contained within the new proposed drainage system and would not cause any damage to any essential services or adjoining developments and provide safe egress and access to the site at all times. 8.16 Moray Flood Risk Management, following consultation, are content with this information and these arrangements and have raised no objection to the proposal. The condition shall be amended to require adherence to the submitted drainage plan and strategy and implementation. Subject to compliance with the condition, these elements are therefore acceptable and considered to accord with NPF4 Policy 22 and MLDP Policy EP12. 8.17 Access (NPF4 Policy 11; and MLDP Policy PP3 and DP1) Condition 18 requires the submission and approval of details of access and their implementation in accordance with the approved details. The application proposes to revert to using the original bellmouth junction onto the A96 trunk road to the east. This arrangement has been utilised during the construction phase and was agreed with Transport Scotland to safeguard services that were subsequently identified in the area and increased the complexity of making any changes to the existing access. 8.18 Transport Scotland, following consultation on the application, is content with these arrangements and have raised no objection to the proposal. The condition shall be amended to require adherence to the plans of the junction and implementation. The proposal is considered to accord with NPF4 Policy 11 and MLDP Policy PP3 and DP1. 8.19 Noise (NPF4 Policy 11 and 23; and MLDP Policy DP9 and EP14) NPF4 Policy 11 and 23, and equivalent MLDP policy DP9 and EP14 seek to ensure that impacts from renewable energy are considered and mitigated. An addendum assessment has been submitted in support of the application to supplement the previous Noise Impact Assessment submitted to discharge the requirements of condition 8 “Noise” of the deemed planning permission which sets the noise level limits. This takes account of the changes to the height and width of a bund, and concludes that noise levels will not exceed agreed noise limits detailed in Planning Condition 8 and that no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 8.20 The Environmental Health Section is content with this assessment and has raised no objection to the proposal, subject to re-application of conditions regarding adherence to construction hours, noise limits and the approved Construction Environmental Management Plan. As no adverse noise impacts are predicted from the change in the bund, the Proposed Development is considered to accord with NPF4 policy 11 and 23 and policy DP9 and EP14 of the MLDP. 8.21 Remaining conditions It is recommended that all other remaining conditions of the deemed planning permission be reiterated so that they continue to have effect. Some conditions Page 118
Page 119
have been purified in part but are reiterated to ensure compliance throughout the lifetime of the development. Conclusion The proposed variation of conditions 6, 13, 15 and 18 of the deemed planning permission to account for the amended bund design, SuDS pond, landscaping and access is acceptable. As such the proposals are considered to be compliant with relevant NPF4 and MLDP policies in relation to renewable energy developments. All conditions of the deemed permission are either reiterated or updated with amended wording where required and it is recommended that planning permission is granted. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposal accords with the provisions of the development plan and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer: Richard Smith Principal Planning Officer Ext: 01343 563256 Neal MacPherson Acting Development Management & Building Standards Manager Page 119
Page 120
Page 120
Page 121
WARD 07_17 24/00705/APP 20th May 2024 Revised proposals for R2 site consisting of residential development and associated landscape and infrastructure on R2 Bilbohall Elgin Moray for Moray Council Comments: • Application is a major application as defined under the Scottish Government’s hierarchy of developments as it involves a development of more than 50 houses and the site area exceeds 2 hectares. • It is a remix of house types as compared to a previous application for a wider site at Bilbohall. • Advertised in local press for neighbour notification purposes. • No representations have been received. Procedure: • Prior to the issue of consent completion of an appropriate legal agreement regarding payment of developer obligations relating to secondary education, health care and transport will be required. Recommendation Grant planning permission - subject to the following conditions and conclusion of legal agreement: - 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 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. No development shall commence on site until details of the design, surfacing, drainage, and timing of delivery of the path links from the Wards character area to connect onto the existing path network in the Wards wildlife site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. The path links shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details and timetable unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Item 8 Page 121
Page 122
Reason: To ensure the provision of safe and suitable access routes for pedestrians both within and to/from the development to the existing network and as these details were not included in the application. 3. No development shall commence on the construction of any units west of the spine road until scaled plans detailing the design, surfacing, drainage, timing of delivery (which should reflect the target of delivery before 95% (100 units) of the residential units are occupied) for the upgrading of Core Path EG36 which runs along the western boundary of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. These path works shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the provision of safe and suitable access routes for pedestrians both within and to/from the development to the wider core path network and as these details were not included in the application. 4. Notwithstanding the submitted landscaping plans, no development shall commence until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority: • Timescale for the delivery of planting. • Timescale for the delivery of biodiversity measures. • Timescale for provision of paths. • Full details (scaled drawings) of all landscaping including rain gardens and detention basins/ponds and swale. • Landscape details to reflect the requirement to include native species (as highlighted within the approved Net Biodiversity Gain Feasibility Assessment), avoid the use of invasive laurel hedging or wetland planting to reflect the recommended species in the Wards management plan, and for any non-native species to be restricted to formal planting areas • Details of ongoing maintenance regime. All hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details. Any trees or plants which (within a period of 5 years from the 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 species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the approved landscaping works are timeously carried out and properly maintained in a manner which will not adversely affect the development or amenity and character of the area. 5. No development shall commence on any units west of the spine road until details of the equipped play area, surfacing, equipment and its ongoing maintenance (reflecting the need for at least half of play equipment to be to inclusive standards) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. The equipped play areas shall thereafter be provided in accordance with Page 122
Page 123
the approved details and be available for use prior to the occupation of 50% of residential units unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. Thereafter the play areas shall be maintained in accordance with the approved maintenance arrangements and retained throughout the lifetime of the development hereby approved. Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of equipped play areas and its future maintenance. 6. No development shall commence until a detailed Arts Strategy (which shall include street naming strategy) has been submitted to and approved by the Council, as Planning Authority. This shall reflect the principles set out in the Arts Strategy information contained within the approved Placemaking Addendum and shall include details of how the art will be delivered and a timetable for delivery. The strategy shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details and timetable unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development integrates into the landscape and supports delivery of a distinctive place. 7. No development shall commence until a Community Wealth Building Plan (based on principles submitted within supporting correspondence) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. The measures, timetable and monitoring shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the plan unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To support a new strategic approach to economic development that helps to build a wellbeing economy in accordance with National Planning Framework Policy 25 - Community Wealth Building. 8. No development shall commence until a Non-Invasive Non-Native Species Survey and Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. This plan shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details during the lifetime of the development. Reason: To enhance biodiversity at the site. 9. No development shall commence on site until details of the proposed measures to enhance biodiversity on and off site to reflect the principles outlined in section 4.3 and 4.4 of the approved Net Biodiversity Gain Feasibility Assessment dated August 2024, together with the measures outlined in section 5.3 of the approved Ecological Assessment Report dated August 2024, future management proposals and a timetable for their delivery have been submitted to and approved in writing by Moray Council, as Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed with the Council, as Planning Authority the following additional measures shall be Page 123
Page 124
considered and included: amphibian friendly drainage throughout the development (inbuilt toad ladders on all gulleys for example); amphibian hibernacula in the wetland area (away from public access); and use of swift and bee bricks incorporated into the fabric of all buildings with suitable aspect / flight clearance. These measures and the approved Biodiversity Plan shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that biodiversity is enhanced. 10. No development shall commence until an updated Drainage Impact and Flood Risk Assessment which includes full details of the proposed measures to enhance biodiversity and wetlands at the Wards Nature Reserve (including measures required by condition 9) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Flood Risk Management Team. The document shall include details of timetable for delivery. Thereafter no residential unit shall be occupied until the surface water drainage arrangements serving it have been implemented in accordance with the approved details and approved timetable. The arrangements shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: To ensure that surface water drainage is provided timeously, complies with the principles of SUDS and in order to protect the water environment and to ensure the development enhances biodiversity. 11. No development shall commence on site until existing trees and hedging to be retained have been enclosed with protective fencing and thereafter protected during construction in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Impact Assessment dated September 2024 and the Tree and Vegetation to be Retained Plan Drawing No. L 2120 Revision P4. These trees and hedging shall be retained thereafter on site throughout the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, with no other trees removed without the prior written approval of the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is integrated into the surrounding landscape/townscape and that features of landscape and biodiversity value to the local area are retained. 12. No development shall commence until a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Environmental Health Manager. This plan shall include: • Site Waste Management Plan which should cover the management of soil on site. • Construction Method Statement. • Measures to ensure that there will be no pollution or discharge of sediment which may affect the Wards wildlife site including a focus on the sensitive Page 124
Page 125
area adjacent to the Wards wildlife site and maintaining connectivity between the Wards and the wider landscape to the west throughout construction. • Measures to minimise construction related noise, dust and artificial lighting. • Mitigation measure outlined in section 5.2 of the approved Ecological Assessment Report dated August 2024. • Pre-construction surveys as recommended in section 5.2 of the approved Ecological Assessment Report dated April 2024. • Measures to ensure that any felling or vegetation clearance works happen outside of the nesting bird season (typically March - August, inclusive) and if this is not possible, then a pre-start breeding bird survey must be carried out by a suitably qualified and experienced ecologist to confirm that no breeding birds will be disturbed must be completed. Thereafter construction shall proceed in accordance with the approved plan. unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: In order to minimise the impacts of the development upon the environment from construction works and to ensure that environmental emissions are considered and managed at the construction phase, in order to protect local residents. 13. No work shall commence on the construction of any residential unit until details of all proposed external finishes by way of samples/specifications/visualisations have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. These details to reflect the approach of the approved Placemaking Statement (colour and materials addendum dated August 2024) and in addition reflect the need to make feature buildings stand out as key buildings through use of, for example colour of renders, colour of doors/windows and consideration of window surrounds to complement the glazed brick features. The units shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the development is integrated into the surrounding landscape/streetscape, supports delivery of a distinctive place and delivers distinctiveness between each character area. 14. No development shall commence on the development until details of the design, height and finishes of all retaining walls, enclosures and boundary railings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority. These details to reflect the need to retain an open aspect around features such as the SuDS ponds. All boundaries shall thereafter be completed and retained in accordance with the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the development is integrated into the surrounding landscape/streetscape, supports delivery of a distinctive place and delivers distinctiveness between each character area. Page 125
Page 126
15. 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). 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.
16. No development shall commence on plots 250 to 251 until details including
material, design and surface density of the proposed acoustic barrier of at least
3.7m height at the Substation in the location shown in Appendix B, figure 6
("Substation Sound Levels 100Hz Contours with Mitigation") of the approved noise
impact assessment supporting document by AECOM Limited, 100 Embankment,
Cathedral Approach, Manchester, dated June 2024, and titled "Bilbohall
Masterplan. Planning Noise Report - Site R2 Moray Council" have been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Moray Council, as Planning Authority in
consultation with the Environmental Health Manager. These details shall reflect
the requirement for the acoustic barrier to have a sound reduction index (R) of at
least 20 dB in the 100 Hz third-octave band, as detailed in page 15 of the
approved noise impact assessment supporting document referenced above in this
condition. The barrier shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the approved
details and prior to the occupation of any units on plots 250-251 and maintained
thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.
Reason: In order to prevent noise nuisance at proposed dwellings from the
existing substation.
17. The housing development at plots 251, 252, 303, 305 shall be designed to ensure
that parallel walls of living apartments separated by a distance of 1.7m (to the
nearest 0.1m) or whole number multiples thereof are not constructed, as identified
in the noise impact assessment supporting document , Appendix B, Figure 1-
Proposed layout for site R2 and dated 11/09/23, by AECOM Limited, 100
Embankment, Cathedral Approach, Manchester, dated June 2024, and titled
"Bilbohall Masterplan. Planning Noise Report -Site R2 Moray Council".
Reason: In order to prevent noise nuisance at proposed dwellings from the
existing substation.
18. No development shall commence on the construction of the residential units on
plots 251, 252, 303, 305 until details of their construction shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Moray Council acting as Planning Authority, in
Page 126Page 127
consultation with the Environmental Health Manager. Unless otherwise agreed these details to reflect the requirement that light-weight timber frame constructions shall not be used. The units shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the approved details before they are occupied. Reason: In order to prevent noise nuisance at proposed dwellings from the existing substation. 19. All residential units on Plots 201-208,225-243,260-273,283-286,298,299 shall have thermal double-glazing units provided in living apartment windows, which should achieve an acoustic performance of at least Rw + Ctr = 25 dB, as identified in "Table 6.1 Glazing/Ventilation Configuration" of the noise impact assessment supporting document by AECOM Limited 100 Embankment, Cathedral Approach, Manchester, dated June 2024, and titled "Bilbohall Masterplan. Planning Noise Report - Site R2 Moray Council”. These measures shall be implemented before the units are occupied and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: In order to prevent noise nuisance at proposed dwellings from road traffic noise. 20. All residential units on plots 201-208, 225-243, 260-273, 283-286, 298 and 299 shall have acoustic trickle ventilation provided in living apartments windows, which should achieve an acoustic performance of at least Dn,e,w 18 dB Ctr -1 dB, as identified in "Table 6.1 Glazing/Ventilation Configuration" of the noise impact assessment supporting document by AECOM Limited, 100 Embankment, Cathedral Approach, Manchester, dated June 2024, and titled "Bilbohall Masterplan. Planning Noise Report - Site R2 Moray Council”. These measures shall be implemented before the units are occupied and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Reason: In order to prevent noise nuisance at proposed dwellings from road traffic noise. 21. Notwithstanding the details shown on the site layout plan (20344-CAL-XX-XX-DR- A- 01-003 Rev P12) for the road bend between plots 258 and 306, which is not acceptable due to the sharp change in angle of the road. No development shall commence until a revised plan (Scale- 1:500) with an increased bend radius at this location together with swept path analysis to demonstrate two opposing large car movements at this location, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Moray Council acting as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Thereafter the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To secure the provision of details of the matters specified lacking from or unacceptable on the submission so as to ensure that an acceptable road layout can be provided in the interests of road safety. Page 127
Page 128
22. No works shall commence until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority; a) detailed drawings (Scale 1:500 minimum) showing the location, design specifications and timescale for delivery for the extension of Edgar Road to provide access to the site and the required amendments to the High School Access, including proposals for footways, cycle paths, pedestrian/cycle crossing facilities and boundary treatments. The design details shall be informed by a Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit (RSA), for the proposed road extension and, any other works proposed e.g. pedestrian crossings, and the Road Safety Audit shall be included as part of the required details. b) A Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit for the proposed site road layout has been submitted for approval by the Roads Authority and any mitigation or modifications to the road layout have been incorporated within the revised proposals. Thereafter, the internal road network shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and agreed timescales. Reason: To ensure the provision of a safe and suitable access, including for pedestrians and cyclists, to the development and to safeguard provision of vehicular access to the High School from Edgar Road, in the interest of road safety. 23. No works shall commence until details for the construction of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority regarding: a) A Construction Traffic Management Plan which shall include the following information: • duration of works; • construction programme; • number of vehicle movements (i.e. materials, plant, staff, components); • anticipated schedule for delivery of materials and plant; • full details of construction traffic routes from the Strategic Road Network (A941/A96) to the site, including any proposals for temporary haul routes and routes to be used for the disposal of any materials from the site. (Note Construction vehicles will not be permitted to access the site via the Railway Bridge to the north of the development unless otherwise approved in writing by the Roads Authority); • measures to be put in place to prevent material being deposited on the public road; • traffic management measures to be put in place during works including any specific instructions to drivers; and • parking provision, loading and unloading areas for construction traffic. And b) Any temporary construction access which shall include the following information: • a drawing (Scale 1:500 minimum) regarding the location and design Page 128
Page 129
specifications of the proposed access(es); • specification of the materials used for the construction access(es); • all traffic management measures required to ensure safe operation of the construction access(es); • details, including materials, for the reinstatement of any temporary construction access(es); and • details regarding the timescale for the opening up and closure of any temporary access(es) together with the time period over which the temporary access(es) will be used. The plan shall also reflect the requirements of Network Rail that the Wards Level Crossing should not be utilised for the routing of construction traffic to the development site. Thereafter, the construction of 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, road safety and the amenity of the area/adjacent properties and in the interests of public safety and the protection of Network Rail infrastructure. 24. No boundary fences, hedges, walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 0.6m in height and fronting onto the public road shall be within 2.4m of the edge of the carriageway, measured from the level of the public carriageway, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Reason: To enable drivers of vehicles leaving driveways 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. 25. No development shall commence on the construction of any flat or unit within the development which requires external cycle storage, until details (plans and elevations) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority to confirm the design of the proposed cycle storage and to demonstrate it will have sufficient capacity, is enclosed, secure and weatherproof. Thereafter no flat or unit shall be occupied until its cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved details and retained and maintained for use throughout the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that suitable provision is made for cycle storage and to ensure that the development integrates into the landscape. 26. No fences, planting/hedges, walls or any other obstruction whatsoever over 0.3m measured from the level of the public carriageway shall be permitted within any ‘forward visibility’ areas or any visibility splays crossing plot boundaries within all areas of the residential development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Page 129
Page 130
Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Reason: To enable drivers of vehicles to have an acceptable clear forward visibility, in the interests of road safety for the proposed development and other road users. 27. Parking provision shall be provided in accordance with the Proposed Parking Strategy Plan drawing (Collective Architecture Jan 2024 20344-CAL-XX-XX-DR- A-01-005 Rev P03) and thereafter no house or flat shall be occupied until parking has been provided and made available for use by that house or flat. The parking arrangements shall be retained and maintained in perpetuity as parking spaces for use in conjunction with that house or flat hereby approved. Reason: To ensure the permanent availability of the level of parking necessary for residents/visitors/others in the interests of an acceptable development and road safety. 28. Driveways over service verges shall be constructed to accommodate vehicles and, shall be surfaced with bituminous macadam unless otherwise approved in writing by the Council acting as Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. Reason: To ensure acceptable infrastructure is provided at the property accesses. 29. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 (or any amendments to this order) all service strips along plot frontages shall be kept free from any obstruction and no amendments to the approved planting shall be permitted. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development and effective roads drainage infrastructure is provided and safeguarded. 30 The development hereby approved shall be constructed in accordance with the approved site sections and levels plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is integrated into the surrounding landscape/townscape. 31. All residential units within the development shall be provided and retained as affordable housing for the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority in consultation with the Housing Strategy and Development Manager. Reason: To ensure an acceptable form of development in terms of the required provision and delivery of affordable housing. Page 130
Page 131
32. No unit shall be occupied until its associated parking, cycle, electric vehicle charging, and bin storage provision has been implemented in accordance with the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is adequately serviced. Reason(s) for Decision The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposal, subject to the imposition of planning conditions, complies with the development plan (namely the National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020) and there are no other 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. Should you require further assistance please contact the Building Standards Duty Officer between 2pm and 4pm or telephone on 03001234561. No appointment is necessary. Alternatively e-mail buildingstandards@moray.gov.uk THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TEAM has commented that : - It is considered that there would be merit in including photovoltaics in this development. Further advice on community wealth building plans is available in Moray Local Development Plan - Community Wealth Building Planning Guidance http://www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file148992.pdf THE TRANSPORTATION MANAGER has commented that: - Notwithstanding the following details submitted in support of the planning application: “Road Adoption Layout” submitted on drawing J5143-R2-038 Reeve, “Road Construction Details” submitted on drawings J5143-R2-035 to 037 and the “Drainage Construction Details” submitted on drawings J5143-R2-045 and 046. These will require separate RCC approval and as such may require further amendments. Before commencing development, the applicant is obliged to apply for Construction Consent in accordance with Section 21 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 for new roads. The applicant will be required to provide technical information, including drawings and drainage calculations, and provide a Road Bond to cover the full value of the works in accordance with the Security for Page 131
Page 132
Private Road Works (Scotland) 1985 Regulations. Advice on this matter can be obtained from the Moray Council web site or by emailing transport.devlop@moray.gov.uk Construction Consent shall include a CCTV survey of all existing roads drainage to be adopted and core samples to determine the construction depths and materials of the existing public roads to determine the extent of re-construction required within the development site. A Road Safety Audit shall be completed for all new or modified junctions and the internal road network unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Roads Authority for the modifications to the existing public road will also be required as part of the Roads Construction Consent. The requirement for a Stage 3 or 4 Road Safety Audit will be determined through the Roads Construction Consent process or subsequent to the road construction prior to any road adoption. Requirement for any traffic calming, road construction materials and specifications and any SuDS related to the drainage of the public road must be submitted and approved through the formal Roads Construction Consent process. In curtilage Electric Vehicle (EV) charging provision requirements are covered by building warrant. EV charging provisions for off plot and communal parking areas shall be provided in accordance with Moray Council guidelines. Cabling between charging units and parking spaces must not cross or obstruct the public road including footways. Infrastructure provided to enable EV charging must be retained for this purpose for the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Guidance on Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging requirements can be found in the Moray Local Development Plan Policy and Additional Guidance http://www.moray.gov.uk/moray_standard/page_133431.html Planning consent does not carry with it the right to carry out works within the public road boundary and the applicant is obliged to contact the Transportation Manager for road opening permit in accordance with Section 56 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. This includes any temporary access joining with the public road. Private Roads – A responsible party, constituting the road manager, must be nominated for a private road and this information included within the National Gazetteer through the Scottish Road Works Register (SRWR). No building materials/scaffolding/builder’s skip shall obstruct the public road (including footpaths) without permission from the Roads Authority. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that surface/ground water does not run from the public road into his property. Page 132
Page 133
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. No retaining structures or embankments shall be constructed along the edge of the road, whether retaining the public road or ground adjoining the public road without prior consultation and agreement of the Roads Authority. Street lighting will be required as part of the development proposal. The developer must contact the Roads Authority Street Lighting Section at Ashgrove Depot, Elgin – email Road.Maint@moray.gov.uk to discuss the proposals. THE CONTAMINATED LAND OFFICER has commented that: This development has been identified from Ordnance Survey Map data as being located adjacent to an electricity substation to the west. Moray Council does not have any further information as to whether the ground is contaminated. [Safe development is the responsibility of the developer]. You should consider investigating this matter further prior to proceeding with the proposed works. Should contamination be encountered, contact the Environmental Health section immediately (email contaminated.land@moray.gov.uk, tel 0300 1234561) to agree an appropriate course of action. THE POLICE CRIME PREVENTION OFFICER has commented that : - See comments attached dated 22 May 2024. SCOTTISH WATER has commented that : - The developer should contact them to confirm capacity at their water and wastewater treatment plans and also in respect of any live infrastructure in the area – more detail in their attached comments dated 18 June 2024. LIST OF PLANS AND DRAWINGS SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT Reference No. Version No. Title/Description 01-001 -P04 Proposed Master plan 1178201 Wards extended topo survey 01-008 PO2 Material application key-roofs 03-602 P05 Block A3- Type AA semi detached (linear) 03-603 P05 Block A6-type-AAAB Terrace - 6 flats J5143-R2-051 A Bio-retention details Page 133
Page 134
05-001 P03 Location plan 03-619 P01 Block A1 type AA semi-detached stepped 03-601 P06 Block A2 type AA semi detached 03-604 P05 Block A8 type AAAB terrace - 8 flats J5143-R2-053 Detention basin details J5143-R2-052 Detention pond details J5143-R2-050 A Swale details 03-311 P01 Type M Balcony- detailed elevation 2704 P1 Site sections 8 & 9 2703 P1 Site sections 7 03-605 P06 Block B3 type BABB semi detached 03-606 P05 Block D-Type D semi detached 03-607 P05 Block E1 - Type E detached 03-608 P05 Block F3- Type F detached 03-609 P05 Block H2-Type HAHA semi detached 03-610 P06 Block H5- Type HAHC semi-detached 03-611 P06 Block J1- Type HJA semi detached 03-612 P05 Block J2- Type HJA semi - detached 2702 P1 Site section 5 and 6 2701 P1 Site sections 3 and 4 2700 P1 Site sections 1 and 2 J5143-R2-037 A Road construction details J5143-R2-036 Road construction details J5143-R2-035 A Roads construction details 24288-WWL-XX-XX-PL-E-960101 P02 Private external electrical services J5143-102 B Foundation zoning J5143-116 Foundation details - house blocks J5143-115 Foundation details - flatted block J5143-R2-046 Drainage construction details J5143-R2-045 Drainage construction details 03-310 P01 Detailed elevation - entrance north 03-616 P05 Block L - Type L-detached 03-615 P05 Block K1- Type K detached 03-618 P05 Block J5 - Type JA detached 03-613 P05 Block J3 - Type HJA semi-detached 01-005 P03 Proposed parking strategy plan 2100 P13 Landscape masterplan 2110 P5 Hardworks plan J5143-025 J Private car tracking sheet 2 J5143-R2-032 K Site layout J5143- R2 -038 E Road adoption layout Page 134
Page 135
7000 P6 Planting strategy plan 7010 P7 Biodiversity plan J5143-R2- 021 J Bus Route tracking J5143-R2- 023 J Refuse vehicle tracking J5143-R2- 041 H Drainage Layout BILB-RYD-00-XX-DR-L-2120-S2 P4 Tree and Vegetation to be retained - removed 01-007 P04 Material application key - site 01-009 P03 Material application key - render colour 03-300 P03 Proposed street elevations - 1 03-301 P03 Proposed street elevations - 2 03-302 P03 Proposed street elevations - 3 03-303 P04 Proposed street elevations - 4 BILB-RYD-00-XX-DR-L-2130-S2 P5 Boundary treatments - fence and wall details 06-617 P09 Type M flats - elevations and floor plans 01-003 P12 Proposed site plan Supporting Documents • Pre-Application Consultation Report (1 May 2024 in DMS) • Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) including tree survey V2 (9 Oct) • NVC survey (4 Oct) • Revised Flood Risk and Drainage Impact Assessment (20 May) • Geo- Environmental Interpretative report • Phase 1 Transport Statement (1 May) • Planning Noise Report (13 June) • Planning Sustainability Statement (1 May) • Carbon Reduction Statement (1 May) • Landscape outline specification (1 May) • Landscape material palette (1 May) • Placemaking statement addendum (1 May) • Placemaking Statement Rev A (Colours and Materials Update) (8 Oct) • Biodiversity Net Gain Feasibility Report (12 Sep) • Street engineering review (3 May) • Schedule of house types ASHPs (1 May) • ASHP data sheet (1 May) • Ecological Assessment (12 Sep) – (SENSITIVE) Page 135
Page 136
Page 136
Page 137
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: R2 Bilbohall Elgin Planning Application Ref Number: 24/00705/APP Location Plan Applicant Name: Moray Council Page 137
Page 138
Site Location Page 138
Page 139
Site plan 16/01664/APP Page 139
Page 140
Drainage Plan 16/ Page 140
Page 141
Biodiversity plan 16/ Page 141
Page 142
Street elevation 16/ Page 142
Page 143
Visualisation 16/ Page 143
Page 144
Consented and proposed layout 16/ Page 144
Page 145
16/ Page 145
Page 146
Photo 1 16/ Page 146
Page 147
Photo 2 16/ Page 147
Page 148
Photo 3 16/ Page 148
Page 149
Photo 4 16/ Page 149
Page 150
Page 150
Page 151
PLANNING APPLICATION: 24/00705/APP In the event that a recommendation on this planning application is overturned the Committee is reminded of the advice contained on the front page of the agenda for Reports on Applications 1. THE PROPOSAL • Planning consent was issued in 2022 for a wider site comprising the three designated housing sites at Bilbohall. This included the current application site which comprises the southernmost (R2) part of the wider site, known as the Lower Valley character area at that time. • Application is a remix of that original consent increasing number of units from 84 to 106 and all units are affordable housing. • The application is a major application under the terms of the Scottish Government’s Hierarchy of developments and was the subject of pre application consultation with the community. • Overall roads and SUDS layout remains unchanged as does the general landscape approach and strategy. • The site will be accessed from Edgar Road extending an existing spur and creating a three-arm priority junction with traffic movement between Edgar Road and the spine road becoming the major road of the junction, and the Elgin High School access road becoming the minor road. This network can in the future connect onto the previously consented spine road which will run northwards to serve the other sites, then take access via a new junction onto Bilbohall Road south of Fairview Avenue. • It is proposed to use the previously consented internal road layout comprising two access points onto the spine road with a loop road running round internally, with two home zone type links running through for the western part of the site. • The eastern part of the site will also take access onto the spine road by a single point serving a courtyard type arrangement. • A swathe of landscaped open space is still proposed through the centre of the site linking from the core path to west, running eastwards to connect onto the spine road and ultimately to the Wards wildlife site itself. The shape of this open space is now more varied/winding. • 3-metre-wide shared pedestrian and cycle path is proposed through this open space and there will be central green area with timber benches, public art and equipped play area. • The proposed units comprise a mixture of one, two, three, four and five bedroomed properties, with a mixture of single and two storey units as well as 2 blocks of 3 storey 2 bedroom flats. The site is split into three character areas: • Central Green Character Area located around the central green space running through the site. Comprises two storey units with gable features looking towards the green. Several have dual frontages to assist with passive surveillance. Page 151
Page 152
• Wards Character Area located to east of the site comprises two and three storey blocks to the east of the spine road in the lower part of the site beside the Wards wildlife site. Each 3-storey block contains 6 units and is designed with lightweight balcony features. They include lift access to provide accessible accommodation designed to ensure residents can remain in their homes long term should their mobility needs change. • There are some units on the western side of the spine road. • Path links are proposed within and around this part of the site, with large wet woodland and standard woodland planted areas proposed to the north and east, incorporating links to the Wards. The SUDS ponds will be located in this eastern area. • Path links also proposed heading in a zig zag manner northwards to connect into the open space and community garden area which is proposed on the wider site on the knoll type feature here. • Lower Valley character Area is located around the perimeter of the site, surrounding the Central Green area. It includes a number of single storey enhanced accessibility units to the north of the central green designed for families who need greater flexibility internally and located close to other family homes. Some units have double pitched roofs and some have dual frontages. This area also includes 2 storey detached family houses located on the southern perimeter of the site adjacent to the school to ensure generous gardens for families. • The units located closer to the existing electricity sub-station in the western part of the site laid out to mitigate for any potential noise nuisance from the adjacent electricity sub-station with landscaping proposed to the south of the substation. • A section of an existing track/path (Core path EG36) to the west of the site lies within the red line application site. Two links will be formed onto the core path, one to the south of the sub-station and one at an area reserved for future link to housing land. • Internal site roads will feature traffic calming including ramps and chicanes to lower vehicle speeds and increase pedestrian/cyclist safety. • 3-metre-wide shared pedestrian/cycle path proposed alongside the spine road. • 196 parking spaces proposed via mixture of on street and in curtilage spaces. • Secure cycle storage areas, cycle spaces close to the flatted units proposed with in - curtilage cycle provision for other properties. • Communal bin storage proposed for flats and in curtilage storage for other units. • All communal parking for the flatted units will have Electric Vehicle (EV) charging point and for other plots each unit will have a parking space with access to a charging point. • Surface water disposal is proposed by a system of bio-retention/rain gardens within the main housing areas, roadside swales and two connected SUDS detention basins and one detention pond to southeast of the site between the Wards character area and the Wards wildlife site. These will discharge towards a watercourse/ditch at the head of the Tyock Burn or to the Wards nature reserve. • Boundary enclosures are a mixture of screen fences, railings, some hedging and retaining walls. Page 152
Page 153
• Connection to public water and drainage supplies is proposed. • The arts strategy for the site remains as per the principles of the Bilbohall Arts Strategy for the wider site which set out locations where artwork could be integrated into central green routes and as part of the landscape and biodiversity provision on the site, to be developed with artist and future resident input. • Insect hotels are shown throughout the site with bat and bird boxes also proposed. • Some existing trees, which are located largely along the southern boundary and are of varying quality and age, are to be removed. Existing mature trees and hedging along the core path to the west are to be retained along with some of the existing planting adjacent to the wards. The application is supported by a suite of documents and plans including; • Pre-Application Consultation Report - as required because this is a major application. This gave details of the two public events held in Elgin in February (attended by 18 people) and March (attended by 2 people) along with the consultation website that was set up. Total of 6 feedback forms were submitted. Points raised noted that the proposal remains in line with the approved master plan, pedestrian and cycle connections work well, concerns raised over increasing number of units compared to the original submission and impact of this on local services, roof tiles noted to be more in keeping with local character, query raised regarding timescale for this phase, full development of site could negatively impact roads in the area, landscaping at the wetland works well but hard landscaping also noted which could impact water management, query why link road is extended beyond proposed housing and whether the development will result in loss of the country path to the west of the site. These comments are all addressed within the report. • Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) including tree survey - this concludes that of the 18 trees surveyed one was of high quality (ash tree on the western site boundary) which will be retained. The majority of trees situated on southern site boundary and those that require to be removed are small and can be replaced by supplementary planting. The AIA includes working measures to be followed. • Ecological Assessment and NVC survey - recommends mitigation measures to minimise impacts on protected species, habitats and hydrology. • Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment - concludes that there is low risk of flooding at the site. There will be an increase in impermeable surfaces whereby surface water will require to be appropriately managed with full details provided. • Geo - Environmental Interpretive Report which concludes that there are no elevated concentrations of potential contaminants recorded and no potential pollutant linkages with respect to human health. No remedial measures are required in this regard. Soils across the site are classified as being non hazard apart from an area of made ground where material will need to be disposed of separately. With regard to ground gas, it recommends that installation of gas protection system be independently verified. Page 153
Page 154
• Transport Statement – full Transport Assessment was submitted with the original 2020 application for the wider site which considered impacts on the surrounding roads network and the accessibility of the development to all modes of traffic. A Traffic Statement was considered by the Engineers to be sufficient to assess the impacts of the additional 22 units now proposed. Using current modelling this concludes there will be no significant impact on the roads network from the additional units. The statement includes a framework Construction Traffic Management Plan and Travel Plan. • Planning Noise Report. • Planning Sustainability Statement - covering matters such as reduced reliance on cars due to location of the development, creating shared social and community environments as well as ecological enhancements and use of site waste management plans to minimise waste. • Carbon Reduction Statement. • Landscape strategy, landscape pallet including outline maintenance strategy. • Placemaking statement addendum – this is an addendum to the previously approved placemaking statement and seeks to explain how the proposals meet NPF policies and provide a justification for the proposed changes. Explains the landscaping vision to create a mixture of public, semi-private and private spaces for socialising, leisure and play, including provision of nature-based play areas, incidental play features and areas to display public art. Green travel routes and ecological features are proposed to encourage active travel and improve biodiversity. It also explains how drainage features such as rain gardens will be used in the home zone areas to enhance biodiversity. • Placemaking Statement (Colours and Materials Update) – which explains the rationale behind the finishes to highlight character areas and key buildings. • Biodiversity masterplan. • Biodiversity Net Gain Feasibility Report – the purpose of this report was to assess the baseline habitats and evaluate the proposed landscape plans in order to conclude whether a net gain in biodiversity can be achieved. An updated condition assessment of the site was carried out in June to inform this report. The report concludes that due to the extent of new development and the loss of the existing habitats/grassland there is no realistic on-site management suggestions that would allow for a positive net gain calculation using the DEFRA biodiversity metric. It concludes that the landscape plans will increase overall diversity of habitats and increase opportunities for faunal species but that the loss of an existing watercourse as well as the extent of wet and dry grassland loss is not offset by the proposed habitats. A series of measures to improve biodiversity including off site compensation are recommended. 2. THE SITE • Site is located in the southern part of the consented Bilbohall affordable housing development on the western side of Elgin – work has not commenced on this development to date. Page 154
Page 155
• This wider site extends to around 18 hectares and comprises three designated housing sites at Bilbohall on the western edge of Elgin, within the settlement boundary and adjacent to other designated housing sites which make up in total the Bilbohall Masterplan area. • The current application site (designated as R2 Edgar Road) is located to the south of the consented R3 site. It is separated from R3 by proposed future landscaping, woodland planting and community orchard with path links through this connecting both sites. • Elgin High School lies immediately to the south. • The Wards wildlife site lies to the east which is a popular recreation and amenity facility for Elgin. • This area is well used by walkers using the core path network around the site. • The traditional core of Elgin lies to the far north beyond the railway line. • To the west there is countryside, with areas of woodland, including Knockmasting Wood and Mayne Wood, strong features in the landscape here. • The site currently comprises around 6.5 hectares of reasonably level ground, with northern part sloping up to the R3 site which is located on and over a distinct knoll feature which forms a backdrop to the application site. • The site comprises grassland, some made up land and more boggy land on the eastern part. • There is an electricity substation on the western part adjacent to the track/core path here. • There is some scrub, woodland and hedgerows around the boundaries of the site and hard surfaced/former spoil type area in the middle of the site. • A water course crosses the southern part of the site. 3. HISTORY • 24/00162/PAN - Proposal of Application Notice setting out pre application proposals for this current site was considered at the March 2024 meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee who drew attention to the need for a transport management plan during and after development, and the capacity in Elgin schools. • 24/0191/PEMAJ - pre-application inquiry for development on this site advice provided earlier this year. • 20/00905/APP - full planning consent granted in April 2022, subject to legal agreement following consideration at March 2021 Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting, for proposed residential units (mix of affordable housing and care village) with associated access infrastructure landscaping and miscellaneous works on Sites R7, R2 And R3 Bilbohall, Elgin. • 19/00953/SCN - Development of housing and associated infrastructure in the areas identified in the Bilbohall Masterplan at Development Site Bilbohall Road Elgin – screening opinion issued by Moray Council confirming that Environmental Impact Assessment was not required. • 19/00954/PEMAJ - pre-application inquiry for development on wider masterplan site. Page 155
Page 156
• 19/00930/PAN - proposal of application notice setting out pre application consultation proposals for 2020 application. • 15/00607/APP - application for planning permission granted to permanently deposit the excavated material from the construction of the new Elgin High School (consented application 14/01618/APP) to the Northern end of the site | Elgin High School High School Drive Elgin Moray approved – land to north of School and forming part of current site. 4. POLICIES National Planning Framework 4 NPF1 - Tackling the Climate NPF2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation NPF3 - Biodiversity NPF4 - Natural Places NPF5 - Soils NPF6 - Forestry, woodland and trees NPF7 - Historic assets and places NPF13 - Sustainable transport NPF14 - Design, quality and place NPF 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods NPF16 - Quality homes NPF18 - Infrastructure first NPF21 - Play, recreation and sport NPF22 - Flood risk NPF23 - Health and safety Policy 25 Community Wealth Building Moray Local Development Plan 2020 PP1 Placemaking PP2 Sustainable Economic Growth PP3 Infrastructure and Services DP1 Development Principles DP2 Housing EP2 Biodiversity EP1 Natural Heritage Designation EP5 Open Space EP7 Forestry Woodland and Trees EP8 Historic Environment EP12 Management and Enhancement Water EP13 Foul Drainage EP14 Pollution Contamination Hazards Elgin - R2 Edgar Road Elgin - TSP26 Page 156
Page 157
5. ADVERTISEMENTS 5.1 The application was advertised in the local press for neighbour notification purposes. 6. CONSULTATIONS Transport Scotland - No objections. Scottish Water - No objections, noting that there is currently sufficient capacity in the water and wastewater treatment works for the development. They note that this does not however confirm that the development can currently be serviced, capacity cannot be reserved, and the applicant will require to contact them regarding formal connection applications. Network Rail - No objections subject to a condition being imposed requiring a Construction Traffic Management Plan which should ensure that the Wards Level Crossing is not utilised for the routing of construction traffic to the development site. Elgin Community Council and Scottish and Southern Energy - No comments have been provided to date. Flood Risk Management Team - Initially sought further information and discussion with the environmental team in respect of the viability of utilising drainage arrangements to enhance wetlands adjacent to the site. Following further discussion and revised plans to reduce the amount of water being held in the proposed attenuation/detention and to ensure that water was going out of outfalls to the Wards in order to achieve enhancement of the wetlands the Team has confirmed that these arrangements, subject to conditions requiring approval of finalised details, are acceptable. Transportation Team – No objection subject to conditions. Notes that the site is part of the Bilbohall masterplan area with a previous planning consent here. They have noted that whilst the overall unit numbers on the R2 designation has increased from 84 units to 106 units, the use of the revised Elgin Traffic Model Trip rates (as approved by committee in August 2021) shows that there would be a net decrease in number of vehicle trips forecast in both the AM and PM periods when compared with the previous consented development. On that basis the current proposals and the previously approved TA of the impact are considered acceptable. Their consideration of the transport requirements of the Local Development Plan R2 designation for the site are summarised as follows (Designation wording in italics referencing TSP's (Potential Transportation Improvements)): • Minimum of two access points required. Primary access must be from Edgar Road - The requirement for two access points is based on the principle of providing secondary access for a development of 100 or more units. Whilst this would ultimately be achieved by the completion of the spine road and connection with Mayne Road to the north, this initial development of 106 units is considered acceptable as it is marginally over 100 units, the extent of the site layout served by a single point of access is Page 157
Page 158
relatively short and the non-vehicular path connection to Mayne Road and the sub-station site could potentially be used to gain access in an emergency. • The site is constrained until TSP 3 (Bilbohall Road/Mayne Road/Fleurs Road/Wards Road improvements to railway bridge and junctions) TSP 4 (Bilbohall Road widening) and TSP 26 (Edgar Road extension) are provided - Given the emergency access provisions noted above the proposals are not considered to be constrained by TSP3 or TSP4. The proposals would take primary access from Edgar Road and include proposals to widen the road sufficient to meet the requirements of this site in terms of TSP26. • A Transport Assessment required which should also assess the impacts on junctions TSP 30 (A941 New Elgin Road/Edgar Road/Linkwood Road junction) and 31(New Elgin Road/Station Road/Maisondieu Road junction) to determine the level of developer obligations for any necessary mitigation - Whilst a Transport Statement rather than a Transport Assessment is included with the current application, it demonstrates that the impact from the development is less than that assessed for the previous 20/00905/APP consent. In the absence of a revised TA for the current application, the proportional impact and mitigation requirements for the current site including Developer Obligations are based on the previous TA and with regard to TSPs 30 and 31 mitigation can be addressed by developer obligations. • Improvements to the operation of the Edgar Road/Glen Moray Drive/The Wards junction will be required (TSP 27) - The previous TA network modelling indicated that the threshold for capacity testing at the Edgar Road/The Wards/Glen Moray Drive junction was not exceeded. This junction would initially take 100% of the development traffic in the initial phases and the majority of the masterplan development traffic once completed. A select link analysis was undertaken for this junction for the previous TA to calculate the development trips and mitigation was addressed by Developer Obligations. Mitigation for the current development impact at this junction can be addressed by Developer Obligations. In terms of public transport, the Team has noted that the previous consent for this site was approved with suspensive conditions requiring details of the public transport infrastructure to be provided for the overall development. This infrastructure was not required to enable Phase 1 (the current application site) whereby the Team do not consider that these details are required for the current application. It is noted that electric charging provision has been made for communal parking and that on plot parking will require EV charging to meet building standard requirements, and that a condition requiring a road safety audit as per the terms of the original consent will need to be reapplied. The Team has also provided a summary of their consideration of all the TSPs identified in the Local Development Plan for the Bilbohall development in relation to the current application: Page 158
Page 159
TSP Description TA Consideration Comments Recommendation TSP2 A96/Wittet Drive Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Trunk Road junction, see Transport Scotland response. Trunk Road junction, see Transport Scotland response. TSP3 Bilbohall Road/ Mayne Road/ Fleurs Road/ Wards Road Included in scope. Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Sufficient junction capacity but junction improvements proposed to enable safe access over the railway bridge. Revised application for Phase 1 (R2 only) does not include the spine road with access via this junction. No further action. TSP5 A96/ B9010 /South Street Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Trunk Road junction, see Transport Scotland response. Trunk Road junction, see Transport Scotland response. TSP27 Edgar Road/ The Wards/ Glen Moray Drive Included in scope but not tested in TA. Link flows approaching this junction identified as exceeding 5% in PM Peak in ‘with bus gate’ traffic modelling. Interventions at this location have been identified in ETS. Proportionate contribution towards ETS interventions sought based on % impact. See Developer Obligations report. TSP29 A941 Main Road/Birnie Road/ Thornhill Road Included in scope and tested in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. TSP30 /I3A Edgar Road/ New Elgin Road (I3A) Included in scope but not tested in TA. Link flows approaching this junction identified as exceeding 1% in PM Peak in ‘with bus gate’ traffic modelling. Interventions at this location have been identified in ETS. Proportionate contribution towards ETS interventions sought based on % impact. See Developer Obligations report. TSP31 /M1B Moss Street/ Station Road Included in scope but not tested in TA. Link flows approaching this junction identified as exceeding 1% in PM Peak in ‘with bus gate’ traffic modelling. Interventions at this location have been identified in ETS. Proportionate contribution towards ETS interventions sought based on % impact. See Developer Obligations report. TSP32 A941 Hay Street/ Wards Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would No further action. Page 159
Page 160
operate within capacity with proposed development. B9010/ Wiseman Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. B9010/ Fleurs Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. B9010/ Wittet Drive Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. South Street/ Mayne Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. A941/Moray Street Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate be operating with a maximum flow to capacity ratio of 0.83 without development in the PM peak on the Moray Street eastern approach and 0.92 with the development. TA has used estimated flow on Moray Street link at this junction as data was not available from model output data. The traffic flow used is considered to provide a robust assessment. No further action required. Wards Road/ Included in scope Capacity testing No further action. Page 160
Page 161
The Wards and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. Mayne Road/ Wittet Drive Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate well within capacity with proposed development. Revised application for Phase 1 (R2 only) does not include the spine road with access via this junction. No further action. Wittet Drive/ Wards Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate well within capacity with proposed development. Revised application for Phase 1 (R2 only) does not include the spine road with access via this junction. No further action. Wards Road/ Bilbohall Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. Revised application for Phase 1 (R2 only) does not include the spine road with access via this junction. No further action. Forteath Avenue/ Wards Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate well within capacity with proposed development. No further action. Birnie Road/ Gleneagles Drive/Sandy Road Included in scope and Capacity Testing undertaken in TA. Capacity testing demonstrates that the junction would operate within capacity with proposed development. No further action. The Team has concluded that they have no objections to the application subject to conditions to address the various points made and to the delivery of developer obligations. Page 161
Page 162
Strategic Planning and Development Team - Notes that the application is a remix of a recently consented scheme for the wider Bilbohall area which was the subject of comprehensive discussion and a quality audit process at that time in order to secure compliance with policies. As it is a small-scale remix within the larger consented area a further Quality Audit is not required in this case. As the overall layout/infrastructure has not changed, it is considered that the primary consideration for assessment is the impact of the changes to the place making approach, type and design of new units together and any additional requirements of NPF4 such as climate change and community wealth building, given that these policies were not in place at the time of the original application. In this regard the Team noted that the extant consent demonstrates a number of the key facets of good placemaking and consider that the increase in housing numbers and introduction of 3 storey development does not diminish the function of the overall development. However, it was considered the changes to materials and orientation of some of the buildings has impacted on key elements that provided distinction and identity as required by Local Development Plan Policy P1 Placemaking and NPF Policy 14 Design Quality and Place. Timber cladding and corrugated metal roofs/cladding is no longer proposed which had been used before to define recessed entrances, key buildings and build a cohesive identity. The current proposals for difference roof materials, subtle brick recesses and limited variation in colour tones is not considered to contribute to a distinct identify or character with some of the key buildings themselves lacking the scale necessary to stand out as feature buildings. The Team recommended that the applicants give further consideration to stronger accent features, materials and buildings details on key buildings, with such features tying more strongly to the overall character, with materials for each character area to be clearly distinct. It was considered that this was necessary to comply with Policies and reflect the Bilbohall Masterplan which is the overarching approved document for the site. The Team also noted that the development was not considered to fully comply with Local Development Plan policy EP2 Biodiversity and NPF4 Policy 3 Biodiversity. It is noted that the development, similarly to the consented one, shows environmental enhancements with some additional enhancements such as wildlife boxes shown. However, further hydrological surveys, invasive non- native species and water vole surveys are recommended in the applicant’s Ecological Assessment, and it considered that these should be provided along with consideration of the opportunities to enhance the neighbouring wildlife site at the Wards through the proposed SUDS system. The Team also noted that NPF Policy 25 Community Wealth Building requires major applications to contribute to local or regional wealth building strategies and to be consistent with local economic priorities. To this end a community wealth building plan is required. Otherwise, the application was considered to comply with NPF Policy 15 Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods due to the proximity to services, including schools, retail uses and the active travel routes. It was also considered to comply with NPF Policies 1 and 2 on Climate Change with (following consultation with Climate Change colleagues), the submitted Carbon Page 162
Page 163
Statement considered to be a competent response satisfying the policy requirements. It was acknowledged that although the use of photovoltaics was not required to achieve compliance there would be merit in including this form of renewable energy in the development. On consideration of further information provided by the applicant on an approach to biodiversity enhancements at the Wards and on finishes/materials along with a commitment to producing a detailed Community Wealth Building Plan the Team has concluded the application is not considered to fully comply with NPF4 Policy 14 and LDP policy PP1 as there is insufficient information on the details of finishes at present to ensure a distinctive place is created. It is considered that more needs to be done to make the feature buildings (feature roof units) stand out as key buildings – (e.g. application of coloured render or window surrounds complimenting glazed brick); feature buildings need to be reviewed; and samples of all proposed external finishes to be confirmed to ensure these contribute to creating a cohesive design strategy and that differentiation in colours is achieved. Details of boundary treatments are also required to ensure they contribute positively to placemaking and public art delivery requires to be conditioned. Similarly, it is not considered to fully comply with NPF Policy 3 Biodiversity due to a lack of details on the biodiversity enhancement which means it has not demonstrated how the design will conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity including how significant biodiversity enhancements are to be provided. To meet NPF4 Policy 3 it is considered that the loss identified within the Biodiversity Net Gain Feasibility Assessment should first be mitigated against, then added to through significant enhancement. It is noted that it is unclear from the plans submitted which of the measures recommended in the Biodiversity Net Gain Feasibility Assessment are being taken forward. Confirmation of which of the measures (both on and offsite) identified in this assessment will be delivered and justification for those that are not is required. Some additional suggestions are made for consideration including a need for amphibian friendly drainage. It is also recommended that opportunities to enhance the neighbouring Wards wildlife site through a joint solution with the proposed SuDS system are taken, with meetings having been held with the applicant to discuss solution. The application is also considered to not fully comply with NPF Policy 25 Community Wealth Building due to the lack of a detailed community wealth building plan. It is noted that there is not yet a contractor appointed who would be best placed to address the community wealth building requirements whereby a planning condition would be appropriate. Finally in relation to NPF Policy 21 Play, recreation it is considered that there is presently insufficient detail on the proposed equipment for the play areas and future management as required by policy. It is noted that the Council’s Planning Policy Guidance states that pocket parks require six pieces of equipment offering six different play values (i.e. climbing, swinging, sliding, balancing, crawling, jumping rocking, gliding, rotating/spinning or running/skipping/hopping). Three pieces of equipment must be inclusive. Sensory panels and/or instruments must be provided in addition to the six pieces of play equipment. The accessibility of the play area, including Page 163
Page 164
consideration of the surfaces, slopes, paths and benches, must be suitable for all ages and abilities. NPF Policy 21 also requires new play provision to provide a range of play experiences, be inclusive, and provide a stimulating environment and that management plans are included. Developer Obligations Team – Has assessed the impact from the increase in units arising from this development, based on 22 additional units and taking into account the fact that some of the 22 units are one-bedroom units which are assumed not to generate school pupils. The Team has concluded that contributions are required towards a new build primary school, or such other primary educational facilities as may be reasonably justified by the Council; extension or other such secondary educational facilities as may be reasonably justified by the Council; and contribution towards healthcare. No contributions towards sport and recreation are required. In relation to transportation impacts contributions towards off site infrastructure required and is based on interventions identified within the Elgin Transport Strategy following confirmation from the Transportation Service. Moray Council Contaminated Land Team - No objections. Recommends that an informative is attached to highlight that there is an electricity substation to the west, Moray Council does not have any further information as to whether the ground is contaminated, and it is the applicant’s responsibility to consider this. Moray Council Access Manager - No formal comments have been provided to date. However, at the pre application stage the officer recommended that a path connection joining through to Core Path EG37 in the Wards should be provided by the developer particularly given that the developer (Moray Council) owns the Wards area. The officer also welcomed the two path connections to core path EG36 which runs along the western edge of the site and recommended that the development incorporate upgrade of EG36 itself including drainage and a suitable surface (min 2.2 metres wide) to allow multi- use. Aberdeenshire Council Archaeology Team - No objections, noting that the archaeological mitigation was competed in 2020. 7. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATION None. 8. OBSERVATIONS 8.1 Background As this is a major planning application, under the terms of the Scottish Government’s Hierarchy of Developments there is a requirement for statutory pre application consultation with the community which has been undertaken with a Pre-Application Consultation Report submitted. Page 164
Page 165
8.2 The original application for the wider site was screened in relation to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. Having considered the characteristics of the development, the location of the development and characteristics of the proposed development it was concluded that the proposal was not an EIA development. The current application for only part of the site did not require to be screened. 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. 8.4 The main issues are considered below. 8.5 Principle Elgin is Moray’s primary growth area as identified in the Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) where new development is to be focussed, with the Elgin Settlement Statement setting out the general development strategy/placemaking objectives for the town. These objectives include identifying housing land and significant growth areas including new neighbourhoods at Bilbohall; identifying green infrastructure to connect to wider green/blue network and a new network of play areas and parks; promoting active travel connections and conserving and enhancing Elgin’s distinctive built heritage and the integrity of the Conservation Areas. 8.6 The application site is designated for residential development in the Moray Local Development Plan (MLDP) under the designation R2 Edgar Road with indicative capacity for 75 units. As noted earlier in this report there is a live planning consent in place for the erection of 194 residential units (all social housing) on three designated residential sites including this R2 site where 84 units were approved. 8.7 The principle of housing on this site is therefore well established. The development also complies fully with NPF4 Policy 9: Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings, which states that proposals on greenfield sites will not be supported unless the site has been allocated for development or the proposal is explicitly supported by policies in the LDP, and with Policy 16: Quality Homes sets which out that development proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in the LDP will be supported. 8.8 The current application is essentially for a remix of the house types and will increase the number of units from 84 to 106. The overall layout of the roads, landscaped areas and SUDs infrastructure is largely unchanged. 8.9 Whilst the principle is well established it is necessary to consider the detail of the application in relation to how the revised layout/remix complies with both Local Development Plan policies and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) which was not in part of the development plan when the first application was considered. Page 165
Page 166
8.10 Location The application involves development on a site designated in the MDLP whereby the suitability of the general location is well established in terms of LDP policies. NPF Policy 15 (Local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods) requires development proposal to contribute to local living including 20-minute neighbourhoods within settlements with consideration to be given to existing settlement pattern and the interconnectivity of new residential development with the surrounding area to ensure there is local access to various amenities. 8.11 This is readily achieved with the application site which is close to the retail uses at Edgar Road, bus links, active travel links and education facilities. The location is therefore considered to fully support the principles of 20-minute neighbourhoods. 8.12 Placemaking, Design and Siting NPF Policy 14 (Design Quality and Place) requires proposals to be consistent with the six qualities of successful places which are healthy, pleasant, connected, distinctive, sustainable and adaptable. Proposals which are poorly designed, detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area or inconsistent with these qualities will not be supported. Similarly, MLDP Policy PP1 (Placemaking) contains design criteria which all residential development must meet in relation to placemaking, character and identify, healthier safer environments, housing mix, open spaces/landscaping, biodiversity, parking, and/street layout and detail. MLDP Policy DP1 (Development Principles) sets out the need for the scale, density and character of development to be appropriate to the surrounding area. 8.13 In this case the general road layout and landscaping areas were considered in some detail with the original application which through a rigorous quality audit process concluded that the layout met with MDLP policy aspirations. This general layout has been followed with the current submission so continues to comply with these objectives. 8.14 In essence, the main changes as compared to the previously consented layout site are: • Increase in density from 84 units to 106 – increase of 22 units. • Central swathe of open space is now proposed as a more varied, sinuous form. • Reduction in number of single storey units and introduction of higher density amenity units on eastern portion of site. • Introduction of 3 storey amenity flats in eastern part of site. • Increased number of 2 storey semi-detached family homes which the applicant’s state is to meet housing demand. • Change from double pitched roof style to simple single pitch with only a few double pitched roofs remaining. • Change in finishes from corrugated steel and timber cladding to tile roofs, harling and glazed brick features at individual recessed entrances, with use of different colours of render and roof tiles to differentiate key buildings. 8.15 The applicants advised that these changes have taken place in order to meet housing needs and for economic viability reasons. Page 166
Page 167
8.16 In terms of layout, it is considered that the higher scale and density of development in the Wards character area in the eastern part of the site fits in well with the landscape here. It uses the lower part of site for this higher scale development with the overall location here benefiting from the wooded/vegetated setting of the Wards wildlife site as well as the knoll to the north. 8.17 It is considered that the SUDS features to the east of these amenity units will provide a very attractive feature for residents of these units as well as the wider public and residents of the rest of the site, who will be able to continue to access the overall site through the network of proposed paths and the central swathe of landscaping. Improved access to the valuable amenity of the Wards wildlife site will also be secured. This overall approach, which will deliver good quality blue and green infrastructure, is considered to comply with placemaking principles, and over time as landscaping develops will add to the quality of the surrounding area. 8.18 Similarly, the layout of housing in the western part of the site (lower valley and central green character areas) is considered to complement the surrounding area, providing much needed family homes with good levels of amenity achieved through both garden space and access to the proposed central green where path, benches and play areas will be provided. The network of paths is proposed throughout the development with links to the Wards wildlife site, the core path to the far west and the remainder of the site to the north echoes that approved already and delivers on placemaking principles subject to conditions to secure implementation. 8.19 The mix of affordable house types, which includes amenity flats is considered to offer a good choice of homes for future residents and will help meet the housing needs of Elgin. 8.20 In terms of design, it is considered overall that the scale and general design of the proposed house types are complementary to each other and to the surrounding area, with sufficient variety to create character areas subject to careful use of finishes to accentuate entrance points and changes in character areas. The proposed three storey development will offer a well sited accessible environment to residents, with proposed balconies lightening the visual appearance. Site sections are considered to satisfactorily demonstrate how the new development will sit on the site with the design and layout of units seeking to minimise excavations to help the units sit well in the landscape. 8.21 As noted earlier in the consultation section the Moray Council Strategic Planning and Development Team consider the development as currently submitted to be a departure from NPF Policy 1 Design, quality and Place and MDLP Policy Placemaking with more work required to make feature buildings stand out, more information on finishes required, along with details of boundary treatments and delivery of public art. Whilst the original development used more contemporary finishes such as timber and corrugated steel the rationale for the change in finishes to less costly and lower maintenance finishes is understood. It is considered that a sufficient level of variety in finishes can be secured by careful use of colours, and accent features such as glazed bricks as Page 167
Page 168
suggested by the applicant. This should ensure, along with the other landscape and layout merits of the proposed application, that placemaking principles will be met. Securing these final details may be addressed by planning conditions with the material submitted to date providing reassurance that this can be achieved with some further refinement to address the recommendations of the Strategic Planning and Development Team Similarly the finer details of boundary enclosures can be secured by planning condition with the general approach to the boundary mix considered to be acceptable. Securing the final design details will however be important to secure the boundaries suitably reflect the open, attractive feel of the development. Delivery of public art may also be conditioned. On this basis it is considered that the application does not depart from policies subject to appropriate planning conditions being attached. 8.22 Finally, with regard to safer communities the applicants have liaised with the Police Architectural Liaison Officer and received a report outlining fairly standard measures required in order to achieve silver Secured by Design award. This will address the comments of the Crime Prevention Officer as noted in the consultation section which can be attached as informatives to any consent issued. 8.23 In these overall circumstances it is considered that the changes to the layout, including increased density which is largely achieved as a result of the introduction of three storey development, comply with placemaking objectives and the policies of both the NPF and the LDP subject to appropriate planning conditions being attached. 8.24 Open Space NPF policy 21 Play, recreation and sport supports development likely to be occupied by children and young people where they incorporate well designed good quality provision for play, recreation and relaxation which is proportionate to the scale and nature of the development and existing provision in the area. Policy 21 also highlights that development proposals which include new streets should be inclusive and enable children and young people to move around safety and independently maximising opportunities for informal and incidental play in the neighbourhood, outlining the various requirements for new play provision. MLDP Policy EP5 (Open Space) contains open space standards for new development to meet in order to provide accessible multifunctional open space with supporting planning policy guidance providing more detail on requirements. 8.25 The MDLP open space standards were considered with the original application and the current submission follows that approach with extensive areas of open space retained in the proposed layout. These offer a good mix of formal and informal play areas, seating areas, and “blue” infrastructure by way of the proposed SUDS as well as good links to the surrounding path network. As noted by the Strategic Planning and Development Team the current submission lacks detail on the type of play equipment to ensure that the play area is inclusive. It also lacks detail on long terms management whereby at present it does not fully comply with policies. This can be readily addressed by planning condition and on this basis the development is considered to comply with policy. Page 168
Page 169
8.26 Affordable Housing NPF4 Policy 16: Quality Homes sets out that development proposals for new homes will be supported where they make provision for affordable homes to meet an identified need with provision of at least 25% sought unless the LDP set out locations where a higher or lower contribution is sought. This policy also explains that proposals which improve affordability and choice by being adaptable to changing needs will be supported. Similarly, MLDP Policy DP2 - Housing sets out that all housing developments must provide a contribution towards the provision of affordable housing with proposals for more than 4 units required to provide 25% of the total units as affordable housing. 8.27 This case for 100% affordable housing readily complies with policies with the 25% requirement exceeded and the remix now providing for more affordable units than previously consented is welcomed. The range of units is also welcomed and helps supports the objectives of Policy 16 to improve affordability and choice. Consequently, subject to a condition being attached to ensure the development is retained as affordable housing the proposal complies with Development Plan policies with regards to affordable housing requirements. 8.28 MDLP Policy DP2 also sets out that proposals must demonstrate tenure integration and ensure that architectural style and finishes are tenure blind with the spatial mix ensuring that communities are integrated to share school catchment areas, open space areas, play areas, sports areas, bus stops and other community facilities. The layout and design as outlined earlier in the report is considered to be satisfactory and as such the new development will integrate with the community as required by policy. 8.29 Finally, NPF Policy 16 sets out that proposals for 50 or more homes should have a statement of community benefit covering how it helps meet local housing requirements including affordable homes, provides or enhances local infrastructure, and improves the residential amenity of the surrounding area. 8.30 The community benefit of 100% affordable housing is clear whilst as set out throughout this report there are also benefits to the surrounding area arising from improved path links and landscaping. 8.31 Sustainability and Climate Change The National Planning Framework 4 highlights that the global climate emergency and the nature crises have formed the foundations of the strategy as a whole. This is reinforced by NPF4 Policy 1: Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises which applies to all development and sets out that when considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global climate and nature crises. NPF4 Policy 2: Climate Mitigation and Adaptation also seeks to ensure that development is sited and designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible and to be able to adapt to climate change risks. 8.32 As noted earlier in this report the site is well located in terms of being within a settlement, close to facilities and amenities and serviced by a range of modes of transport. A Carbon Reduction Statement has been submitted which explains how a whole carbon approach has been adopted to support the move to a net Page 169
Page 170
zero carbon economy. This includes measures such as use of air source heat pumps to avoid reliance on fossil fuels, timber windows avoiding use of UPVC, reducing number of double pitched roof houses, adopting biodiversity and sustainable drainage initiatives and adopting higher density development which is more cost effective and uses less materials. 8.33 On a similar vein NPF Policy 12 (Zero waste) requires all development that generates waste including residential properties, to detail how much waste will be generated and how it will be dealt with including means of segregation. NPF Policy 5 Soils also seeks to minimise disturbance and damage to soils. 8.34 This application has made provision for bin storage and seeks to minimise soil movement. The issue of soil movement and construction waste can be considered as part of a Construction Environment Management Plan which can be secured by planning conditions. 8.35 In these circumstances the development is considered to comply with Development Plan policy. 8.36 Biodiversity NPF4 Policy 3: Biodiversity requires development proposals to contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity, including where relevant restoring degraded habitats and building and strengthening nature networks and the connections between them. Nature based solutions to be integrated where possible. Major developments, as is the case here, will only be supported where they demonstrate that the proposal will conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity include nature networks so they are in a better state than without intervention. This to include future management and be informed by best practise. A series of criteria to achieve this is set out. NPF4 Policy 4: Natural Places does not support development which will have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment. NPF Policy 20 (Blue and green infrastructure) sets out that development which results in fragmentation or net loss of existing blue and green infrastructure will only be supported where it is demonstrated that the proposal would not result in or exacerbate a deficit of blue or green infrastructure provision, and the overall integrity of the network to be maintained. Developments which incorporate or enhance blue and/or green infrastructure will be supported with effective management plans required. 8.37 MDLP Policy EP2 has similar requirements setting out that all development proposals must, where possible, retain, protect and enhance features of biological interest and provide for their appropriate management. Development must safeguard and where physically possible extend or enhance wildlife corridors and green/blue networks and prevent fragmentation of existing habitats. 8.38 As noted earlier in the report the applicant has provided a Biodiversity Plan setting out measures to be undertaken to enhance biodiversity. Extensive landscaped areas crossing the site and linking habitats are being provided along with SUDS ponds and a system of planted swales and rain gardens to deal with surface water. Whilst some less mature trees along the southern site boundary will be lost as a result of development, key trees around the site will be protected and further extensive tree planting is proposed whereby the Page 170
Page 171
proposals do not conflict with NPF policy 6 - Forestry, woodland and trees or MDLP Policy EP6 Forestry, woodland and trees. 8.39 A biodiversity net gain feasibility report has been provided which concludes that the proposed landscaping is expected to increase the overall diversity of habitats within the site although this will not offset the loss of mature grassland habitats and a section of watercourse. A range of measures to help compensate for this have provided included works off site potentially at the Wards wildlife site. 8.40 With regard to this issue, it is also worth noting that the grassland here has matured as a result of being left fallow awaiting development and under normal circumstances it would have been cultivated for agricultural purposes. 8.41 In these overall circumstances it is considered that the benefits to the community and environment resulting from the biodiversity measures proposed by this application are wide ranging and in principle comply with the requirements of policy to enhance biodiversity and provide connecting habitats over time. SUDS basins if appropriately planted will provide an attractive landscape and biodiversity feature linking the new built development to the Wards Nature Reserve and providing amenity benefits for residents of the scheme and for users of the Wards with path links through the new development. The SuDs scheme also has potential to enhance the wetland at the Wards subject to final design. The proposed overall planting scheme includes scrub planting to the north of site with woodland plantations beyond and alongside the existing substation in the northwest portion of the site. This will all contribute over time to provide a good visual setting and backdrop for the new development with the mixed planting offering good opportunities for biodiversity together with the rain gardens proposed throughout the site. Wet woodland beside the wards and along the southern boundary of the site separating the new development form the secondary school Wildflower meadows is also proposed to the north of the wards and at key areas on the northern boundary. These proposals are considered overall to provide an opportunity to deliver green and blue infrastructure here. 8.42 As noted by the Strategic Planning and Development Team the application presently lacks full detail on the implementation, delivery and final details of the proposed biodiversity measures and how they compensate for loss of. Consequently, the Team consider that, as submitted, the application does not comply with policy as it has not been demonstrated how the design will conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity including how significant biodiversity enhancements are to be provided. However it is considered that the various biodiversity measures set out in the applicants supporting material (along with the Moray Council Stategic Planning and Development Teams’ additional suggestions for on-site enhancements) provide sufficient reassurance of a satisfactory approach towards delivery of biodiversity and provision of sufficient biodiversity enhancement taking into account the current use of the land and the proposed green and blue infrastructure in the form of landscaped corridors across the site connecting it to the Wards wildlife site and SUDS ponds. All of these biodiversity recommendations can be addressed by appropriate planning conditions to secure their final details and their delivery. Page 171
Page 172
8.43 On this basis, subject to planning conditions the application is considered to comply with Development Plan policies. 8.44 Transport Issues NPF4 Policy 13: Sustainable Transport supports new development where it is line with the sustainable transport and investment hierarchies and where appropriate provides safe links to local facilities via walking, wheeling and cycling networks, provides secure cycling parking, is designed to incorporate safe crossing for walking and wheeling and reducing the speed of vehicles, and takes account of the transport needs of diverse group, adequately mitigates any impact on local public access routes/MLDP Policies PP3 (Infrastructure and Services) and DP1 (Development Principles) require the provision of a safe entry/exit from new development, with appropriate infrastructure, parking, cycle parking and Electric Vehicle (EV) charging facilities. 8.45 In this case the site is well located to services and amenities, readily accessible by bike, foot and car. It has good public transport links with a bus stop located within 400 metres of the nearest units and the railway station within reasonable distance to the east. As noted by the Transportation Team improved bus links are required for later stages of the wider Bilbohall development, but for this application the public transport links are considered to be adequate. 8.46 There is a good, well used network of paths and core paths around the site and the proposal involves linkages to these paths which will require to be secured by planning conditions, which should also secure in time the upgrading of the core path to the west running up from the school. There are also paths proposed through the application site included shared cycle and pedestrian paths. Infrastructure to help deliver sustainable transport objectives such as electric vehicle charging points and cycle storage can be secured by planning conditions. 8.47 The technical consultees (Transportation Manager and Transport Scotland) have confirmed no objection to the proposal subject to appropriate conditions being attached. This is also subject to contributions to off-site transport improvements as identified in the LDP and roads consultation being secured through the developer obligations process. The applicant is agreeable to these contributions. In these circumstances the application is considered to comply with Development Plan policies. 8.48 Drainage and flooding issues NPF4 Policy 22: Flood Risk and Water Management creates a presumption against all development at risk from flooding and seeks to ensure that that there is no risk of surface water flooding to others, and that all rain and surface water is managed through sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) with area of impermeable surfaces minimised. NPF4 Policy 20: Green and Blue Infrastructure is also of some relevance. This supports development which incorporates new or enhanced blue and/or green infrastructure with proposals for their future management to be included. 8.49 There are no particular flood risk issues on the site and general SUDS scheme here was approved with the original application. Following discussion with the Flood Risk Management Team, work has been undertaken to consider how to Page 172
Page 173
try and deliver some enhancement of the Wards wildlife area. This resulted in revised plans to reduce the amount of water being held in the proposed attenuation/detention and to ensure that water was going out of outfalls to the Wards in order to achieve enhancement of the wetlands. A topographical study has been undertaken and updated drainage information is being prepared to give further detail of these works. The technical consultee (Flood Risk Management Team) is content that with these proposals in principle and consider that an appropriate planning condition can secure the final details. 8.50 On this basis the application is considered to comply with policy. 8.51 Community Wealth Building NPF Policy 25: Community wealth building supports proposals that contribute to local or regional community wealth building strategies and those that are consistent with local economic proprieties. It explains that this could for example include improving community resilience and reducing inequalities, increasing spending within communities, ensuring the use of local supply chains and services, local job creation and supporting led proposals. 8.52 It is likely that the proposed development will reduce inequalities by providing accessible housing for all, as well as improving path links and networks for the wider community and providing economic opportunities for local firms at the construction stage. There may also be potential for involving the local community and schoolchildren with any off-site biodiversity works at the Wards wildlife site. 8.53 A plan has not been prepared to date as at this stage the applicant has not appointed a contractor to assist in preparing it. Given the potential for community wealth building here this is considered to be a matter that could be secured by planning condition. On this basis the application is considered to comply with policy. 8.54 Residential Amenity NPF4 Policy 23: Health and Safety sets out that development which is likely to have a significant adverse effect on health or air quality, or which are likely to raise unacceptable noise issues will not be supported, with MLDP Policy EP14 (Pollution, Contamination and Hazards) taking a similar position. MDLP Policy EP14 Pollution, Contamination and Hazards sets out that proposals which may cause significant air, water, soil or light or noise pollution or exacerbate existing issues must be accompanied a detailed assessment report with measures to mitigate any impacts. 8.55 In this case the proximity of the housing to an existing electrical substation has potential to raise noise issues for residents along with potential noise from the new spine road. A noise report has been carried out for the current application in the form of an update focussing specifically on the current layout and drawing upon material from the Noise Assessment carried out for the original application. As identified with the original report, noise mitigation is necessary for plots close to the electricity substation. This will be achieved through placement of windows and provision of a 3.7metre high acoustic barrier in the form of a bund with screen on top. Mitigation for noise from the spine road is also recommended by way of glazing specifications and ventilation Page 173
Page 174
configurations such as acoustically attenuated trickle vents. The report has been assessed by the technical consultee (Environmental Health Team) who are satisfied with the proposed measures which can be implemented by way of planning condition. 8.56 There are no other particular amenity issues, with existing houses being sufficiently far away. The new units are also laid out with sufficient space to ensure satisfactory privacy and amenity for future residents. The existing school to the south will be screened from the application site by existing vegetation and proposed landscaping so again no conflicts are anticipated. 8.57 On this basis the application is considered to comply with Development Plan policies. 8.58 Developer Obligations NPF4 Policy 18: Infrastructure First sets out that the impacts of developments on infrastructure must be mitigated. Similarly, MLDP PP3: Infrastructure and Services sets out that contributions will be sought from developers in cases where a development would have a measurable adverse or negative impact upon existing infrastructure, community facilities or amenity. 8.59 Developer obligations were considered at the time of the original planning application for the overall development here with a legal agreement in place to secure contributions for the entire site including this R2 site. As noted earlier in this report the Developer Obligations Team has assessed the impact upon infrastructure from the additional 22 houses now proposed and concluded that further contributions towards transport, education and health are required. The applicant is agreeable to this, and the contributions will need to be secured by an appropriate mechanism prior to any consent being issued. 8.60 On this basis the development is considered to comply with development plan policies. 8.61 Contamination NPF Policy 9: Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings sets out that where land is known or suspected to be contaminated then proposals will need to demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed use. MDLP policy EP14 has similar requirements. 8.62 As noted earlier the technical consultee (Contaminated Land Officer) has no objection to the proposal whilst the applicants technical report explains how they will address construction to ensure no issues arise. On this basis the application is considered to comply with Development Plan policy. 8.63 Cultural Heritage NPF Policy 7 – Historic Assets and Places notes that where there is potential for non-designated buried archaeological remains to exist below a site, developers should provide evaluation of the site an early stage. This policy also seeks to ensure that any proposals affecting the setting of a listed building should preserve its character and special interest. MDLP Policy EP8 Historic Environments seeks to ensure that there is no adverse effect on sites of local archaeological importance or the integrity of their settings whilst Policy EP10 on Page 174
Page 175
listed buildings seeks to ensure that there is no detrimental effect on the integrity, character or setting of the buildings. 8.64 In this case there are no listed buildings within the immediate vicinity of the site and as noted earlier in the report by the technical consultee archaeological evaluation was undertaken with the original application. 8.65 On this basis the development is considered to comply with development plan policies. Conclusion The ongoing development of a designated housing site to provide much needed affordable housing is welcomed. The development is considered to comply with NPF4 and LDP policies subject to planning conditions being attached to secure key policy objectives of conserving and enhancing biodiversity measures, detailing to ensure a distinctive place is created, provision of inclusive play areas and securing a community wealth building plan. Conditions to secure implementation of the final details relating to these matters along with other issues such as landscaping, roads and drainage can be readily addressed. Similarly, developer obligations can be secured by a suitable legal means. On this basis approval is recommended. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - Subject to planning conditions the proposal complies with the development plan (namely the National Planning Framework 4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020) and there are no other material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer: Katherine Donnachie Planning Officer Ext: 01343 563256 Beverly Smith Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development Page 175
Page 176
Page 176
Page 177
REPORT TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: 24/01139/PAN – PROPOSED EXPANSION OF MALTINGS PRODUCTION CAPACITY AND ASSOCIATED ROADS DRAINAGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE AT PORTGORDON MALTINGS BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 To inform the Committee that a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted on 17 July 2024 by agents on behalf of Crisp Malt. 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. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 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 (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. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 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. Item 9 Page 177
Page 178
3.2 Following consideration by this Committee on 11 November 2014 it was agreed that any PAN received after this date would be reported to Committee to give Members of 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 (paragraph 4 of the Minute refers). 3.3 This current 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. 3.4 This PAN relates to a proposal for the expansion of the existing maltings and associated infrastructure. No further details have been provided at this stage. The site extends to 6.49ha and includes the existing maltings and open land to the north and east (Appendix). There are houses immediately to the north. The site is not covered by any designations in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP). Both Portgordon Maltings and Crop markings in the north of the application site are both recorded on the Historic Environment Record (HER). The site is within the buffer for a high pressure gas pipeline in the vicinity. Areas of surface water flooding across the site are identified on the SEPA flood risk maps. 3.5 Planning permission is required for this proposal. The proposal is for an industrial development where the site exceeds 2ha and therefore the proposal is a major development for planning purposes. The proposal will be subject to PAN and pre-application consultation procedures with the local community. The applicant(s) have utilised the Council’s pre-application advice service to assist in identifying key issues and information that would be expected to accompany any formal application. 3.6 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 proposes to consult with Lennox and Buckie Community Councils. In this case the applicant’s agent has been advised to notify Portgordon Community Trust with a copy of the PAN. 3.7 The regulations in relation Pre-Application Consultation (PAC) have changed (The Town and Country Planning (Pre-Application Consultation) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2021) refers) to require a minimum of two public events for all PANs submitted after 1 October 2022. The final event is primarily about feedback on the views gathered during PAC. In this case, the PAN advises that public events will be held at Portgordon Village Hall on Wednesday 7 August and Wednesday 11 September. Each event requires to be advertised locally in advance and allow an opportunity for feedback upon 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 Page 178
Page 179
made on the proposal and how the applicant has responded to all comments made on the proposal in the development of the application. 4. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Identifying key issues at an early stage to assist with front loading major planning applications is a vital aspect of supporting and facilitating the Council’s priority for economic development in Moray. (b) Policy and Legal Scottish Government guidance on the role of councillors in pre- application procedures affords elected 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. (c) Financial implications None. (d) Risk Implications None. (e) Staffing Implications None. (f) Property None. (g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact None. (h) 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. (i) Consultations Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Acting Development Management and Building Standards Manager, the Equal Opportunities Officer, the Strategic Planning & Delivery Manager, and Lissa Rowan (Committee Services Officer) have been consulted, and comments received have been incorporated into the report. Members of Moray Council who are not on this Committee have also been consulted and any views received on the proposal will be made known at the meeting. Page 179
Page 180
5. CONCLUSION 5.1 The Council has received a PAN intimating that a formal application for planning permission will be submitted for a major development proposal, in this case for the expansion of the existing maltings and associated infrastructure. The Committee (and any other Member(s) of the Council) are asked to identify any provisional views/relevant issues which they would wish to see taken into account and inform the development of the proposal. Author of Report: Lisa MacDonald Background Papers: 24/01139/PAN Ref: Page 180
Page 181
Tanks T ra ck Fl Sk Ch y Sports Pavilion 28.1m WB A 9 9 0 Tk Wr T Tank Gas Pr oduction Site 32.1m WB 36.0m 31.9m Hoppers Chy Track Par kside Cottage Playing Field Tanks L Tw rs Tanks Tanks 35.5m Maltings 1:5000 COMMITTEE SITE PLAN Expansion of maltings production capacity and associated roads drainage and infrastructure at Portgordon Maltings Buckie BUCKIE Application Reference Number: 24/01139/PAN (c) Crown Copyright. The Moray Council AC0000806936 2024 © Bluesky International Ltd. / Getmapping PLC . Appendix Item 9 Page 181
Page 182
Page 182
Page 183
REPORT TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: 24/01424/PAN - PROPOSED TWO BORROW PITS WITHIN THE SITE OF BERRYBURN WINDFARM EXTENSION BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 To inform the Committee that a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted on 9 September 2024 on behalf of BB2 Wind Farm Limited. 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. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 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 (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. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 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. Item 10 Page 183
Page 184
3.2 Following consideration by this Committee on 11 November 2014 it was agreed that any PAN received after this date would be reported to Committee to give Members of 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 (paragraph 4 of the Minute refers). 3.3 This current 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. 3.4 As described, this PAN relates to a proposal for two large borrow pits within the bounds of the consented windfarm extension (see Appendix 1). 3.5 The site is located adjacent to the operational Berry Burn Wind Farm, Dunphail, Forres Moray. A borrow pit in the general location of proposed borrow pit 1 was approved by the Scottish Government under the extension to Berry Burn Windfarm (20/01026/S36). To ensure materials are obtained on site rather than imported, additional borrow pit capacity is now sought, with an further borrow pit area on the east side of the site being considered. 3.6 Planning permission is required for this proposal, for what amounts to almost 14 Hectares of search area for minerals. Relative to the current Hierarchy Regulations due to the site area the development would constitute a ‘Major’ development, the proposal would comprise a major development for planning purposes, where mineral extraction sites exceed 2 hectares. As such, the proposal will be subject to PAN and pre-application consultation procedures with the local community. The propospective applicant 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. 3.7 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 proposes to consult with Heldon and Finderne Community Council. In this case the applicant’s agent has been advised that no additional parties require to be notified with a copy of the PAN. 3.8 The PAN advises that two public events will be/have been held. The first at Edinkillie Village Hall on Tuesday 24th September between 15:00 and 19:00 and the second at Dallas Village Hall on Wednesday 30th October between 15:00 and 19:00. The events will be advertised locally in advance and allow an opportunity for feedback upon 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. Page 184
Page 185
4. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Identifying key issues at an early stage to assist with front loading major planning applications is a vital aspect of supporting and facilitating the Council’s priority for economic development in Moray. (b) Policy and Legal Scottish Government guidance on the role of councillors in pre- application procedures affords elected 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. (c) Financial implications None. (d) Risk Implications None. (e) Staffing Implications None. (f) Property None. (g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact None. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts Notwithstanding impacts on site, there would be negative effects if the developer was unable to win the necessary material on site. (i) Consultations Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Development Management and Building Standards Manager, the Equal Opportunities Officer, the Strategic Planning & Delivery Manager, and Lissa Rowan (Committee Services Officer) have been consulted, and comments received have been incorporated into the report. Members of Moray Council who are not on this Committee have also been consulted and any views received on the proposal will be made known at the meeting. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 The Council has received a PAN intimating that a formal application for planning permission will be submitted for a major development proposal, in this case for permission for two large borrow pits at Berry Page 185
Page 186
Burn Windfarm Extension. The Committee (and any other Member(s) of the Council) are asked to identify any provisional views/relevant issues which they would wish to see taken into account and inform the development of the proposal. Author of Report: Fiona Olsen, Acting Senior Planning Officer Ref: 24/01424/PAN Page 186
Page 187
1:40000 COMMITTEE SITE PLAN Proposed 2no borrow pits within the site of Berry Burn Wind Farm Dunphail Forres FORRES Application Reference Number: 24/01424/PAN (c) Crown Copyright. The Moray Council AC0000806936 2024 © Bluesky International Ltd. / Getmapping PLC . Appendix 1 Item 10 Page 187
Page 188
Page 188
Page 189
REPORT TO: MEETING OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: CONSULTATION ON SECTION 36 VARIATION TO CONSENTED ROTHES III WIND FARM TO INCREASE HEIGHT OF 3 WIND TURBINES FROM 149.9 METRES TO MAX 200 METRES (TURBINES NUMBERED 9, 13 AND 14) BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 This report asks Committee to consider the consultation received from the Energy Consents Unit (ECU) of the Scottish Government in relation to an Electricity Act 1989 Section 36C application (which includes deemed planning permission) for a variation to the consented Rothes III Wind Farm. This Section of the Electricity Act relates to consenting onshore electricity generation. 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 functions of the Council as Planning Authority. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Committee agrees: (i) to consider and note the contents of the report, as set out in Appendix 1-3, including the conclusions regarding the planning and wider merits of the development (see Section 5 below) where taking into account National Planning Framework 4, Moray Local Development Plan 2020 and all other material considerations, it is recommended that Moray Council does not object to the Section 36C application, subject to conditions applied to the consented wind farm being reiterated as part of the requested variation. (ii) where the committee are minded to raise an objection, provide planning reasons for objecting and instruct Officers to respond with those reasons formally objecting to the Section 36C application. Item 11 Page 189
Page 190
3. BACKGROUND 3.1 As the proposal seeks to vary a consented windfarm with an output that will exceed 50MW, the proposal is to be determined by the ECU within the Scottish Government. Responsibility for consultation with statutory consultees, relevant local authorities, receipt of representations and determination lies with the ECU. In these circumstances the role of Moray Council, as planning authority, is as a consultee rather than being the determining authority. The ECU has invited Moray Council to comment on the proposed variation to the wind farm development within a specific timeframe along with other consultees. The period for consultation for Moray Council expires on 25 October 2024 and an extension to this period has been granted previously to accommodate referral to this committee. Where Moray Council objects to a Section 36C variation, this will usually trigger a Public Local Inquiry (PLI). 3.2 This application is described as a variation to change three consented wind turbines on the consented Rothes III Wind Farm (turbines numbered 9, 13 and 14). The consented turbines are 149.9 metres in height, and the variation seeks to amend these to 200 metre high turbines. The footprint/foundations of the varied turbines will be identical to that permitted on the consented wind farm. 200 metre wind turbines are consented elsewhere on the wind farm, along with 225 metre high wind turbines. 3.3 At its meeting of 25 June 2019, this Committee agreed to object to the proposed Rothes III Wind Farm (ref. 19/00156/S36). This was on the basis that the proposal was considered to result in significant adverse impacts on the landscape, as well as there being insufficient information to demonstrate that turbine components could be delivered to the site safely without detriment to the public road network. This objection triggered the need for a PLI. 3.4 Following the PLI Scottish Ministers granted consent for the wind farm on 21 October 2022. This was on the basis the proposal would deliver significant renewable energy benefits within the context of Scottish Government targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions (in place at the time of determination), as well as net economic benefits. This decision acknowledged the significant adverse landscape and visual effects of the wind farm, but found on balance these negative impacts are acceptable in the context of the renewable energy and economic benefits of the proposal. A condition was applied refusing consent for the construction of one turbine in the scheme (identified as turbine number 15 due to its impact on peat in light of concerns raised by SEPA). 3.5 The recommendation by officers is that no objection be raised by Moray Council to the requested variation to the consented wind farm. The report in Appendix 1 outlines the reasoning for this. It is recommended no objection is raised on the basis the proposal varies the magnitude of the landscape and visual impact of the consented wind farm to a limited degree (relative to the consented windfarm). All other technical and environmental impacts of the proposal either have no impact over and above the already consented wind farm or are within acceptable standards and can be mitigated within the realms of the existing consent for the Rothes III Wind Farm. This is subject to all conditions applied to the consented wind farm (as shown in the Appendix 2) being reiterated as part of the varied consent. Page 190
Page 191
4. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Promote economic development and growth and maintain and promote Moray’s landscape and biodiversity. (b) Policy and Legal The application is made for consent under S36C of the Electricity Act 1989 to Scottish Government. If consented, planning permission is deemed to be granted for the development. For planning purposes proposals require to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. If granted by Scottish Government, the responsibility for the discharge of (planning) conditions attached to the formal decision to grant consent will pass to Moray Council. (c) Financial implications If this committee agrees to object to the proposal, a Public Local Inquiry would be arranged by Scottish Government. Moray Council would be expected to attend and participate in the Inquiry process, including any pre-Inquiry arrangements with resultant costs, including officer, legal representation and consultant costs where required/appropriate. Furthermore as officers have recommended not to formally object then any case presented to a PLI may need to be by the relevant Councillors who moved against the officer recommendation. They would get support from legal but not from Development Management planning officers directly, although Strategic Planning & Development may assist. At Inquiry, the applicant may seek an award of costs against the Council if it is considered the Council has acted unreasonably. (d) Risk Implications If the Council decide not to respond within the agreed period it would be open to Scottish Government to proceed and determine the application. If deciding to object, the outcome of any Public Local Inquiry held to consider this proposed development is uncertain: it might uphold and support the Council’s decision to object, but equally the objection could be dismissed and consent granted for the development. (e) Staffing Implications In the event of a Public Local Inquiry, staff time and resources (Elected Members, planning and legal officers) will be required for preparation and attendance at any Inquiry. (f) Property None. Page 191
Page 192
(g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact None. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts As detailed in the Appendix 1 report, the proposed varied development has the potential to make a considerable contribution toward the generation of low-carbon based electricity generation so significant weight is attached to this element. Switching to renewable sources of energy is acknowledged to make a big contribution toward climate change goals. Biodiversity impacts are sought to be mitigated by proposals such as the Habitat Management Plan required by condition on the consented wind farm and sought to be condition on a varied consent. (i) Consultations Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Acting Development Management and Building Standards Manager, the Equal Opportunities Officer, the Strategic Planning & Development Manager, and the Democratic Services Manager have been consulted, and comments received have been incorporated into the report. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 From Appendix 1, the planning merits have been considered relative to current national and development plan policy and material considerations, including Moray Council’s Wind Energy Landscape Sensitivity Study adopted by the Council. 5.2 Whilst the Council previously objected to the development of the Rothes III Wind Farm, the decision of Scottish Ministers to consent the wind farm is a strong material consideration in considering the consultation response to the request to vary the height of the three turbines. The magnitude of the landscape and visual impact of the consented wind farm to a minor degree so as not to warrant objection from the Council as Planning Authority. All other technical and environmental impacts of the proposal either have no impact over and above the already consented wind farm or are within acceptable standards and can be mitigated within the realms of the existing consent for the Rothes III Wind Farm. 5.3 Accordingly, the recommendation to members is to raise no objection to the consultation response to the variation sought to increase the height of turbines 9, 13 and 14 on the consented Rothes III Wind Farm, subject to all conditions applied to the existing consent being reiterated. There is no requirement to recommend any amended conditions to the Scottish Ministers/Energy Consents Unit in this instance. Author of Report: Andrew Miller, Acting Principal Planning Officer Background Papers: Ref: Page 192
Page 193
APPENDIX 1 MORAY COUNCIL Response to consultation issued by Scottish Ministers THE ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 – SECTION 36C THE ELECTRICITY GENERATING STATIONS (APPLICATIONS FOR VARIATION OF CONSENT) (SCOTLAND) REGULATIONS 2013 VARIATION TO CONSENTED ROTHES III WIND FARM TO INCREASE HEIGHT OF 3 WIND TURBINES FROM 149.9 METRES TO MAX 200 METRES (TURBINES NUMBERED 9, 13 AND 14) (MORAY COUNCIL REFERENCE 24/01171/S36) INTRODUCTION On 18 July 2024 Rothes III Limited submitted an application under section 36C of the Electricity Act 1989 requesting Scottish Ministers’ grant a variation to the existing section 36 consent for Rothes III Wind Farm issued on 21 October 2022 by Scottish Ministers. This application will be determined by Scottish Ministers via the Scottish Government’s Energy Consents Unit (ECU), and not by Moray Council as the local planning authority. In determining the Section 36C variation application, the views of Moray Council, as local planning authority are being sought by the ECU. The Council’s role in the process is therefore as a statutory consultee. In responding with comments, the Council has a right to object or not to the application, as well as commenting on the conditioning of the consent. If the Council objects to the proposed development and the objection is not later withdrawn, or the areas of objection cannot be addressed by conditions then ECU/Scottish Ministers are likely to convene a Public Local Inquiry. Prior to determination, the ECU are responsible for affording publicity of the proposal and taking account of all representations received, whether from the general public or interested parties, and for consulting with agencies and organisations (consultees). Internal consultation with relevant services/sections within the Council has been undertaken in order to provide a comprehensive response in responding to the consultation. HISTORY/BACKGROUND The applicant was granted consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 to construct and operate Rothes III Wind Farm. The consent is for 28 wind turbines, consisting of: 3 turbines of a maximum tip height of 149.9 metres, 8 turbines of a maximum tip height of 200 metres, and 17 turbines of a maximum tip height of 225 metres. Item 11 Page 193
Page 194
At its meeting of 25 June 2019, the Council’s Planning and Regulatory Services Committee agreed to object to the proposed Rothes III Wind Farm (ref. 19/00156/S36). This was on the basis that the proposal was considered to result in significant adverse impacts on the landscape, as well as there being insufficient information to demonstrate that turbine components could be delivered to the site safely without detriment to the public road network. This objection triggered the need for a Public Local Inquiry (PLI). Following the PLI Scottish Ministers granted consent for the wind farm on 21 October 2022. This was on the basis the proposal would deliver significant renewable energy benefits within the context of Scottish Government targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions (in place at the time of determination), as well as net economic benefits. This decision acknowledged the significant adverse landscape and visual effects of the wind farm, but found on balance these negative impacts are acceptable in the context of the renewable energy and economic benefits of the proposal. A condition was applied refusing consent for the construction of one turbine in the scheme (identified as turbine number 15 due to its impact on peat in light of concerns raised by SEPA). THE SITE The proposed varied development is located approximately 4 km west of Rothes and just over 2.5 km north of Archiestown. The operational Rothes I and Rothes II wind farms are located to the immediate north west of this site. The consented wind farm covers an area of 1,779 ha. Access to the wind farm would be via the existing Rothes I and Rothes II wind farm entrance on the Dallas to Knockando Road (C13E). Construction access would be via the access point on the A941 at Gedloch, to the south of Fogwatt. It is anticipated that turbines would be delivered from Inverness to Elgin then south to Gedloch. The windfarm area site is not subject to any international, national, regional or local landscape, built environment or nature conservation designations, but there are several archaeological assets within the site. “Gull Nest” which is a biological Site of Scientific Special Interest (SSSI) lies immediately to the north east of the site. Groundwater dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTE’s) are present on site. The Burn of Rothes/Mannoch Road Core Path sits partly within the north eastern boundary of the windfarm site. A Right of Way from Upper Knockando towards Birnie also runs north-south through the site (known as the Lower Mannoch Road). There are a number of windfarms (operational and consented) close to the proposed windfarm site. Most notably Rothes I and Rothes II are located immediately north of the proposed site. PROPOSAL Amendment of consented Rothes III Wind Farm to increase height of three consented turbines. Page 194
Page 195
The consented development consists of 28 wind turbines (3 at 149.9m, 8 at 200m and 17 at 225m). The three at 149.90m are to be increased in height to 200m. The affected turbines (numbers 9, 13 and 14) are located on Carn na Cailliche. Other than a change to the height of the three turbines, there will be no change to the overall layout of the consented wind farm nor the foundations of the turbines. ADVERTISEMENTS Advertisements will have been carried out by the ECU who is the determining authority for the application. CONSULTATIONS As noted above, consultations are limited to Council services. Consultations with external bodies such as SEPA are undertaken directly by the Energy Consents Unit. Internal consultation responses from Council departments are summarised as follows: Strategic Planning and Development - The principle of development has been established by the existing consent for Rothes III Wind Farm and the proposal seeks to increase the heights of 3 consented turbines from 149.9m to 200m. There are no other changes to the consented scheme proposed. In isolation, the proposal would likely incur significant adverse landscape character and visual effects, however these effects need to be considered in the context of the consented scheme, the remainder of which is made up of 200m and 225m turbines. In determining the consented Rothes III Wind Farm, Scottish Ministers concluded that the “the significant adverse landscape and visual impacts the proposed Development would have, are acceptable in the context of the net economic benefits and significant renewable energy benefits, in support of climate change mitigation, that would arise if the proposed Development were deployed.” On this basis, Strategic Planning & Development have no comments on the proposal. Transportation – No objections to the proposed variation subject to the reapplication of Conditions 14 and 15 of the Energy Consents Unit’s Decision Notice dated 21 October 2022. Environmental Health – No objections subject to conditions Private Water Supplies – No objections. Moray Flood Risk Management – No objections. Aberdeenshire Archaeology – No objections. REPRESENTATIONS Page 195
Page 196
Third party representations are submitted to the ECU for their consideration in dealing with the S36C variation request. RELEVANT POLICIES AND GUIDANCE National Planning Framework 4 Policy 1 - Tackling the Climate 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 11 - Energy Policy 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 18 - Infrastructure first Policy 22 - Flood risk Policy 23 - Health and safety Policy 25 - Community wealth building Policy 33 - Minerals Moray Local Development Plan 2020 PP2 Sustainable Economic Growth PP3 Infrastructure and Services DP1 Development Principles DP9 Renewable Energy DP10 Minerals EP1 Natural Heritage Designation EP2 Biodiversity EP3 Special Landscape Areas EP7 Forestry Woodland and Trees EP8 Historic Environment EP12 Management and Enhancement Water EP13 Foul Drainage EP14 Pollution Contamination Hazards EP15 MOD Safeguarding EP16 Geodiversity and Soil Resources Moray Wind Energy Landscape Sensitivity Study 2023 OBSERVATIONS The proposed variation seeks consent under Section 36C of the 1989 Electricity Act and also a direction under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended for the development to be deemed to be granted. As Moray Council is a consultee for the Section 36 process, some matters within the Observations will be assessed differently had it been assessed as a planning Page 196
Page 197
application where Moray Council are the determining authority. Matters such as, for example, impact on aviation and the water environment will be informed by direct consultation with the Ministry of Defence or SEPA, as they will be consulted separately and will reply directly to the ECU. Similarly detailed consideration of ornithology will be best commented upon by consultees such as the RSPB and Nature Scot (formerly SNH). The Council’s consideration of some matters will therefore be less involved where the ECU are consulting directly themselves on particular areas of interest best addressed by other specialist consultees. Officers have considered the proposal against National Planning Policy 4 (NPF), the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 (MLDP) and material considerations including Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, the Scottish Government Onshore Wind Policy Statement 2022, and Scotland’s Energy Statement. It is noted that the Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan is still at a draft stage. The determination of the Scottish Ministers to grant consent for the development of Rothes III wind farm at this site is a significant material consideration in the determination of this variation application. It should be noted that as the application is being considered under the 1989 Electricity Act, rather than the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, the development plan does not have primacy under Section 25 of the 1997 Act. Environmental Impact Assessment This proposal was screened under The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 by the ECU. As part of this process there is a statutory requirement to consult with the planning authority. Moray Council officers responded to this consultation via delegated powers with the opinion that the proposal is not EIA development, noting that the main consideration for the requested variation relates to landscape and visual impacts, with all other matters previously determined remaining unaltered. The ECU agreed with this position and adopted a screening opinion on 20 September 2024 confirming this proposed variation is not an EIA development. Principle of Proposal National projects sit at the top of the hierarchy of development and comprise developments that are specified in NPF that are considered to be of national importance. Within Annexe A of NPF, it states that “their designation means that the principle of the development does not need to be agreed in later consenting processes”. All onshore energy generating developments in excess of 50 MW fall within the definition of national development in NPF (Annexe B, 3. Strategic Renewable Electricity Generation and Transmission Infrastructure). NPF Policy 1 ‘Tackling the climate and nature crises’ states that significant weight must be attached to the global climate and nature crisis. It aims seeks to reduce emissions and supports development that addresses these goals. Development of renewable energy is one such development and therefore significant weight must be attached to its contribution toward emissions reductions. Similarly, Policy 2 ‘Climate Change and adaptation’ seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. This can directly be linked to other wider objectives of NPF in creating sustainable places and the production and transmission of clean energy is part of the spatial strategy for the north of Scotland. Page 197
Page 198
NPF Policy 11 ‘Energy’ seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate all forms of renewable energy development onshore and offshore. Part (a) (i) of the policy supports wind farms, but other parts of the policy, in particular part (e) sets out how proposals should demonstrate impacts on a number of aspects have been designed and mitigated. These matters are considered below, but the general position of Policy 11 in respect of supporting renewable energy development should be noted with regards to the principle of this development. The supporting Planning Statement submitted identifies the need for the amendment, noting that economic climate for wind turbines, as well as available technology has advanced since first applying for Rothes III Wind Farm in February 2019. They also note that construction process and material costs have increased significantly. As such it is not economically viable to source and construct three smaller wind turbines (149.9m high). Taking account of this situation, the applicant has concluded that it would not be viable to build all of the consented turbines apart from the three smaller turbines, and are therefore seeking a variation to increase the height of the three turbines in height to 200 metres (to tip). The applicant states this variation would allow the output of the wind farm to increase, with a subsequent benefit of lowering of carbon emissions. The original S36 consent remains implementable regardless of any decision on this variation application. Although the Council objected to the scheme on grounds of impacts on landscape character, visual effects and impacts on the local road network (with regard to lack of information on delivery of components and subsequent lack of identification of appropriate mitigation/modification of road network to accommodate these), Scottish Ministers approved the scheme and only the variations and associated impacts must be assessed against current national and local policies and guidance. The principle of the development cannot be questioned afresh, due to the presence of an extant consent. A wind farm of this scale and siting is therefore acceptable at this location. On the basis the principle of a wind farm in this location is established and considering the variations sought to the consented Rothes III Wind Farm and the requirements of the relevant policies and guidance, the following factors will be considered in this response: Landscape and Visual Impacts Noise Shadow Flicker Natural Environment Flood Risk and Drainage Cultural Heritage Access and Traffic Paths and Access Impact on soils resources and minerals Woodland Aviation Page 198
Page 199
Socio-economics Decommissioning and restoration Landscape and Visual Impacts NPF Policy 11 states that project design and mitigation must demonstrate how the various impacts are addressed and these are listed in part (e) of the policy. Part (e)(ii) notes that significant landscape and visual impacts, recognising that such impacts are to be expected for some forms of renewable energy. Where impacts are localised and/ or appropriate design mitigation has been applied, they will generally be considered to be acceptable. This goes beyond the comparable MLDP Policy DP9 by implying that under certain circumstances, even significant landscape impacts are to be accepted. MLDP Policy DP9 Renewable Energy (supported by Moray Council’s - Moray Wind Energy Landscape Sensitivity Study 2023) states that all renewable energy proposals will be considered favourably where they meet criteria identified in Policy DP9 (a)(i) where proposals should be compliant with policies to safeguard and enhance the built and natural environment, while DP9 (a)(iii) gives a list of impacts that must be avoided to prevent an overall unacceptable significant adverse impact occurring. Whilst many of these are addressed or can be addressed via condition one of these states that unacceptable significant adverse landscape and visual impacts must be avoided in order for proposals to be considered favourably. This element specifically deviates from the position present in NPF Policy 11. Section 24 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) states that should there be any conflict between the adopted National Planning Framework and the adopted local development plan, the most recently adopted shall prevail. As NPF was adopted most recently, its position must take precedence and therefore the greater tolerance to significant impacts must be applied. This site falls within Landscape Character Type (LCT) 10 – Upland Moorland and Forestry, as classified by NatureScot. The Moray Wind Energy Landscape Sensitivity Study 2023 (LSS) utilises these LCTs to consider their sensitivity to wind turbine developments. In respect of the LCT in which this proposal falls, the LSS states the landscape:- “comprises a gently undulating plateau-like landform with smooth even slopes although some more defined and higher hills are present on the outer edges of this Assessment Unit. This landscape is predominantly large scale, sparsely settled and covered with a simple pattern of coniferous forestry and moorland although some smaller scale farmed and settled areas are present on the outer fringes of this landscape in the upper Lossie valley and Upper Knockando areas. Visibility of the interior of these uplands is restricted from surrounding roads and settlement but the outer edges of parts of this landscape are prominent from the coastal plain of Moray and from the Spey valley.” The LSS identifies Rothes III wind farm (i.e. the consented wind farm) as a key issue on the basis it along with Paul’s Hill II and Clash Gour will significantly increase intrusion on views from the A95 and from settlement within the Spey valley. Page 199
Page 200
This proposal sees the increase in height of three turbines by 50.1 metres. Increasing the height of any structure will result in it having greater visibility and prominence in the surrounding landscape. However, this must be viewed within the context of the consented wind farm. The consented wind farm was found to have significant adverse landscape and visual impacts, as stated in the decision from Scottish Ministers. A copy of their decision letter is included in Appendix 2, with a summary of “Landscape and Visual Effects” shown on pages 13 – 16 of this. In support of this proposed variation, the applicant has submitted a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) that builds upon that previously submitted in support of the consented wind farm. The updated LVIA takes account of the introduction of Special Landscape Areas in the MLDP (Spey Valley and Ben Rinnes SLAs). It does not, however, consider an update to the cumulative position in respect of the recently consented Clash Gour Wind Farm and Berry Burn Wind Farm Extension. This is on the basis the Rothes III Wind Farm was found to be acceptable by the reporter. The degree of change of this variation is small in relation to the wider wind development baseline, and consideration of the potential effects of the proposal against the previously identified cumulative effects is not considered to bring about any additional significant effects over and above those which were assessed for the consented Rothes III Wind Farm. On this basis the cumulative effects are not considered further other than a consideration of the design and appearance of this proposal when viewed alongside the existing Rothes I and II wind farms. These developments are considered as part of the LVIA. The approach taken in the LVIA is considered suitable for evaluation of the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed variation. Effects on Landscape Character The Comparative Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) shows additional areas where the increased turbine tip heights could be viewed from compared to the consented wind farm. These areas tend to be at greater distances beyond 10km from the wind farm, though there is a small area of localised additional visibility to the south west of the site at approximately 2 – 5 km from the wind farm. In these additional areas of visibility, it is possible for up to a maximum of 50.1 metres of the turbine blades of the proposal to be visible that would not have been seen as part of the consented development. However, the extent of the areas with additional visibility is small compared to that currently consented, and those elements would appear small at middle to distant views. In respect of areas where the consented wind farm would be visible from, the number of turbines visible in these areas will increase by up to 3 turbines. The main impact is likely to be in lower landscapes to the west of the site. However, it has already been assessed that the landscape character effects in these areas is significant, as detailed by the Reporter and as reported by the Council previously. Page 200
Page 201
The proposed variation would not be so apparent that a change to the previously identified effects would increase. On this basis, the proposed variation is not considered to result in any additional significant effects on landscape character as previously permitted. Effects on Visual Receptors The LVIA undertaken considers the nine viewpoint locations where a significant visual effect was identified as part of the consented windfarm. This proposal has been considered with updated wireline comparing the consented scheme to the proposal. It also considers the magnitude of the impact of the consented and proposed variation. The previously identified significant effects for the viewpoints and sequential routes would remain unchanged as part of the proposed variation. Residential Visual Amenity Impacts The LVIA contains a Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) which has found there are no additional properties that fall within areas of additional theoretical visibility resulting from this proposal. The Reporters decision on the consented windfarm found there were 7 residential properties that would experience significant visual effects but that non would be subject to an overwhelming or overbearing impact to the extent they would reasonably be considered an unattractive place to live. Within this context, the proposal if visible would not alter the magnitude of the change previously identified in the LVIA and agreed by Scottish Ministers. As a result it is not considered the proposal would have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenity of the properties previously identified. Effects on Local Landscape Designations As noted above, there are very few additional areas of theoretical visibility across the study area of the ZTV. Significant effects were assessed within what was the Spey Valley Area of Great Landscape Value (now a Special Landscape Area in the MLDP). for the Consented Development by virtue of the significant effects (major/moderate) on landscape character which were identified for areas up to 8 km within the Broad Farmed Valley Landscape Character Type and for six of the assessment viewpoints located. The assessment of the consented wind farm in relation to landscape character and viewpoints did not conclude any increase to the previously identified effects in the LVIA. As such, the conclusion on local designations, which was agreed by Scottish Ministers, is also considered to remain unchanged from the LVIA. Landscape and Visual Impacts - Conclusion Taking account of these matters, in particular the requirements of NPF Policy 11 and the material consideration of the extant consent in place, it can be concluded that the overall landscape impact of the proposed variation would be concurrent with the significant effects already established by the consented wind farm. On this basis the variation sought to increase the height of the three turbines would not be so significant to warrant raising an objection to this consultation request on landscape and visual impact grounds. Page 201
Page 202
Noise NPF Policy 11 (e) (i) and MLDP Policy DP9 (a) (ii) both require noise impacts of renewable energy development to be mitigated as part of the design of a development. This is also the case for NPF Policy 23 ‘Health and safety’ and MLDP Policy EP14 ‘Pollution, Contamination and Hazards’, both of which require noise generated from proposed developments to be an acceptable level or suitably mitigated. Where this is not the case, development will not be supported. An updated Noise Assessment undertaken by the applicant has found the proposed variation would result in noise levels below the limits set out in the consented decision, meaning the turbines can operate within the noise limits applied to the consented development by conditions. Environmental Health have not raised any objections to these findings, subject to the original conditions attached to the consented wind farm remaining in place. As such there is no conflict with the aforementioned policies in respect of noise. Shadow Flicker The consented wind farm does not have any conditions placed in respect of shadow flicker. NPF Policy 11 (e) (i) and MLDP Policy DP9 (b) (ii) require noise impacts of renewable energy development to be either avoided or mitigated as part of the design of a development. This is on the basis the reporter did not consider shadow flicker to be problematic and the condition sought by the Council was not necessary. As a result of this proposal, the nearest receptors would be beyond the required separation distance for potential impacts of shadow flicker. As such, no additional assessment was deemed necessary in respect of shadow flicker. Environmental Health have not raised any objections in this regard. There is therefore no conflict with renewable energy policies with regard to shadow flicker. Natural Environment NPF policies 1 and 2 as a wider perspective on the natural environment see tackling climate change via carbon reduction, as one of the major priorities. NPF Policy 1 views the ongoing nature crises as being an issue considered hand in hand with climate change, and to address both it sees development of renewable energy as part of that solution. NPF Policy 3 ‘Biodiversity’ and EP2 Biodiversity however both seek to enhance biodiversity, so not withstanding allowances made for energy generation in upland areas elsewhere in NPF, efforts should still be made to enhance the local biodiversity as a result of development. Of note, Naturescot and RSPB will respond separately on aspects such as ornithology and Groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems (GWDTE). NPF Policy 4 ‘Natural places and MLDP Policy EP1 ‘Natural Heritage Designations’ seek to ensure proposals do not have an adverse effect on protected species. NPF Policy 11 (e) (ix) and MLDP Policy DP9 (a) (iii) and (b) (ii) require renewable energy projects to ensure they do not have an adverse impact on ecology and biodiversity. Page 202
Page 203
An Ornithology and Ecology Appraisal, building on the EIA Report that accompanied the consented scheme, has been submitted in support of the proposal. It has considered the impact of the increased heights of the three turbines on ornithology, bats and habitats. It has found there is no adverse impact over and above that established by the consented wind farm. NatureScot have raised no objections in their consultation response to the ECU. Conditions requiring submission of a Construction Environment Management Plan and Habitat Management Plan, as well as appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works are attached to the consented wind farm. The Council will request these conditions remain to ensure compliance with the above policies in respect of the natural environment. Flood Risk and Drainage As this proposal does not result in any increase to the size of the foundations of the turbine, nor does it require any amendments to access tracks, borrow pits etc., the impact of this proposal on drainage and flood risk remains unchanged. Moray Flood Risk Management have not objected to this proposal. There is therefore no conflict with flood risk and drainage policies (NPF policies 11 (e) (viii) and 22, and MLDP policies DP9 (a) (iii) and EP12). Cultural Heritage Cultural heritage and archaeological impacts were concluded to be low in the consented windfarm. The proposed variation would have a negligible effect over and above that already consented. As such this proposal is not at odds with historic environment policies NPF Policy 6 and MLDP Policies EP9 and EP10, as well as NPF Policy 11 (e) (vii) and MLDP Policy DP9 (b) (ii). Historic Environment Scotland will be consulted separately, and of note the Council’s internal consultation with the Aberdeenshire Archaeology Service raised no issues with the proposed increase in height of turbines. Access and Traffic The proposed three wind turbines do not exceed the maximum height of turbines already proposed as part of the consented wind farm. As such delivery arrangements/conditions consider turbines of this height. The Council’s Transportation team have raised no objections to this application in light of the consented wind farm, but have requested existing conditions applied to the consented scheme are repeated. It is noted that Transport Scotland have raised no objections to Scottish Ministers on this proposed variation. The proposal therefore complies with NPF Policies 13 and 11 (e) (vi), and MLDP Policies PP3 (a) (vi), DP1 (ii) and DP9 (a) (iii). Paths and Access A public Right of Way runs from Bardonside (to the south of Birnie where the public road ends) to Knockando. Part of this is a core path running from Bardonside to Rothes, which branches off the right of way to the north of Mannoch Hill. As part of the consented wind farm, there is a requirement for an access plan to be submitted and agreed with the Council. This condition will remain and the proposed variation sought would not have an further impacts on access/rights of way over and above Page 203
Page 204
that already consented. The proposal therefore complies with NPF Policies 13 and 11 (e) (iii), and MLDP Policies PP3, DP1 and DP9 (b) (ii). Impact on soil resources/minerals As this proposal does not result in any increase to the size of the foundations of the turbine, nor does it require any amendments to access tracks, borrow pits etc., the impact of this proposal on soil resources and minerals remains unchanged. Woodland There are no changes proposed to the previously assessed forestry impacts of the consented wind farm. The three turbines subject to this proposal are in an area of open hill and rough grazing. The extant condition (number 19) secures compensatory planting as part of the consented scheme and subject to its retention would ensure the revised scheme complies with relevant woodland and forestry policies. Aviation When considering impacts on aviation, the ECU have consulted with relevant consultees. The Ministry of Defence and NATS (who are responsible for air traffic control in UK air space) have raised no objections. Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd. have at the time of writing of this report submitted a holding objection requiring a line-of-sight assessment to be undertaken to understand any impact of the proposed variation on infrastructure and operation of Inverness Airport. Ultimately this is not a reason for the Council to object to the consultation response for this proposal, but in order to ensure compliance with relevant planning policies (NPF Policy 11 and MLDP Policy DP9), impacts on aviation should be suitably mitigated. Socio-Economics As noted as part of the Scottish Ministers reason for decision, it is considered there will be economic benefits of the consented wind farm, and this would remain the same as part of the proposed variation. NPF Policy 11 states that proposals will only be supported where they maximise net economic impact, including local and community socio economic benefits. NPF Policy 25 states developments that contribute towards local/regional community wealth building strategies and are consistent with local economic priorities will be supported. For new wind energy projects consideration is being given as to how net economic benefits might be realised. No planning obligations contributions are due as such development would not have any impact on community facilities, schools etc. It has been deemed previously in the Scottish planning system "Community Benefit Funds" are not a matter for the development management system. The setting up of a Community Benefit Fund should not be a matter that influences the planning decision and would be arranged separate to the planning process in the event that permission is granted. This approach is highlighted in Annex A ‘Defining a Material Consideration’ of the Circular 3/2013: Development Management Procedures. The applicant has referred to contributing to a Community Benefit Fund in submissions, and it is noted that there Page 204
Page 205
was no condition applied for community wealth building matters on the consented wind farm. For the proposed variation, utilising already consented tracks, substations, and infrastructure there is limited scope to purse community benefit or other economic benefits in isolation form the rest of the development. In this instance, no additional action is being sought under these policies, and the turbine will be managed and operated in line with the rest of the previously consented wind farm. Decommissioning and Restoration NPF Policy 11 (e) (xi) and MLDP Policy DP9 (b) (ii) both require renewable energy developments to provide appropriate provision for decommissioning and restoration, whilst NPF Policy 11 (e) (xii) requires proposals to include measures to safeguard or guarantee availability of finance to effectively implement decommission and restoration. As this proposal does not result in any increase to the size of the foundations of the turbine, nor does it require any amendments to access tracks, borrow pits etc., the decommissioning and restoration arrangements, as well as the bond arrangements, already required by conditions under the consented scheme are considered to be suitable. Conclusions and Recommendation The foregoing observations have demonstrated that the proposal varies the magnitude of the landscape and visual impact of the consented wind farm to so small of a degree so as not to warrant objection from the Council as Planning Authority. All other technical and environmental impacts of the proposal either have no impact over and above the already consented wind farm or are within acceptable standards and can be mitigated within the realms of the existing consent for the Rothes III Wind Farm. Accordingly, the recommendation to members is to raise no objection to the consultation response to the variation sought to increase the height of turbines 9, 13 and 14 on the consented Rothes III Wind Farm, subject to all conditions applied to the existing consent being reiterated. There is no requirement to recommend any amended conditions to the Scottish Ministers/ECU. Page 205
Page 206
Page 206
Page 207
28 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Annex 2 part 1 - Section 36 consent conditions 1. Notification of Date of First Commissioning and Final Commissioning (1) Written confirmation of the date of First Commissioning shall be provided to the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month after that date. (2) Written confirmation of the date of Final Commissioning shall be provided to the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month after that date. Reason: To allow the Planning Authority and Scottish Ministers to calculate the date of expiry of the consent. 2. Commencement of development (1) The Commencement of the Development shall be no later than five years from the date of this consent, or in substitution, such other period as the Scottish Ministers may hereafter direct in writing. (2) Written confirmation of the intended date of Commencement of Development shall be provided to the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month before that date. Reason: To avoid uncertainty and ensure that the consent is implemented within a reasonable period and to allow the Planning Authority and Scottish Ministers to monitor compliance with obligations attached to this consent and deemed planning permission as appropriate. 3. Non-assignation (1) This consent shall not be assigned without the prior written authorisation of the Scottish Ministers. The Scottish Ministers may authorise the assignation of the consent (with or without conditions) or refuse assignation as they may, in their own discretion, see fit. The consent shall not be capable of being assigned, alienated or transferred otherwise than in accordance with the foregoing procedure. (2) The company shall notify the Planning Authority in writing of the name of the assignee and principal named contact and contact details within 14 days of written confirmation from the Scottish Ministers of their consent to the assignation. Reason: To safeguard the obligations of the consent if transferred to another company. Appendix 2 Item 11 Page 207
Page 208
29 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk 4. Serious incident reporting In the event of any breach of health and safety or environmental obligations relating to the Development during the period of this consent, the Company will provide written notification of the nature and timing of the incident to the Scottish Ministers, and confirmation of remedial measures taken and/or to be taken to rectify the breach, within 24 hours of the incident occurring. Reason: To keep the Scottish Ministers informed of any such incidents which may be in the public interest. 5. Radar Mitigation (1) No wind turbine shall be erected unless and until an *Air Traffic Control Radar Mitigation Scheme (“ATCRMS”) to address the impact of wind turbines upon air safety has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Scottish Ministers in conjunction with the Ministry of Defence (MOD). (2) No wind turbine erected as part of this development shall be permitted to rotate its rotor blades about its horizontal axis, other than for the purpose of testing radar mitigation for this development for specific periods as defined in the approved ATCRMS or otherwise arranged in accordance with provisions contained the in approved ATCRMS, until: (a) those mitigation measures required to be implemented prior to any wind turbine being permitted to rotate its rotor blades about its horizontal axis as set out in the approved ATCRMS have been implemented; and (b) any performance criteria specified in the approved ATCRMS and which the approved ATCRMS requires to have been satisfied prior to any wind turbine being permitted to rotate its rotor blades about its horizontal axis have been satisfied and Scottish Ministers, in conjunction with the Ministry of Defence, have confirmed this in writing. (3) Thereafter the development shall be operated strictly in accordance with the details set out in the approved ATCRMS for the lifetime of the development, provided the Radar remains in operation. Reason: In the interests of aviation safety *The Air Traffic Control Radar Mitigation Scheme (“ATCRMS”) is a scheme designed to mitigate the impact of the development upon the operation of the Primary Surveillance Radar at RAF Lossiemouth (“the Radar”) and the air traffic control operations of the MOD which are reliant upon the Radar. The ATCRMS shall set out the appropriate measures to be implemented to mitigate the impact of the development on the Radar and shall be in place for the lifetime of the development provided the Radar remains in operation. Page 208
Page 209
30 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk 6. Aviation Lighting (1) Prior to commencing construction of any wind turbine generators, anemometry masts, or deploying any construction equipment or temporal structure(s) 50 metres or more in height (above ground level) the Company must submit an aviation-lighting scheme for the approval of Scottish Ministers in conjunction with the Civil Aviation Authority and the Ministry of Defence defining how the development will be lit throughout its life to maintain civil and military aviation safety requirements as required under the Air Navigation order 2016 and, or, as determined necessary for aviation safety by the Ministry of Defence and, or, as directed by the Civil Aviation Authority. This should set out: (a) Details of any construction equipment and temporal structures with a total height of 50 metres or greater (above ground level) that will be deployed during the construction of wind turbine generators and details of any aviation warning lighting that they will be fitted with. (b) The locations and heights of all wind turbine generators in the development identifying those that will be fitted with aviation warning lighting identifying the position of the lights on the wind turbine generators; the type(s) of lights that will be fitted and the performance specification(s) of the lighting type(s) to be used. (2) Thereafter, the Company must exhibit such lights as detailed in the approved aviation lighting scheme. The lighting installed will remain operational for the life time of the development. Reason: In the interest of aviation safety. Page 209
Page 210
31 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Annex 2 part 2 - Deemed planning permission conditions 7. Commencement of development (1) The development must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date of this permission. (2) Written confirmation of the intended date of Commencement of Development shall be provided to the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month before that date. Reason: To comply with section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. 8. Details of the turbines (1) No development shall commence until the external finish and colour of the turbines and any anemometry masts have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. No development shall commence until the Planning Authority has approved in writing the sound power and tonality of the turbine model selected. Thereafter, the turbines/anemometry masts shall be installed in accordance with the approved details. (2) All wind turbine blades shall rotate in the same direction. (3) No wind turbine or anemometry mast shall have any text, sign or logo displayed on any external surface of the wind turbines/anemometry mast unless approved in advance in writing by the Planning Authority or if required by law. Reason: To ensure that the environmental impacts of the turbines forming part of the Development conform to the impacts of the candidate turbines assessed in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report and in the interests of the visual amenity of the area. 9. Details of other infrastructure No development of the substation building, associated compounds, foul drainage provision, water supply, or any construction-compound boundary fencing, external lighting and parking areas shall commence until details of their external appearance, dimensions, and surface materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The development shall not proceed other than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the environmental impacts of the substation, control building, associated compounds and associated development forming part of the Development Page 210
Page 211
32 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk conform to the impacts assessed in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report and in the interests of the visual amenity of the area. 10. Decommissioning (1) Upon the expiration of a period of 35 years from Final Commissioning, the wind turbines shall be decommissioned and removed from the site. (2) No development shall commence unless and until a Provisional Decommissioning Method Statement (PDMS) has been submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The PDMS shall set out proposals for the removal of all surface elements of the Development except for the access tracks and the turbine foundations more than 1 metre below ground level. The PDMS shall provide for the restoration of the site following the removal of the Development and for the timing of all operations. (3) Not later than 24 months before the expiry of this permission a Decommissioning Method Statement in accordance with the principles of the Provisional Decommissioning Method Statement shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The Decommissioning Method Statement shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the Development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 11. Bond or other form of financial guarantee (1) No development shall commence unless and until the Company has delivered to the Planning Authority, a bond or other form of financial guarantee in terms reasonably acceptable to the Planning Authority which secures the anticipated cost of performance of the obligations contained in the Provisional Decommissioning Method Statement (“PDMS”) submitted in accordance with Condition 10. The bond or other form of financial guarantee shall thereafter be maintained in favour of the Planning Authority until the date of completion of all restoration and aftercare obligations. (2) The value of the bond or other form of financial guarantee shall be agreed between the Company and the Planning Authority or, failing agreement, determined (on application by either party) by a suitably qualified independent professional as being sufficient to meet the costs, taking into account any salvage value of the development infrastructure, of all decommissioning and restoration and aftercare obligations contained in the PDMS. (3) The value of the bond or other form of financial guarantee shall be reviewed by agreement between the Company and the Planning Authority or, failing Page 211
Page 212
33 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk agreement, determined (on application by either party) by a suitably qualified independent professional no less than every five years and increased or decreased to take account of any variation in costs of compliance with restoration and aftercare obligations and best practice prevailing at the time of each review. Reason: To secure the performance of the obligations of the Company as to decommissioning and removal of the Development as well as for any aftercare and restoration of the Development by ensuring that suitable financial provision has been made for the performance of those obligations in the event of the Company’s default. 12. Micrositing (1) The turbines shall be erected and the site tracks and other infrastructure constructed in the positions indicated in Figure 1.2 of the EIAR save that the location of any turbine, track or associated infrastructure may be varied from the indicated position without further recourse to the planning authority by up to 50 metres, subject to the following restrictions:- (a) No development shall take place until a finalised post-consent layout is approved in writing by the planning authority in consultation with SEPA, having regard to minimising the proposed development’s impact on peat. The approved layout may be varied with the consent of the planning authority in consultation with SEPA; (b) No development shall take place within 50 metres of any water course with the exception of any watercourse crossings; (c) The advice of the Ecological Clerk of Works has been sought before any such variation is made; (2) Furthermore, the position of Substation 2 may be varied to the position shown on AI Figure 1.2 (attached at Annex 3 – Part 2) or within 50 m of that position. Reason: to control environmental impacts while taking account of local ground conditions and to ensure the impact on peat is minimised such that the release of its embodied carbon is kept to a minimum. 13. Construction and Environmental Management Plan including Construction Method Statement (1) No Development shall commence until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan ((“CEMP”) which shall include a Construction Method Statement (“CMS”)) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Page 212
Page 213
34 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Planning Authority in consultation with NatureScot, RSPB and SEPA. The CEMP shall include:- (a) a site waste-management plan (dealing with all aspects of waste including forestry removal and forest waste other than peat produced during the construction period), including details of contingency planning in the event of accidental release of materials which could cause harm to the environment; (b) details of the formation of the construction compound, welfare facilities, any areas of hardstanding, turning areas, internal access tracks (including details of whether tracks are to be cut or floating), car parking, material stockpiles, oil storage, lighting columns, and any construction-compound boundary fencing; (c) details of borrow-pit excavation, including excavation times, any noise monitoring required, and proposals to address complaints relating to blasting noise and vibration; (d) ) a dust-management plan; (e) details of measures to be taken to prevent loose or deleterious material being deposited on the local road network including wheel-cleaning and lorry-sheeting facilities, and measures to clean the site entrances and the adjacent local road network; (f) a pollution-prevention and control method statement, including arrangements for the storage of oil and fuel on the site; (g) soil storage and management; (h) a peat-management plan including peat site investigation to identify areas where floating access track is to be constructed; (i) a drainage-management strategy, demonstrating how all surface water and waste water arising during and after development will be managed and prevented from polluting any watercourses or sources including assessment of risk to the private water supply to the dwelling called “Treetops”; (j) sewage treatment and disposal; (k) temporary site illumination; (l) the upgrading of the access into the site and the creation and maintenance of associated visibility splays; (m)the method of construction of access tracks including floating track design, and construction; (n) the method of construction of the crane pads; (o) the method of construction of the turbine foundations; (p) the method of working cable trenches; (q) ) the method of construction and erection of the wind turbines, anemometry and meteorological masts; (r) details of watercourse crossings; (s) post-construction restoration/reinstatement of the working areas not required during the operation of the Development, including construction access tracks, borrow pits, construction compound and other construction areas; Page 213
Page 214
35 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk (t) a wetland-ecosystems (Ground Water Dependent Terrestrial Systems) survey and mitigation plan; (u) a species-protection plan for goshawk, merlin, capercaillie, black grouse and Scottish crossbill; (v) an ornithological-monitoring plan; (w) a pre-construction and construction fish-monitoring programme; (x) a water-quality monitoring plan; (y) measures to protect the boundary stones marked on EIAR figure 9.1 as 16a- c and 20a-b during construction; and (z) details of all construction works on the site and the timing of these works. (2) The CEMP shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure that all construction operations are carried out in a manner that minimises their impact on road safety, amenity and the environment, and that the mitigation measures contained in the EIA Report accompanying the application, or as otherwise agreed, are fully implemented. 14. Construction traffic management (1) No development shall commence until a construction-traffic-management plan (“CTMP”) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority in consultation with Transport Scotland. The CTMP shall include the following:- (a) Information on materials, plant, equipment, components and labour required during construction as well as details of escorts for abnormal loads, access and egress arrangements for abnormal loads, concrete wagons and heavy goods vehicles (including potential out of hours deliveries) and a local signage scheme and the scheduling and timing of abnormal load movements. A communications protocol with stakeholders including the public will also be detailed; (b) A scheme for reviewing the condition of the section of road between the A96 / Reiket Lane Roundabout and the site access junction. This shall include requirements for before- and after-construction-traffic reviews of the road and verge infrastructure and shall outline how damage resulting from construction traffic shall be repaired and a programme for making good any damage. (2) The works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved CTMP. Reason: To ensure that construction activities will not have a detrimental effect on the road network or the safety of all road users. Page 214
Page 215
36 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk 15. Abnormal Load Access (1) No abnormal-load deliveries shall be made to site until the following have been provided to the planning authority and the planning authority in consultation with Transport Scotland has given its approval in writing to:- (a) an updated survey of the proposed route for abnormal loads on the trunk- and local-road network and any accommodation measures required including, but not limited to, the removal of street furniture, junction widening and traffic management; (b) a structural survey of the section of the abnormal-load delivery route from the A96 / Reiket Lane Roundabout through to the site access junction; (c) the documented results of a test run undertaken from the Port of Inverness through to the site access; and (d) details of the additional signing or temporary traffic-control measures necessary due to the size or length of any loads being delivered or removed during the delivery period of the wind-turbine construction materials. (2) The works shall thereafter be carried out as approved above in part (1) above. (3) Where intervention works are required to improve the structural capacity of infrastructure on the section of road referred to in letter (b) of this condition, these shall be delivered by the Company to the standard and specification approved by the planning authority (and the council in its role as roads authority). (4) The Roads Authority and Transport Scotland shall be invited to attend the test run referred to in letter (c) of this condition. (5) The details supplied in letter (d) of this condition must be provided by a traffic- management consultant whose appointment is approved by the planning authority in consultation with Transport Scotland. (6) The Company shall consult all affected road and structure authorities through the abnormal-load permitting process via the ESDAL portal. No abnormal load delivery shall be made to the site until the planning authority in consultation with Transport Scotland has confirmed that the consultation has been carried out to the appropriate standard. Reason: To ensure that abnormal loads can be transported in safety and to minimise the disruption to other road users, residents and businesses in the area. 16. Ecological Clerk of Works Page 215
Page 216
37 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk (1) No development shall commence unless and until an Ecological Clerk of Works (EcoW) approved by the Planning Authority has been appointed by the Company. The terms of the appointment shall:- (a) Impose a duty to monitor compliance with the ecological and hydrological commitments required in terms of conditions 12, 17 and 13 (“the EcoW Works”) and with legislation on the protection of the environment; (b) Require the EcoW to report to the Company’s nominated construction project manager and Planning Authority any incidences of non-compliance with the commitments monitored as part of the EcoW Works or with legislation for the protection of the environment at the earliest practical opportunity; and (c) Require the EcoW to submit a monthly report to the Planning Authority summarising works undertaken on site and incidents of micrositing in accordance with condition 11. (2) The EcoW shall be appointed on the approved terms throughout the period from Commencement of Development, throughout any period of construction activity, and for the duration of any period of post-construction restoration works approved as part of the Construction Environment Management Plan under condition 13. (3) No later than 18 months prior to decommissioning of the Development or the expiration of this consent (whichever is the earlier), the Company shall submit details of the terms of appointment by the Company of an independent EcoW throughout the decommissioning, restoration and aftercare phases of the Development to the Planning Authority for approval. The EcoW shall be appointed on the approved terms throughout the decommissioning, restoration and aftercare phases of the Development. Reason: To secure effective monitoring of and compliance with the environmental mitigation and management measures associated with the Development. 17. Habitat Management Plan (1) No development shall commence until a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with NatureScot, SEPA and RSPB. (2) The HMP shall set out proposals for the management of the habitat of the windfarm site for enhancement of habitat for capercaillie and woodland grouse during the periods of construction, operation and decommissioning of the Development and during the restoration of the site after the Development has been removed. Page 216
Page 217
38 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk (3) Unless otherwise approved in advance in writing with the Planning Authority, the approved HMP shall be implemented in full. Reason: In the interests of the protection of the habitats of those species identified in the EIA Report. 18. Programme of Archaeological Works (1) No development shall commence until an archaeological written scheme of investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. 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 WSI will be provided and agreed throughout the implementation of the programme of archaeological works. (2) Should the archaeological works reveal the need for post-excavation analysis, a post-excavation research design (PERD) for the analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition shall be submitted to the planning authority for its written approval. (3) The WSI and any PERD shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To safeguard and record the archaeological potential of the area. 19. Compensatory Planting No development shall commence unless and until a woodland compensatory planting plan (CPP) in accordance with the Scottish Government Control of Woodland Removal Policy (or such replacement as may be in place at the time that the CPP is submitted for approval) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Forestry Scotland (FS). The CPP shall provide details of the planting of woodland within the Site. The CPP shall include:- (a) The location and details of the proposed planting, timescales for implementation and its maintenance for the operational period of the Development; and (b) A silvicultural proposal for compensatory planting and a protection plan for the life of the development. Reason: to enable appropriate woodland removal to take place in accordance with the current Scottish Government Control of Woodland Removal Policy. 20. Construction Hours Page 217
Page 218
39 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk (1) Construction work shall only take place on the site between the hours of 07.00 to 19.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive and 07.00 to 16.00 on Saturdays, with no construction work taking place on a Sunday or on national public holidays or bank holidays (see definitions) other than concrete pouring if started within those hours, turbine erection and emergency works. The Company shall notify the Planning Authority of such works if carried out outside the permitted hours within two working days of their occurrence. (2) Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) movements to and from the site (excluding abnormal loads) during construction of the wind farm shall be limited to 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Friday, and 07.00 to 16.00 on Saturdays, with no HGV movements to or from site taking place on a Sunday or on national public holidays or bank holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. (3) Turbine delivery may be made out with these construction hours, where necessary, and as agreed in writing in advance with the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of local amenity. 21. Aviation Safety (1) Prior to the Commencement of Development the Company shall provide the Planning Authority and Ministry of Defence, Defence Geographic Centre with the following information:- (a) the date of the expected commencement of the erection of the wind turbine generators; (b) the date of the expected commencement of operation of any wind turbine generators; (c) the maximum height of any construction equipment to be used in the erection of the wind turbines generators; and (d) the position of the turbines and any masts in latitude and longitude. (2) The Company shall notify Ministry of Defence in writing of any changes to the information supplied in accordance with these requirements and of the completion of the construction of the Development. Reason: In the interests of aviation safety. 22. Noise (including Excess Amplitude Modulation) The rating level of noise immissions from the combined effects of the wind turbines hereby permitted (including the application of any tonal penalty), when determined in accordance with the attached Guidance Notes, shall not exceed the values for the Page 218
Page 219
40 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk relevant integer wind speed set out in or derived from Table 1 attached to these conditions and: (a) Within 21 days from receipt of a written request of the Planning Authority, following a complaint to it alleging noise disturbance at a dwelling, the Company shall, at its expense, employ an independent consultant and provide a written protocol to be approved by the Planning Authority. The protocol shall describe the procedure to assess the level and character of noise immissions from the wind farm at the complainant's property in accordance with the procedures described in the attached Guidance Notes. The written request from the Planning Authority shall set out as far as possible the time or meteorological conditions to which the complaint relates and time or conditions relating to tonal noise or excess amplitude modulation if applicable. Measurements to assess compliance with the noise limits shall be undertaken in accordance with the assessment protocol which shall be approved in writing by the Planning Authority. (b) The Company shall provide to the Planning Authority the independent consultant's assessment of the rating level of noise immissions undertaken in accordance with the protocol within two months of the date of the approval of the protocol by the Planning Authority. The assessment shall include all data collected for the purposes of undertaking the compliance measurements and analysis, such data to be provided in a format to be agreed with the Planning Authority. Certificates of calibration of the equipment shall be submitted to the Planning Authority with the report. (c) Where a further assessment of the rating level of noise immissions from the wind farm is required pursuant to Guidance Note 5 of the attached Guidance Notes, the Company shall submit a copy of the further assessment within 21 days of submission of the independent consultant's initial assessment unless otherwise agreed by the Planning Authority. Table 1: At all times – Noise limits expressed in dB LA90,10 minute and apply for standardised 10 m height wind speeds up to 12 m/s as determined within the site averaged over 10 minute periods LOCATION Noise Limit (dB LA90) Burn of Rothes 31 Heatherlea 34 Lynes 34 Knocknagore 33 Lyne of Knockando 32 Aldivonie 32 Table 2: Coordinate locations of the dwelling listed in Table 1 Page 219
Page 220
41 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk LOCATION Easting Northing Burn of Rothes 325273 847814 Heatherlea 322947 844545 Lynes 321693 844349 Knocknagore 318143 845004 Lyne of Knockando 317602 845267 Aldivonie 317063 845397 Note to Table 2: The geographical coordinate references are provided for the purpose of identifying the general location of dwelling to which the noise limits apply. Reason: To mitigate and monitor potential noise impacts from the Development. 23. Access Plan No development shall commence until an Access Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The Access Plan will include the consideration of the upgrade of the existing tracks, the formation of new tracks and other improvements to provide enhanced access opportunities and improvements to track surfaces across the proposed development area. Reason: to improve public access to the site. Page 220
Page 221
42 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Guidance Notes for Noise Condition – Condition 21 These notes are to be read with and form part of the planning condition on noise. The measured data is to be split into bins as described below. The rating level for each bin is the arithmetic sum of the wind farm noise level plus any tonal penalty applied in accordance with Note 3. Reference to ETSU-R-97 refers to the publication entitled "The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms" (1997) published by the Energy Technology Support unit (ETSU) for the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). IOAGPG is “A Good Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 for the Assessment and Rating of Wind Turbine Noise” or any update of that report current at the time of measurement. Note 1 – Data Collection (a) Values of the LA90,10-minute noise index should be measured in accordance with the IOAGPG. Measurements shall be undertaken in such a manner to enable a tonal penalty to be calculated and to capture data suitable for analysis of excess amplitude modulation for selected periods where a tonal or excess- amplitude-modulation assessment is required. (b) To enable compliance with the conditions to be evaluated, the Company shall continuously log arithmetic mean wind speed in metres per second (m/s) and arithmetic mean wind direction in degrees from north in each successive 10- minutes period in a manner to be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. The wind speed at turbine hub height shall be 'standardised' to a reference height of 10 metres as described in ETSU-R-97 at page 120 using a reference roughness length of 0.05 metres. It is this standardised 10 metre height wind speed data which are correlated with the noise measurements determined as valid. The Company shall continuously log arithmetic mean nacelle anemometer wind speed, arithmetic mean nacelle orientation, arithmetic mean wind direction as measured at the nacelle, arithmetic mean rotor revolutions per minute and whether each wind turbine is running normally during each successive 10-minutes period for each wind turbine on the wind farm. All 10- minute periods shall commence on the hour and in 10-minute increments thereafter synchronised with Universal Time (UT). Note 2 – Data Analysis (a) The independent consultant shall identify a sub-set of data having had regard to:- • the conditions (including time of day and corresponding wind directions and speeds) at times in which complaints were recorded; • the nature/description recorded in the complaints if available; • information contained in the written request from the local planning authority; • likely propagation effects (downwind conditions or otherwise); • the results of the tonality/excess-amplitude-modulation analysis where relevant. Page 221
Page 222
43
Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw,
Glasgow
www.scotland.gov.uk
In cases where it is possible to identify patterns of clearly different conditions in which
complaints have arisen additional sub-sets may be considered provided this does not
introduce unreasonable complexity in the analysis and can be justified by the
independent consultant.
(b) Within each of the sub-set(s) of data identified, data shall be placed into
separate 1 m/s wide wind speed bins.
Note 3 – Tonal Penalty
(a) Where, in accordance with the protocol, the noise contains or is likely to contain
a tonal component, a tonal audibility shall be calculated for each ten-minute
period using the following procedure.
(b) For each 10-minute period for which a tonal assessment is required this shall
be performed on noise immissions during 2-minutes of each 10-minute period.
The 2-minute periods should be spaced at 10-minute intervals provided that
uninterrupted uncorrupted data are available ("the standard procedure").
(c) For each of the 2-minute samples the tone level above audibility shall be
calculated by comparison with the audibility criterion given in Section 2.1 on
pages 104 -109 of ETSU-R-97. Samples for which the tones were below the
audibility criterion or no tone was identified, a value of zero audibility shall be
substituted. Where data for a ten-minute period are corrupted, that period shall
be removed from the tonal analysis.
(d) The tone level above audibility for each ten-minute period shall be placed in the
appropriate data sub-set and wind speed bin.
Note 4 – Amplitude Modulation
Within 21 days of a written request by the Local Planning Authority, following a
complaint to it from a resident alleging noise disturbance at the dwelling at which they
reside and where Excess Amplitude Modulation is considered by the Local Planning
Authority to be present in the noise immissions at the complainant’s property, the
Company shall submit a scheme, for the approval of the local planning authority,
providing for the further investigation and, as necessary, control of Excess Amplitude
Modulation. The scheme shall be based on best available techniques and shall be
implemented as approved.
Page 222Page 223
44 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Note 5 – Calculation of Rating Level (a) The LA90 sound pressure level for each data sub-set and wind speed bin is the arithmetic mean of all the 10 minute sound pressure levels within that data sub- set and wind speed bin except where data has been excluded for reasons which should be clearly identified by the independent consultant. The tonal penalty for each bin is the arithmetic mean of the separate 10-minute tonal audibility levels in the bin converted to a penalty in accordance with Fig 17 on page 104 of ETSU-R-97. The assessment level in each bin is normally the arithmetic sum of the bin LA90 and the bin tonal penalty. (b) If the assessment level in every bin lies at or below the values set out in the Table(s) attached to the conditions then no further action is necessary. In the event that the assessment level is above the limit(s) set out in the Tables attached to the noise conditions in any bin, the independent consultant shall undertake a further assessment of the rating level to correct for background noise so that the rating level relates to wind turbine noise immission only. Correction for background noise need only be undertaken for those wind speed bins where the assessment level is above the limit. (c) The Company shall ensure that all the wind turbines in the development are turned off for such periods as the independent consultant requires to undertake the further assessment. The further assessment shall be undertaken in accordance with the following steps:- i. Repeating the steps in Note 1, with the wind farm switched off, and determining the background noise (L3) in each bin as required in the protocol. At the discretion of the consultant and provided there is no reason to believe background noise would vary with wind direction, background noise in bins where there is insufficient data can be assumed to be the same as that in other bins at the same wind speed. ii. The wind farm noise (L1) in each bin shall then be calculated as follows where L2 is the measured level with turbines running but without the addition of any tonal penalty: 𝐿𝐿1 = 10𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙�10𝐿𝐿2 10⁄ − 10𝐿𝐿3 10⁄ � iii. The rating level shall be calculated by adding the tonal penalties to the derived wind farm noise L1 in that bin. iv. If the rating level after adjustment for background noise contribution and adjustment for tonal penalties in every bin lies at or below the values set out in the Tables attached to the condition at all wind speeds then no further action is necessary. If the rating level at any integer wind speed exceeds the values set out in the Table(s) attached to the condition then the development fails to comply with the planning condition in the circumstances represented by that bin. Page 223
Page 224
45 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk Definition of terms in conditions and related guidance notes "The Application" means the application submitted by the Company on 1 February 2019. "Bank Holiday" means: • New Year's Day, unless it is a Sunday, in which case, 3rd January; • 2nd January, unless it is a Sunday, in which case 3rd January; • Good Friday; • The first Monday in May; • The first Monday in August; • 30th November, Sunday or, if it is a Saturday or Sunday, the first Monday following that day; • Christmas Day, if it is not a Sunday, or if it is a Sunday, 27th December; and • Boxing Day, unless it is a Sunday, in which case 27th December. "Commencement of Development" means the date on which Development shall be taken as having begun in accordance with section 27 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. "the Company" means Rothes III Limited, company registration number SC307540 and registered address C/o Harper Macleod LLP, The Ca'd'oro, Glasgow, G1 3PE or such other person for the time being entitled to the benefit of the consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. "The Development" means Rothes III Wind Farm as described in part 1 of Annex 1 and authorised by this consent and deemed planning permission. "dwelling" means a building within Use Class 9 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 which lawfully exists or had planning permission at the date of this consent and deemed planning permission. “Excess Amplitude Modulation” means the modulation of aerodynamic noise produced at the frequency at which a blade passes a fixed point and occurring in ways not anticipated by ETSU-R-97, The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms, at page 68. “HES” means Historic Environment Scotland. "Final Commissioning" means the earlier of (a) the date on which electricity is exported to the grid on a commercial basis from the last of the wind turbines forming part of the development erected in accordance with this consent; or (b) the date 18 months after the date of First Commissioning, unless a longer period is agreed in writing in advance by the Planning Authority. Page 224
Page 225
46 Scottish Government, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow www.scotland.gov.uk "First Commissioning" means the date on which electricity is first exported to the grid on a commercial basis from any of the wind turbines forming part of the development. "National Public Holiday" means Easter Monday and the third Monday in September. “NatureScot” means Scottish Natural Heritage now operating as NatureScot. “Planning Authority” means Moray Council or any successor as planning authority. “SEPA” means the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Page 225
Page 226
Page 226
Page 227
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: Rothes III W ind Farm Dallas Planning Application Ref Number: 24/01171/S36 Location Plan Applicant Name: Rothes III Limited Appendix 3 Item 11 Page 227
Page 228
Site Location Page 228
Page 229
Turbine Details 16/01664/APP Page 229
Page 230
View Point plan 16/ Page 230
Page 231
View Point 10 16/ Page 231
Page 232
View Point 11 16/ Page 232
Page 233
REPORT TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: EMPLOYMENT LAND AUDIT 2024 BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 This report summarises the employment land supply in Moray and asks the Committee to agree the final version of the Moray Employment Land Audit 2024. 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. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Committee; (i) note the employment land supply in Moray; (ii) approve the finalised Moray Employment Land Audit 2024, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 NPF4 was adopted on 13 February 2023 and now forms part of local development plans (LDP’s). NPF4 requires LDP’s to allocate sufficient land for business and industry to ensure that there is a suitable range of sites that meet current market demand, location, size, and quality in terms of accessibility and services and that it is reviewed regularly to ensure that there is a sufficient supply to meet national and regional targets. The levels of effective/marketable employment land and take-up of land are National Headline Indicators returned annually in the Planning Performance Framework (PPF) to the Scottish Government. Item 12 Page 233
Page 234
3.2 The spatial principles within NPF4 seek to support delivery of productive places that have a greener, fairer, and more inclusive wellbeing economy. The intent of Policy 26 Business and Industry is to encourage, promote and facilitate business and industry uses and enable alternative ways of working. NPF4 states LDPs should allocate sufficient land for business and industry, taking into account business and industry land audits, in particular ensuring that there is a suitable range of sites that meet current market demand, location, size and quality in terms of accessibility and services. The LDP2027 Evidence Report identified the land requirements within each market area as well as highlighting the issues around delivery of serviced land and pressure on land for other uses. 3.3 The Moray Employment Land Audit (ELA) has three key functions:- demonstrate the availability of a range and choice of marketable employment sites; provide an overview of the supply and availability of employment land across the LDP area; and provide an evidence base for the monitoring and review of policies and proposals within the LDP. 3.3 The audit includes four categories of land supply:- Established – This includes all undeveloped land allocated for industrial/business/employment use in the adopted LDP or land that has a valid planning approval for these uses. Marketable/Effective – Land that as well as meeting business requirements, has a secure planning status, can be serviced within 5 years and is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. Constrained – Land that is not considered developable within 5 years due to issues such as planning difficulties, ownership issues, infrastructure provision and physical constraints. Immediately Available – Land that has planning permission, is serviced and has no major constraints to immediate development. 3.4 A copy of the audit will be submitted to the Economic Development and Infrastructure Services Committee for their information due to their interest in industrial and commercial development. 4. CONSULTATION 4.1 The draft audit was made available for consultation on the Council’s website and sent to internal and external consultees. Comments were received from Springfield Real Estate Management noting the limited availability of plots at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park with many of these now let or under offer and it was noted there continued to be demand including for larger sites. Sites that are let or under offer remain shown in the supply until construction commences. However, the level of interest and take up at I7 Barmuckity/ Elgin Page 234
Page 235
Business Park is reflected within Employment Land Audit text with the need to bring forward serviced sites to maintain supply identified. 5. AUDIT FINDINGS 5.1 The 2024 Audit is provided in full as APPENDIX 1 to the report. The audit identifies that there is 330.1 hectares (ha) of Gross Established Employment Land Supply. This is an increase of 32.18 ha from the 2023 audit which reflects the addition of two new sites which have both recently been granted planning permission. The two sites included are the expansion of James Jones adjacent to the I1 designation in Mosstodloch and a malt production facility at Greens of Rothes on the immediate settlement boundary. These sites are not within the LDP but are being included within the ELA due to their proximity to existing designations and being adjacent to the settlement boundary. As proposed they would be developed for a single user and are therefore categorised in the ELA as constrained as the land would unlikely to available to anyone other than that specific user (i.e. they are not part of the general supply open to be let/purchased by a variety of potential occupiers). 5.2 The main supply of employment land continues to be within the Elgin, Forres and Buckie Market Areas, with a more limited supply in Keith and a very limited supply in Speyside. A summary for each Market Area can be found on page 5 of the Audit. 5.3 98.68 ha (net) of land, across 20 sites, is classed as Marketable/Effective. This is a decrease of 1.19 ha compared to 2023. The decrease is due to construction activity at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park. The distribution of Marketable/Effective sites reflects the settlement hierarchy within the MLDP, however there continues to be a shortage of effective sites within Speyside. 5.4 The Marketable/Effective supply is split with 61.61ha suitable for general industrial and 36.59 ha suitable for proposals that require a higher amenity setting usually within the class 4 Business category. The Elgin and Buckie market areas have relatively healthy supplies of general industrial land providing at least the equivalent of 15 years supply. In Keith the general industrial supply is more limited however there is a LONG allocation that could be drawn down if there is shortage. It is noted that in areas around Moray, particularly around Keith, there is considerable pressure for renewable energy developments. There has historically been a significant shortage of general industrial land in Speyside. This means there is a reliance on windfall proposals to accommodate demand. In Forres there is a significant shortage of general industrial land with only 2.75ha of land available at BP1 Forres Enterprise Park. This shortage of general industrial land requires to be urgently addressed and will be explored through the next LDP process. 5.5 The amount of land Immediately Available is 31.94 ha (net) across 5 sites. Take up at I7 Elgin Business Park/Barmuckity has been very good as reflected in previous audits. There is now limited availability with many of these plots now developed, sold or under offer. It is therefore anticipated that the level of immediately available land in the Elgin Market Area will reduce significantly over the next few years. Page 235
Page 236
5.6 There continues to be a restricted choice of sites in the Immediately Available Land Supply. This is a particular issue in Forres and Speyside. The availability of Immediately Available land is a Key Measure in the Moray Economic Strategy. To maintain a supply of serviced sites it is necessary to work together with partners towards bringing other sites forward through the LDP process as a failure to do so could inhibit economic growth 5.7 104.67ha (net) across 17 sites is classed as constrained. This means approximately a third of the Established Supply has some form of constraint that is likely to prevent the land being developed in the next five years. 48.06ha of land across 6 sites is classed as a LONG designation and would be capable of being bought forward should the need arise as set out within Policy DP3 Long Term Land Reserves within the MLDP 2020. 5.8 In the last year, 0.52 ha of land was developed and 4.3 ha of land is under construction. These figures do not represent all building activity only that on designated sites or windfall sites that are not restricted to a single user. 6. OTHER DEVELOPMENT 6.1 The employment land audit focusses on development within designated LDP sites and any windfall sites unless they are constrained to a single user. Although constrained to a single user, the 2024 audit includes two additional sites outwith existing LDP designations. This is on the basis that one is an extension to an existing designation and the other is an extension to a settlement boundary which will likely be reflected in the next LDP. 6.2 Although not highlighted in the audit it is worth noting that several large developments are currently under construction or are proposed on undesignated sites in rural locations which are significant contributors to the economy in Moray. These include a new distillery at Miltonduff, the re- development of the tree nursery at Newton, and whisky storage at land west of Glenrothes Distillery. There is also significant development pressure around Portgordon in relation to the maltings and the requirement for storage facilities. There is increasingly significant pressure from the energy sector including battery energy storage systems, anaerobic digesters, and development to support the National Grid. This has impacted on some industrial designations and rural areas. This pressure is particularly prevalent in the Keith area but there has been more interest in other towns such as Elgin and Buckie. 6.3 These trends will be monitored through the Annual Monitoring Report with the implications for policy and designations considered in the preparation of the new LDP. 7. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) The Employment Land Audit is a key part of monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of the LDP, which delivers Corporate and Community Planning objectives. Ensuring sufficient provision of Page 236
Page 237
effective employment land supports a growing and diverse economy which will provide a stable, sustainable employment base. (b) Policy and Legal The preparation of the annual Employment Land Audit is a requirement of NPF4 to monitor the effectiveness of the LDP and ensure an effective supply of employment land is maintained. (c) Financial implications None identified at present. (d) Risk Implications Risk that insufficient provision of effective employment land limits inward investment and expansion opportunities and risks an unplanned approach being taken to development. (e) Staffing Implications Preparation of the annual Employment Land Audit is part of the workload of the Strategic Planning & Development section. (f) Property The Employment Land Audit includes industrial estates and sites owned by the Council. The Council’s Estates section were consulted on the draft audit. (g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact There are no equalities issues arising from this report as it is to inform the Committee on monitoring of land supply. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts Moray Local Development Plan policies seek to ensure that biodiversity is enhanced and all new buildings reduce carbon emissions. Development proposals are required to maximise connections and routes for pedestrians/cyclists including connections to active travel routes thereby reducing carbon emissions associated with vehicles, create green and blue infrastructure and incorporate and enhance biodiversity through planting and other mechanisms. This supports the principle of local living by providing opportunities for people to access employment and reducing the need to travel by car. National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) has introduced new national policies to bring significant changes to the planning system including reducing carbon emissions in new development, enhancing biodiversity and a much greater focus on brownfield redevelopment. (i) Consultations Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Asset Manager (Commercial Buildings), the Equal Opportunities Officer, Head of Financial Services and Lissa Rowan (Committee Services Officer) have been consulted and their comments have been incorporated into this report. Page 237
Page 238
8. CONCLUSION 8.1 NPF4 requires LDP’s to allocate sufficient land for business and industry and that this is reviewed regularly to ensure that there is a sufficient supply to meet national and regional targets. The levels of effective/marketable employment land and take-up of land are National Headline Indicators returned annually in the Planning Performance Framework (PPF) to the Scottish Government. 8.2 The Employment Land Audit 2024 identifies that there is 98.68ha (net) of Marketable/Effective Employment Land, of which 31.94 ha (net) is Immediately Available. Issues are identified with the restricted choice of sites across all settlements, a shortage of land in the Speyside market area, a shortage of general industrial land at Forres, and the likely impacts of high take up at Elgin Business Park/Barmuckity (I7) on future supplies of Immediately Available Land. Author of Report: Keith Henderson Planning Officer, Strategic Planning and Development Background Papers: Ref: Page 238
Page 239
Moray Employment Land Audit OCTOBER 2024 Appendix 1 Item 12 Page 239
Page 240
For further information, please contact: keith.henderson@moray.gov.uk Page 240
Page 241
Employment Land Audit 2024 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Audit The Moray Employment Land Audit provides an overview of the supply and availability of employment land across the Moray Local Development Plan area. The audit is an annual document and includes figures for take up and sites under construction. The audit provides an evidence base for the monitoring and review of policies and proposals included within the Local Development Plan. In addition, it can help to identify areas where further analysis and investigation is required. The baseline against which information is analysed is 1st January 2024. The information contained in the Employment Land Audit will also be of use to businesses, developers, and other organisations with an interest in employment land in Moray. 1.2 Methodology The audit is prepared from information gathered by Council planning officers through monitoring of the development plan, planning approvals and individual inspections. All employment sites in the existing local development plan have been recorded in a data base, unless the site has been built out in its entirety. In addition to sites allocated in the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 any windfall sites with planning consent for employment uses have been added to the database unless these are constrained to a single user (e.g. a distillery). It is noted that land with buildings that are vacant are not included in the audit nor are redeveloped sites. Once sites have been identified officers undertake a review of planning applications and collect information such as ownership, proposed use etc. for each site. Officers also undertake site visits to monitor development activity. This information is then updated in the data base. The data is then analysed to produce the audit report. Page 241
Page 242
2 Employment Land Audit 2024 2. Background 2.1 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) NPF4 was adopted on 13 February 2023 and now forms part of local development plans and sets out the Scottish Government’s policies in relation to supporting economic development in Scotland. This replaces NPF3 and Scottish Planning Policy and since its adoption it forms part of the current Local Development Plan. NPF4 requires LDP’s to allocate sufficient land for business and industry, taking into account business and industry land audits, to ensure that there is a suitable range of sites that meet current market demand, location, size, and quality in terms of accessibility and services. This allocation should take account of local economic strategies and broader objectives of delivering a low carbon and net zero economic recovery, and a fairer and more inclusive economy. NPF4 requires LDP’s to identify suitable sites for business, general industrial and storage and distribution uses and to enable alternative ways of working such as home working, live-work units and micro businesses. The ELA is undertaken annually to monitor the location, size, planning status, existing use, neighbouring land uses and any significant land use issues of sites within the existing business land supply which is fed into the review of the LDP. 2.2 Moray Local Development Plan NPF4 and the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 now form the statutory Development Plan for Moray. LDP’s already adopted will continue to be part of the development plan and existing LDP land allocations will be maintained. The Moray Local Development Plan 2020 was adopted on 27 July 2020 and designates land for employment uses within towns. Sites from the 2020 plan were first included in the 2020 audit. The adoption of NPF4 introduces a change to the requirements for Local Development Plans given that there is now a suite of national policies forming part of the Local Development Plan for which planning applications will be determined against. The Moray Local Development Plan 2020 already sets out the employment land policies for the Planning Authority (excluding the Cairngorms National Park area) related to economic development. These seek to safeguard employment land and support development of employment uses on designated sites. The policies also look at the types of uses that will be supported on designated sites. A more flexible approach to rural business proposals is provided for, with policy criteria used to ensure the most appropriate locations are supported in rural areas. Page 242
Page 243
Employment Land Audit 2024 3 2.3 Moray Economic Strategy and Moray Economic Partnership (MEP)'s Economic Recovery Plan. The Moray Economic Strategy was published in November 2022. The strategy takes account of changes in the economic landscape since 2012. It also reflects the work undertaken for the emerging Moray Growth Deal. The strategy is for the period 2022-2032 and maintains the overall objective to grow and diversify the economy and focuses on achieving four outcomes, one of which is supporting the economy through the provision of employment land for businesses of all sizes to locate. 2.4 Moray 10 Year Plan - Local Outcome Improvement Plan (LOIP) One of four priorities within the Moray Community Planning Partnership Local Outcomes Improvement Plan is “Developing a diverse, inclusive and sustainable economy.” Whilst employment land supply is not a performance indicator within the Local Outcomes Improvements Plan land supply is important for achieving outcomes. 2.5 Demand for Employment Land Discussion with stakeholders as part of the Moray Business Property Needs Study (completed by Ryden LLP for Moray Council) found that demand in the area is generally focused on smaller units from small local businesses however there also needs to be larger sites available for inward investment and scale- up. From the business survey completed as part of the study, 73% of respondents had a requirement to expand/re-locate with the majority seeking industrial property. Cost was a key consideration in deciding on new premises as was digital connectivity, size and energy efficiency. A lack of suitable properties was raised as a constraint by those who have started to look for new/additional premises. Whisky distilling has seen considerable expansion over recent years, including bonded warehousing and this demand is likely to be continue and increase. It was also found the organisations such as Orbex and the Ministry of Defence were capitalising on growth within the aerospace sector creating demand within the sector, often with large space requirements. There is significant opportunity associated with the renewable energy sector with expected growth in on and off shore wind and hydrogen developments in the area. There was also considered to be demand for larger bespoke premises including from the transportation sector. It was noted that currently it was unfeasible because of construction costs for businesses to build their own large bespoke premises and that developers are not building these units in the area currently. As a result, some companies were reported to be experiencing restricted growth within unsuitable premises. Discussion also considered that there could be more support for SMEs to enable them to gradually expand and step up their space requirements. Some businesses were considered to be “battening down the hatches” following impacts from the Covid 19 pandemic, Brexit and the continuing impacts of the energy crisis and inflation. This was seen to be particularly the case for retail and hospitality. Other issues that were raised included where demand will be met in Elgin was raised in discussion given that the majority of sites at Elgin Business Park/Barmuckity are developed, sold or under offer. Sufficient land and buildings require to be available in to facilitate wider economic development and to support the vision of the Moray Economic Strategy and support economic recovery. Page 243
Page 244
4 Employment Land Audit 2024 3. Employment Land Supply Several categories of land supply are identified in the audit. Definitions for these are provided in section 5. Detailed information on the established, constrained, effective and immediately available sites is provided in Appendix 2. 3.1 Established Employment Land Supply The established employment land supply for Moray is shown in figure 1. There has been a decrease in the gross established supply by 0.63 ha since 2021. This decrease is due to development at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park and I2 Chanonry Industrial Estate, and Ashgrove (Elgin). Figure 1 Established Employment Land Supply (2024) (Figures in hectares) Gross Established Net Established Number of Sites 330.1 251.43 37 Page 244
Page 245
Employment Land Audit 2024 5 The established employment land supply is broken down in figure 2 by market area. Figure 2 Established Employment Land Supply by town (2024) (Figures in hectares) Town Gross Established Net Established Number of Sites Elgin Market Area 202.03 155.44 19 Elgin 124.18 94.15 11 Lossiemouth 12.8 10.24 1 Mosstodloch 63.44 49.95 6 Troves 1.61 1.1 1 Forres 55.48 34.77 4 Buckie Market Area 43.96 37.46 6 Buckie 43.15 36.81 5 Cullen 0.81 0.65 1 Keith 10.58 9.12 5 Speyside Market Area 17.05 14.64 3 Aberlour 1 1 1 Rothes 17.05 13.64 2 ELGIN MARKET AREA -There has been an increase in the established gross and net supply within the Elgin Market area compared to 2023 with the addition of a new site to reflect the approved expansion of the James Jones sawmill in Mosstodloch. However, this site is marked as constrained as it is for a single user. Across the HMA there has been few completions. Two plots are currently under construction at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park FORRES MARKET AREA - There has been no change to the established supply in the Forres Market Areas compared to 2023. BUCKIE MARKET AREA - There has been no change to the established supply in the Buckie Market Areas compared to 2023. KEITH MARKET AREA - There has been a decrease of 0.52ha of the gross and net supply due to the occupation of units at Westerton Road. SPEYSIDE MARKET AREA - There has been an increase in the established supply (16.3 ha) to reflect the approval for a malt production facility at Greens of Rothes. However, this site is marked as constrained as it is for a single user. Page 245
Page 246
6 Employment Land Audit 2024 \ The established employment land supply has also been broken down by size of site to provide an indication of the range of size of sites available. Figure 3: Established Employment Land Supply by site size (2024) (Figures in hectares) Site area Net Established Number of Sites 0 - 1ha 4.23 6 1 - 5 ha 27.43 14 >5 ha 219.77 17 The land supply is broken down by the type of employment uses that are considered suitable on the site. The greatest proportion of land is suitable for Class 5 General Industrial uses (and also Class 4 Business and Class 6 Storage and Distribution. On some designations the whole area may be capable of accommodating higher amenity or a greater mix of uses but on some designations distinct areas within a site are identified. These tend to be uses within Class 4 that require a higher amenity setting or due to the location close to residential development general industrial uses would not be suitable. On some larger sites a greater mix of uses (for example Class 1 Shops where ancillary to main use, Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industrial, Class 6 Storage or Distribution, Class 7 Hotel and Hostels and Use Class 11 Assembly and Leisure) are identified on part of the site to help support delivery of the site as a whole. A breakdown of the type of sites is shown in figures 4 and 5 below. It is noted that some sites will be counted in both the General Industrial and High Amenity figures as on larger sites part of the site may be identified for a greater mix of uses. Figure 4: Net supply by type (2024). Figures in hectares Net Area Number of Sites General Industrial 186.06 30 High Amenity 54.59 12 Page 246
Page 247
Employment Land Audit 2024 7 Figure 5: Net supply by Market Area and type (2024). Figures in hectares Market Area General Industrial Number of Sites High Amenity Number of Sites Elgin 114.63 17 32.71 6 Elgin 58.46 9 27.59 5 Lossiemouth 5.12 1 5.12 1 Mosstodloch 49.95 6 Troves 1.1 1 Forres 21.3 3 10.27 1 Buckie 30.44 4 7.02 2 Buckie 30.44 4 6.37 1 Cullen 0.65 1 Keith 6.05 4 3.59 2 Speyside 13.64 2 1 1 Aberlour 1 1 Rothes 13.64 2 3.2 Marketable/Effective Employment Land Supply The marketable and effective employment land supply in 2024 is shown in figure 6. Overall the marketable/effective area has decreased by 1.19 hectares compared to 2023. The number of effective sites has decreased by one due to the occupation of units at Westerton Road, Keith and construction activity on two sites at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park. Figure 6: Marketable/Effective Employment Land Supply (2024) Marketable/Effective (Net figure in hectares) Number of Sites 98.68 20 Page 247
Page 248
8 Employment Land Audit 2024 The marketable/effective employment land supply has been broken down by market area in figure 7. Annual requirements established through historic demand studies, build out rates recorded in previous audits, and from discussions with HIE and Moray Council Estates have been used to provide the estimated number of years supply available. It is noted that previously it was desirable to have a five year effective land supply at all times and therefore previous Local Development Plans sought to designate a minimum of 10 year land supply. However, to ensure a generous supply, increase choice and the prospect of a 10 year replacement period for future Local Development Plans, the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 sought to designate a minimum of 15 years supply. Figure 7 Marketable/Effective Employment Land Supply by market area (2024) Market Area Marketable/ Number Estimated Available Supply Effective (Net of Sites Annual in years figure in hectares) Requirements Elgin 55.84 9 2.8 20 years Forres 13.02 1 0.8 16 years Buckie 21.69 3 0.8 28 years Keith 4.78 3 0.4 13 years Speyside 1.7 2 0.4 4 years The level of effective supply in Elgin, and Buckie is currently good. However, the choice of sites is limited across all market areas. It is noted that within in Elgin there are only small areas now available within I6 Linkwood East and I2 Chanonry. The level of interest and recent planning applications at I7 Barmuckity also suggests availability will be limited in the future as these applications build out. In Forres whilst there is a good supply of land this is all at BP1 Forres Enterprise Park. Whilst Keith has less than 15 years supply there is a LONG allocation that could be brought forward, however there is a limited choice of sites in Keith with these primarily being in the Westerton Road area. There is a shortage of sites in Speyside and finding suitable sites has been an ongoing issue. Removal of a site in the Examination of the 2020 Local Development Plan means there will be a reliance on windfall proposals within this area. The effective land supply is broken down by the type of employment uses that are considered suitable on the site. The greatest proportion of land is suitable for Class 5 General Industrial uses (and also Class 4 Business and Class 6 Storage or Distribution). As set out above some sites are wholly or have areas that would be capable of accommodating higher amenity uses or a greater mix of uses. These tend to be uses within Class 4 that require a higher amenity setting or due to the location of the site close to residential development general industrial uses would not be suitable. On some larger sites areas that could accommodate a greater mix of uses (for example Class 1 Shops where ancillary to main use, Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industrial, Class 6 Storage or Distribution, Class 7 Hotel and Hostels Page 248
Page 249
Employment Land Audit 2024 9 and Use Class 11 Assembly and Leisure) are identified to help support delivery of the site as a whole. A breakdown of the type of sites is shown in figures 8 and 9 below. It is noted that some sites will be counted in both the General Industrial and High Amenity figures as on larger sites part of the site may be identified for a greater mix of uses. Figure 8: Effective area by type (2024) Figures in hectares. Effective Area Number of Sites General Industrial 63.28 16 High Amenity 36.59 8 Figure 9: Effective area by Market Area and type (2024). Figures in hectares. Market Area General Industrial Number of Sites High Amenity Number of Sites Elgin 39.39 9 16.55 3 Elgin 25.49 7 16.55 3 Mosstodloch 12.8 1 Troves 1.1 1 Forres 2.75 1 10.27 1 Buckie 15.32 2 7.02 2 Buckie 15.32 2 6.37 1 Cullen 0.65 1 Keith 3.55 3 1.75 1 Speyside 0.6 1 1 1 Aberlour 1 1 Rothes 0.6 1 The Elgin and Buckie market areas have relatively healthy supplies of general industrial land providing the equivalent of around 15 years supply. In Forres there is a significant shortage of general industrial land and this requires to be urgently addressed. Only a small portion of the BP1 Forres Enterprise Park can accommodate general industrial uses. In Keith the general industrial supply is more limited however there is a LONG allocation that could be drawn down if there is shortage. There is, and has historically been, a significant shortage of general industrial land in Speyside. This means there is a reliance on windfall proposals to accommodate demand. Page 249
Page 250
10 Employment Land Audit 2024 3.3 Immediately Available The immediately available employment land supply in 2024 is shown in figure 10. The immediately available supply decreased by 1.69 ha compared to 2023. The decrease is due to construction activity at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park and a completion in Keith. As noted above, due to continued take up at I7 Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park it is anticipated that the level of immediately available land in the Elgin Market Area will reduce significantly over the next few years. Bringing forward and servicing new sites will be critical to maintaining supplies. Figure 10: Immediately available Employment Land Supply (2024) Immediately Available (Net figure in hectares) Number of Sites 31.94 5 3.4 LONG The Moray Local Development Plan 2020 included LONG employment sites for the first time. The LONG supply is set out in figure 11 below. These sites set out the direction of growth and assist in forward planning. LONG sites are designated at LONG3 Burnside of Birnie Elgin, LONG MU1 South of the A96, LONG 2 West of Mosstodloch, LONG 2 Westerton Road Keith and LONG2 March Road. Figure 11: LONG sites 2024 LONG (Net figure in hectares) Number of Sites 48.06 5 3.5 Constrained The established land supply that is subject to constraints is shown in figure 12. This has increased by 26.64 hectares since the 2023 audit due to the addition of two additional sites which reflect recent planning approvals. These are the James Jones expansion in Mosstodloch and the malt production facility at Greens of Rothes. Both are constrained due to them being for a single user. Page 250
Page 251
Employment Land Audit 2024 11 Figure 12: Constrained Employment Land Supply (2024) Constrained Supply (Net figure in hectares) Number of Sites 104.67 17 The constrained supply can be broken down into the type of constraints identified. Figure 13: Constrained Employment Land Supply by constraint (2024) (Net figures in hectares) Note some land may fall under more than one constraint. Constraint Type Constrained Supply Number of Sites Infrastructure 45.75 8 Ownership 40.79 6 Physical 61.98 11 3.6 Take up and Construction The number and area of proposals completed in the year to 1st January 2024 is shown in figure 14 below. This includes completion or occupation of sites at I7 Barmuckity, and units in Keith. This is a drop in construction from previous years (4.68 in 2021 and 4.74ha in 2022). While this may be the case a number of planning applications have been approved over the audit year and it is anticipated that take up of these will form part of the next audit. Figure 14 Employment land completed/taken up in year to 1st January 2024 Take up area (Gross figure in hectares) Number of Sites 0.52 1 The number and area of proposals under construction on the base date of 1st January 2024 is shown in figure 15 below. This is a decrease in construction activity compared to 2022 (4.7ha) and is similar to the level recorded in audits completed in 2015-2019 which ranged from 2.31ha to 5.25ha. Page 251
Page 252
12 Employment Land Audit 2024 Figure 15: Employment land under construction at 1st January 2024 Under Construction (Gross figure in hectares) Number of Sites 4.3 2 It is noted that this does not represent all building activity, and only that on designated sites or windfall sites that are not restricted to a single user. Other notable areas of activity primarily relate to expansion proposals of existing businesses, sites in the countryside and expansion of distilleries. 4. Conclusion The Employment Land Audit has been carried out in this format for several years allowing comparison to be made to previous audits. It is clear that the emphasis on employment land continues to be within the main settlements of Elgin, Forres, Buckie and Keith. However, Mosstodloch is also the focus of a large proportion of the supply in the Elgin Market Area. The shortage of general industrial land in the Forres Market Area is a significant issue that requires to be addressed. There is a significant shortage of land and sites within the Speyside Market Areas which means there is a reliance on windfall sites to accommodate demand. Around 32% (104.haha) of the Established Supply has some form of constraint that is likely to prevent the land being brought forward in the next five years and has not changed from the 2024 audit. This takes into account the addition of two new sites in Mosstodloch and Rothes which are marked as being constrained as they are for a single user. There continues to be a limited choice of serviced sites/immediately available sites across all settlements with only 5 sites being classed in this category. A number of consents were approved on identified sites in 2023 along with a number of sites which are now deemed to be under construction. It is anticipated that several of these will be implemented and brought forward which will be reflected in next years ELA. The availability of Immediately Available employment land is a Key Measure in the Moray Economic Strategy and will be a focus for the next Moray Local Development Plan. In figure 16 is a summary by market area. Page 252
Page 253
Employment Land Audit 2024 13 Elgin (including Lossiemouth and Mosstodloch) Forres Development at Barmuckity/Elgin Business Park (I7) is progressing with several plots now completed and others currently under construction. There continues to be significant interest in the remaining plots, including some of the larger plots. The 14 starter units at the back of the site are now complete. The high levels of take up at Elgin Business Park/Barmuckity (I7) suggest the level of Immediately Available land will reduce significantly over the next few years and therefore bringing new sites forward and servicing these is critical to maintaining a supply of serviced sites. At Chanonry (I2) and Linkwood East (I6) there continues to small areas of immediately available land but this has reduced to only a couple of small plots on each site available. At Chanonry there is a private development of 18 starter units that have been built with several now occupied. At OPP4 Ashgrove three general industrial and storage and distribution buildings (including ancillary trade counters) have been built and occupied. Bringing forward other sites within Elgin will be critical to maintaining a choice of immediately available sites. To the north of Elgin Newfield (I8) is being actively marketed increasing choice of sites across Elgin. Land has been identified at Burnside of Birnie (I16/LONG3) to meet future demand. Choice of sites is severely restricted in Lossiemouth, only Sunbank OPP1 or windfall opportunities are available. The topography and ground conditions at Sunbank OPP1 are considered to constrain the site. In Mosstodloch additional land is identified at I3 West of Mosstodloch and there are discussions ongoing with the landowner regarding the site. There are issues with delivery of higher quality business land. Strong demand continues for industrial buildings. Very small choice of marketable/effective sites given settlement size and population, but reasonable areas available at the BP1 Enterprise Park. I4 Easter Newforres is understood to have high infrastructure costs that will likely require public sector funding support to make this site effective. There is continued demand for small offices at Horizon Scotland at BP1 Enterprise Park. Consent has also been granted for two small business units in the north west of BP1. The road extension has opened up an area for development to the south east of BP1. Figure 16 Market Area Summary Page 253
Page 254
14 Employment Land Audit 2024 The remaining land at Waterford (I2) is now constrained due to restricted access. Strong demand, particularly for smaller units and need for serviced employment land to allow businesses to develop and relocate from smaller units. Small choice of marketable sites but reasonable areas available. Significant area immediately available at I3 Rathven Industrial Estate. Redevelopment opportunities at harbour. Small site available at Cullen. The Moray Local Development Plan identifies a reserve of industrial land at March Road (LONG2) that could be brought forward if need arose. Very small choice of marketable sites focussed around the Westerton Road area. Issues with providing readily accessible employment sites. Demand for smaller units but greatest demand is currently for battery storage and development linked to Blackhillock where a masterplan for this area is currently being progressed. An energy management facility that was previously noted as being under construction on the I3 Westerton Road East designation is now complete. A cooperage including office staff facilities storage yard and associated works was approved on the I4 Bridge Street designation. This development has not yet commenced. Opportunities for higher amenity employment uses promoted within a mixed use site to the south of Banff Road (MU). Severely limited choice of designated sites. There is a need for sites for small local businesses in Speyside. The Moray Local Development Plan 2020 identifies a site at Speyview (R2) where 1ha of the housing site is identified for employment uses. The removal of a site during the Examination of the Moray Local Development Plan 2020 means there is a reliance on windfall proposals supported through policy. Forres Buckie Keith Speyside Page 254
Page 255
Employment Land Audit 2024 15 5. Glossary Constrained Employment Land Supply This includes land for example, that has planning difficulties, land subject to ownership difficulties (e.g. multiple ownership/unwilling sellers), land with insufficient infrastructure provision, etc. This category therefore includes much of the land in the Established Employment Land Supply that is not Marketable (see below). Employment Land This includes land for general industrial and business/office use, storage and distribution uses, business parks and specialist technology parks including research and development uses. This comprises Classes 4 (Business), 5 (General Industrial) and 6 (Storage or Distribution) of the 1997 Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order, but is not exclusive to these uses. Established Employment Land Supply This includes all undeveloped land that is allocated for industrial/business/ employment use in the adopted Local Plan or has a valid planning approval for these uses. Gross This refers to the total area in (hectares) within the boundary of the site. Immediately Available Land Supply This is marketable/effective land that currently has planning permission, is serviced and has no other major constraints to immediate development. This definition is useful in the assessment of whether demand for land is being adequately met. Marketable/Effective Land Supply This is land that as well as meeting business requirements, has a secure planning status, can be serviced within 5 years, is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport as defined by SPP. Land that is subject to user restrictions or that is held as ‘option land’ for existing companies’ own expansion cannot be considered to be marketable. Such land is not constrained. Net The total area of land excluding roads, landscaping etc. As the physical attributes of a site and surrounding land uses will determine the area suitable for development and the level of landscaping required the net area will vary. For sites that are partially complete, the net area given is the area that is actually available to be developed. For sites that are undeveloped the net area is estimated. This estimate is based on an assumption that on average, 20% of available land will be taken up with roads, landscaping etc. If relevant site information is available, this is taken into account in the estimate. Take-Up The take up figure includes all proposals where development has been completed within the particular year. Under Construction This is the area of land under construction at the base date. These sites are not yet complete. The area under construction area is not included within the land supply or built totals. Page 255
Page 256
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/AB/E/005 Location: Speyview Grid Ref: 325631 841602 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ABERLOUR Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/R2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1 Net Established: 1 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 1 Reference: M/BC/E/001 Location: High Street (W) Grid Ref: 342942 864437 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: BUCKIE Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 6.37 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/MU LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 6.37 Net Established: 6.37 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 6.37 Page 256
Page 257
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/BC/E/004 Location: March Road (SE) Grid Ref: 343984 865510 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: BUCKIE Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 14.55 Immediately Available: 7.95 LPR: 20/I3 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 17.69 Net Established: 14.55 Development (Ha): Built: 3.14 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 14.55 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/BC/E/005 Location: Maltings Grid Ref: 343676 865357 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: BUCKIE Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I4 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 8.5 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 10.3 Net Established: 8.5 Development (Ha): Built: 5.96 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 257
Page 258
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/BC/E/006 Location: The Harbour Area Grid Ref: 343086 865957 Supply Type: Part Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: BUCKIE Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0.77 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I5 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 1 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.77 Net Established: 1.77 Development (Ha): Built: 20.97 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0.77 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/BC/E/007 Location: March Road (LONG) Grid Ref: 344222 865018 Supply Type: Effective 5years+ Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: BUCKIE Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/LNG2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 7.02 Net Established: 5.62 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 5.62 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 258
Page 259
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/CL/E/002 Location: South of Cemetery Grid Ref: 351482 866184 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: CULLEN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0.65 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 0.81 Net Established: 0.65 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0.65 Reference: M/EL/E/001 Location: Elgin Business Park, Barmuckity Grid Ref: 324719 861725 Supply Type: Part Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 15.59 Immediately Available: 8.9 LPR: 20/I7 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 5.86 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 33 Net Established: 21.45 Development (Ha): Built: 2.9 Under Construction: 3 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 8.64 High Amenity: 5.95 Page 259
Page 260
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/EL/E/002 Location: Riverview Grid Ref: 319633 862782 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/MU1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 3.3 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 4.12 Net Established: 3.3 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/EL/E/004 Location: Glen Moray Distillery Grid Ref: 319932 862424 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I12 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 1.3 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.3 Net Established: 1.3 Development (Ha): Built: 6.5 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 260
Page 261
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/EL/E/008 Location: Chanonry Industrial Estate Grid Ref: 323161 862960 Supply Type: Part Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0.67 Immediately Available: 0.67 LPR: 20/I2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 1.22 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 3.17 Net Established: 1.89 Development (Ha): Built: 10.36 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0.67 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/EL/E/011 Location: Pinefield Industrial Estate Grid Ref: 322991 862330 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0.18 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I5 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 0.18 Net Established: 0.18 Development (Ha): Built: 12.23 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0.18 High Amenity: 0 Page 261
Page 262
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/EL/E/012 Location: Linkwood East Grid Ref: 323707 862498 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1.4 Immediately Available: 1.4 LPR: 20/I6 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.71 Net Established: 1.4 Development (Ha): Built: 2.01 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 1.4 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/EL/E/016 Location: Newfield Grid Ref: 321907 864903 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 9.6 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I8 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 12 Net Established: 9.6 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 9.6 High Amenity: 0 Page 262
Page 263
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/EL/E/017 Location: Burnside of Birnie Grid Ref: 322206 859613 Supply Type: Part Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 9 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I16 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 8.87 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 22.3 Net Established: 17.87 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 4 High Amenity: 5 Reference: M/EL/E/018 Location: Burnside of Birnie (LONG) Grid Ref: 322279 859158 Supply Type: Part Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/LNG3 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 9.8 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 38.2 Net Established: 30.56 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 20.74 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 263
Page 264
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/EL/E/019 Location: Lossiemouth Road (NE) Grid Ref: 321871 865361 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 5.6 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/MU2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 7 Net Established: 5.6 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 5.6 Reference: M/EL/E/020 Location: Ashgrove Road (Yard) Grid Ref: 322589 862554 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ELGIN Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/OPP4 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.2 Net Established: 1 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 1 High Amenity: 0 Page 264
Page 265
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/FR/E/001 Location: Forres Enterprise Park Grid Ref: 306378 859307 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: FORRES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 13.02 Immediately Available: 13.02 LPR: 20/BP1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 22.88 Net Established: 13.02 Development (Ha): Built: 17.92 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 2.75 High Amenity: 10.27 Reference: M/FR/E/006 Location: Benromach Distillery Grid Ref: 303187 859423 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: FORRES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I3 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 3.2 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 4 Net Established: 3.2 Development (Ha): Built: 4 Under Construction: 1.3 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 265
Page 266
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/FR/E/013 Location: Waterford Grid Ref: 303151 859195 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: FORRES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0.8 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1 Net Established: 0.8 Development (Ha): Built: 6.2 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/FR/E/014 Location: Easter Newforres Grid Ref: 306670 859033 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: FORRES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I4 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 17.75 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 27.6 Net Established: 17.75 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 266
Page 267
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/KH/E/004 Location: Bridge Street Grid Ref: 343609 850228 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: KEITH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1.64 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I4 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 2.05 Net Established: 1.64 Development (Ha): Built: 1.72 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 1.64 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/KH/E/005 Location: Isla Bank Mills Grid Ref: 342764 851453 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: KEITH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I7 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 1.84 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.84 Net Established: 1.84 Development (Ha): Built: 4.03 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 267
Page 268
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/KH/E/011 Location: Westerton Road East Expansion Grid Ref: 343761 850329 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: KEITH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1.39 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I11 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.74 Net Established: 1.39 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 1.39 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/KH/E/012 Location: Westerton Road (LONG) Grid Ref: 343822 850218 Supply Type: Effective 5years+ Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: KEITH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/LNG2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 3.2 Net Established: 2.5 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 2.5 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 268
Page 269
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/KH/E/013 Location: Banff Road South Grid Ref: 343847 850958 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: KEITH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1.75 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/MU LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.75 Net Established: 1.75 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 1.75 Reference: M/LS/E/007 Location: Sunbank Grid Ref: 323075 869644 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: LOSSIEMOUTH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/OPP1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 10.24 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 12.8 Net Established: 10.24 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 269
Page 270
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/MS/E/003 Location: Baxters Grid Ref: 333948 859705 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I5 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 1.78 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 2.22 Net Established: 1.78 Development (Ha): Built: 12.05 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/MS/E/005 Location: North of Baxter's Grid Ref: 333613 860016 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 2.57 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 3.22 Net Established: 2.57 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Page 270
Page 271
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/MS/E/006 Location: South of A96 Grid Ref: 333268 859627 Supply Type: Effective 5years+ Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/MUL1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 11 Net Established: 8 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 8 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/MS/E/007 Location: West of Mosstodloch Grid Ref: 331976 860333 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 12.8 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I3 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 16 Net Established: 12.8 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 12.8 High Amenity: 0 Page 271
Page 272
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/MS/E/008 Location: West of Mosstodloch (LONG) Grid Ref: 331976 860549 Supply Type: Effective 5years+ Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/LNG2 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 14 Net Established: 11.2 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 11.2 General Industrial: 0 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/MS/E/009 Location: James Jones Expansion Grid Ref: 333256 860661 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: MOSSTODLOCH Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 13.6 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 17 Net Established: 13.6 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: General Industrial: High Amenity: Page 272
Page 273
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/RS/E/001 Location: Back Burn Grid Ref: 327876 849746 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ROTHES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0.6 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 0.75 Net Established: 0.6 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: 0.6 High Amenity: 0 Reference: M/RS/E/007 Location: Greens of Rothes Grid Ref: 328029 850205 Supply Type: Constrained Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: ROTHES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 0 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 13.04 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 16.3 Net Established: 13.04 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: 0 LONG: 0 General Industrial: High Amenity: Page 273
Page 274
The Moray Council Employment Land Audit2024 Reference: M/TV/E/001 Location: Troves Industrial Estate Grid Ref: 324974 324974 Supply Type: Effective Constrained Owner Infrastructure Physical Town: TROVES Effective Supply (Ha): Effective: 1.1 Immediately Available: 0 LPR: 20/I1 LONG Supply (Ha): Constrained Total (Ha): 0 Established Supply (Ha): Gross Established: 1.61 Net Established: 1.1 Development (Ha): Built: 0 Under Construction: LONG: 0 General Industrial: 1.1 High Amenity: 0 Page 274
Page 275
Page 275
Page 276
October 2024 Page 276
Page 277
REPORT TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: MORAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN – PLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 This report asks Committee to approve planning policy guidance for National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) Policies 10, 20 and 22 to support delivery of the Moray Development Plan. 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. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Committee: (i) approves the planning policy guidance for NPF4 Policies 10, 20 and 22, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report; and (ii) agrees that the planning policy guidance set out in Appendix 1 will be used as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 NPF4 was published and became operational on 13th February 2023. A report on NPF4 was considered and agreed at the meeting of this Committee on 14 March 2023 (para 10 of minute refers). A number of policy topics were identified and agreed in the report as requiring additional guidance to aide delivery or interpretation of NPF4 policies in the local context. 3.2 The guidance is intended to be an evolving technical guide/aid for developers and officers which may/will be updated as further clarification on policy requirements emerge or national level guidance is provided. Item 13 Page 277
Page 278
4. PROPOSALS 4.1 APPENDIX 1 sets out guidance to support delivery of NPF4 Policies 10 Coastal development, 20 Blue and green infrastructure and 22 Flood risk and water management. The guidance sets out the issues that should be considered with regard to flood risk and drainage when planning a new development and the documentation developers are required to submit in support of a planning application. 4.2 The aim of the document is to improve the design and implementation of developments regarding flood risk and drainage and is primarily aimed at developers. 4.3 Implementation of the guidance and the level of detail required for planning applications will be proportionate to the complexity of the site, severity of risk and complexity of the flood risk mechanisms. 5. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) The Moray Development Plan plays an important role in delivering the Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan in terms of supporting economic growth, providing land for business and housing, safeguarding our environment, adapting and acting to the impacts of climate change as well as playing an important prevention role in terms of health and well- being. The additional guidance aims to support these key aims. (b) Policy and Legal The MLDP2020 and NPF4 taken together form the statutory Development Plan for Moray. The new planning system supported through the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 has a delivery focus which is a statutory requirement for planning authorities to support. (c) Financial implications There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. (d) Risk Implications The guidance provides a consistent approach to the implementation of NPF4 Policies 10, 20 and 22. There is a risk that without guidance in place, the aims of the NPF4 policies will not be realised. (e) Staffing Implications Supporting delivery of the guidance has staffing implications for the Strategic Planning & Development, Consultancy and Development Management sections to ensure the aspirations of NPF4 are met. (f) Property None. Page 278
Page 279
(g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact No Equality Impact Assessment is required for this report. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts The guidance requires flood risk and drainage assessments and mitigations to include an allowance for climate change so that this can be managed as part of the development. (i) Consultations The Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Consultancy Manager, the Acting Development Management & Building Standards Managers, the Principal Climate Change Officer and Lissa Rowan (Committee Services Officer) have been consulted and comments received have been incorporated into the report. 6. CONCLUSION 6.1 NPF4 was published and became operational on 13 February 2023. A number of policies have been identified where further local guidance and interpretation is required. 6.2 This report sets out guidance to support delivery and interpretation of NPF4 Policies 10, 20 and 22. Implementation of the guidance will be reviewed and updated if/when national guidance is published. Author of Report: Darren Westmacott, Planning Officer (Strategic Planning & Development) and James Ross, Civil Engineer (Consultancy) Background Papers: Ref: Page 279
Page 280
Page 280
Page 281
DRAFT 2024 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Appendix 1 Item 13 Page 281
Page 282
Page 282
Page 283
Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 How to use this document 2 3 Planning and Regulatory Framework 3 4 Considerations for new developments 6 5 Flooding & Erosion - SOurces 7 6 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) - Fluvial Flooding 8 Levels of Flood Risk Assessment 10 Permitted development types within fluvial flood risk areas 10 Development sites protected by existing formal flood schemes 10 7 Flood Risk Assessment - Coastal flooding & Coastal erosion 12 Levels of Flood Risk Assessment 12 Permitted development types within coastal flood risk areas 12 Coastal erosion 13 8 Drainage Impact Assessment - Pluvial Flooding & Surface Water Drainage 14 Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) 15 9 Roads surface water drainage 17 10 Final drainage design 18 11 Certification, checklist and accuracy of information 18 12 Adoption of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) 19 13 Riparian buffer strip and ownership 20 14 Disclaimer 21 APPENDIX 1: Checklist 22 APPENDIX 2: FRA Compliance Certificate 25 APPENDIX 3: DIA Compliance Certificate 26 APPENDIX 4: Roles and Duties of Stakeholders 27 APPENDIX 5: FRA Reference Documents 29 APPENDIX 6: DIA Reference Documents 30 APPENDIX 7: Glossary 31 Multiple Benefits of SUDS 32 Photo credits : Robert Bray Associates Page 283
Page 284
Page 284
Page 285
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Flooding is an act of nature, which cannot be completely eradicated but can be managed to reduce the potentially devastating effect on people, property, business and cultural heritage. Within Moray, there are several areas at risk of flooding from all sources, including rivers, the sea, surface water and ground water. 1.2 The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 (the Act) places a duty on Local Authorities to exercise their functions with a view to managing and reducing overall flood risk. In line with the requirements of the Act, the Council wants to steer new development away from areas at risk of flooding by requiring developers to consider, at an early stage in the planning process, the susceptibility of their development to flooding and the impact it would have on flood risk elsewhere. 1.3 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) was published in February 2023 and replaces Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 2014. NPF4 adopts a principle of avoidance with regards to flood risk and will only support development within a flood risk area that meet specific criteria. Role and Purpose of Document 1.4 This document provides advice to developers on the information required to support development applications. Flood risk and drainage must be assessed at an early stage in the development process by a competent and experienced professional. The location, layout and design of new developments are critical factors when determining the probability and impact of flooding and designing drainage systems. 1.5 A definition of flood risk is detailed below and in NPF4 Annex F – Glossary. Flood risk: The combination of the probability of a flood and the potential adverse consequences associated with a flood, for human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity. Page 285
Page 286
2 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 2 How to use this document 2.1 The aim of this document is to improve the design and implementation of developments with regard to flood risk and drainage. This guidance is aimed primarily at developers, but its themes may be of interest to the wider public. It explains the Council’s position regarding flood management and the responsibilities of other parties (Appendix 4) with an interest, including developers, landowners, Scottish Government, Scottish Water, SEPA and individual householders. 2.2 This guidance provides information on the issues that must be considered with regard to flood risk and drainage when planning a new development and the documentation developers are required to submit in support of a planning application. The level of detail required is proportionate to the complexity of the flood risk mechanisms, the site and the severity of the risk, which is affected by its location and to an extent the vulnerability of the proposed development. It is expected the information submitted will demonstrate that the proposed development is not at risk of flooding and will not increase flood risk elsewhere. The application must also include robust and sustainable drainage proposals. This information must be completed by an appropriate professional, as set out in this document. If the proposed development does not comply with this guidance and NPF4 policies, the application may be refused. Page 286
Page 287
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 3 3 Planning and Regulatory Framework 3.1 NPF4 requires planning authorities to take into consideration the probability of flooding from all sources and the risks involved when preparing development plans and determining planning applications. Scottish Government’s Online Planning Advice on Flood Risk provides advice on good practice and other relevant information. 3.2 Moray Council’s general approach to flood risk is to encourage developers to avoid development on flood risk areas, specify the requirements for assessing flood risk where appropriate and to embrace a sustainable approach to flood management. 3.3 This Planning Policy Guidance sets out guidelines for developers on what must be considered before planning a development and information regarding flood risk that may be required to support a planning application. There are three main NPF4 policies that directly affect how a proposed development will be designed with regards to Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage: l Policy 10 – Coastal Development l Policy 20 – Blue and green infrastructure l Policy 22 – Flood Risk & Water Management NPF4 Policy 10 a) Development proposals in developed coastal areas will only be supported where the proposal: i. does not result in the need for further coastal protection measures taking into account future sea level change; or increase the risk to people of coastal flooding or coastal erosion, including through the loss of natural coastal defences including dune systems; and ii. is anticipated to be supportable in the long-term, taking into account projected climate change. b) Development proposals in undeveloped coastal areas will only be supported where they: i. are necessary to support the blue economy, net zero emissions or to contribute to the economy or wellbeing of communities whose livelihood depend on marine or coastal activities, or is for essential infrastructure, where there is a specific locational need and no other suitable site; ii. do not result in the need for further coastal protection measures taking into account future sea level change; or increase the risk to people of coastal flooding or coastal erosion, including through the loss of natural coastal defences including dune systems; and iii. are anticipated to be supportable in the long-term, taking into account projected climate change; or iv. are designed to have a very short lifespan. c) Development proposals for coastal defence measures will be supported if: i. they are consistent with relevant coastal or marine plans; ii. nature-based solutions are utilised and allow for managed future coastal change wherever practical; and iii. any in-perpetuity hard defense measures can be demonstrated to be necessary to protect essential assets. d) Where a design statement is submitted with any planning application that may impact on the coast it will take into account, as appropriate, long-term coastal vulnerability and resilience. Page 287
Page 288
4 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance NPF4 Policy 20 a) Development proposals that result in fragmentation or net loss of existing blue and green infrastructure will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that the proposal would not result in or exacerbate a deficit in blue or green infrastructure provision, and the overall integrity of the network will be maintained. The planning authority’s Open Space Strategy should inform this. b) 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. Design will take account of existing provision, new requirements and network connections (identified in relevant strategies such as the Open Space Strategies) to ensure the proposed blue and/or green infrastructure is of an appropriate type(s), quantity, quality and accessibility and is designed to be multi- functional and well integrated into the overall proposals. c) Development proposals in regional and country parks will only be supported where they are compatible with the uses, natural habitats, and character of the park. d) Development proposals for temporary open space or green space on unused or under-used land will be supported. e) Development proposals that include new or enhanced blue and/or green infrastructure will provide effective management and maintenance plans covering the funding arrangements for their long-term delivery and upkeep, and the party or parties responsible for these. Page 288
Page 289
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 5 NPF4 Policy 22 a) Development proposals at risk of flooding or in a flood risk area will only be supported if they are for: i. essential infrastructure where the location is required for operational reasons; ii. water compatible uses; iii. re-development of an existing building or site for an equal or less vulnerable use; or. iv. re-development of previously used sites in built up areas where the LDP has identified a need to bring these into positive use and where proposals demonstrate that longterm safety and resilience can be secured in accordance with relevant SEPA advice. The protection offered by an existing formal flood protection scheme or one under construction can be taken into account when determining flood risk. In such cases, it will be demonstrated by the applicant that: l all risks of flooding are understood and addressed; l there is no reduction in floodplain capacity, increased risk for others, or a need for future flood protection schemes; l the development remains safe and operational during floods; l flood resistant and resilient materials and construction methods are used; and l future adaptations can be made to accommodate the effects of climate change. Additionally, for development proposals meeting criteria part iv), where flood risk is managed at the site rather than avoided these will also require: l the first occupied/utilised floor, and the underside of the development if relevant, to be above the flood risk level and have an additional allowance for freeboard; and l that the proposal does not create an island of development and that safe access/ egress can be achieved. b) Small scale extensions and alterations to existing buildings will only be supported where they will not significantly increase flood risk. c) Development proposals will: i. not increase the risk of surface water flooding to others, or itself be at risk. ii. manage all rain and surface water through sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS), which should form part of and integrate with proposed and existing bluegreen infrastructure. All proposals should presume no surface water connection to the combined sewer; iii. seek to minimise the area of impermeable surface. d) Development proposals will be supported if they can be connected to the public water mains. If connection is not feasible, the applicant will need to demonstrate that water for drinking water purposes will be sourced from a sustainable water source that is resilient to periods of water scarcity. e) Development proposals which create, expand or enhance opportunities for natural flood risk management, including blue and green infrastructure, will be supported. Page 289
Page 290
4 Considerations for new developments 4.1 Before a planning application is lodged for a new development the following flood risk and surface water management matters must be considered 4.2 Each of the following sections includes a flowchart detailing considerations and subsequent requirements for applicants, developers and consultants prior to planning application submission. For large developments or sites located in Flood Risk Areas it is advisable to seek Pre-application advice. 4.3 Any information required to support an application that is not submitted or does not meet the requirements of this guidance will be objected to until the necessary information is submitted. 6 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 290
Page 291
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 5 Flooding & Erosion - Sources 1. Moray Council require 3 main sources of flooding to be assessed for any new development. NPF4 defines these three sources as follows: l Watercourse /Fluvial Flooding – caused by excessive rainfall or snow melt within a limited period, which overwhelms the capacity of the watercourse or river channel, particularly when the ground is already saturated. It can also arise as a result of the blockage of a channel and/or associated structures such as small bridges and culverts. l Coastal Flooding – occurs as a result of high tide, storm surge and wave activity raising the level of the sea above adjoining land. l Pluvial Flooding – occurs when rainwater ponds or flows over the ground (overland flow) before it enters a natural or man-made drainage systems (e.g. a river or sewer/drain). It can also occur when drainage systems are at full capacity. It is often combined with sewer flooding and groundwater flooding. 5.2 Two main policies within NPF4 relate to flooding. Policy 22 covers all flooding and details development requirements, including surface water drainage. Policy 10 contains specific requirements regarding coastal development (See Section 3.0). 5.3 It is advisable that anyone wishing to apply for planning permission first check if the proposed development site is considered to be at risk of flooding. Information on flood risk can be found at: www.sepa.org.uk/environment/water/flooding/ Coastal Erosion 5.4 For proposed developments located within coastal areas future erosion will be considered as part of the application. The Dynamic Coast site provides predictions of future coastal erosion based on low to high emission scenarios up to the year 2100, which can be used to assess site viability. 5.5 NPF4 Policy 10 covers the specific requirements with regards to coastal erosion. 7 Page 291
Page 292
6 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) - Fluvial Flooding 6.1 Where Development Management, in consultation with the Flood Risk Management Team, considers there might be a risk of fluvial flooding to a proposed development or that the development may increase flood risk elsewhere, it will require a FRA to be submitted in support of the application. 6.2 The FRA must demonstrate the development is not at risk of flooding during a 0.5% annual probability flood event, which should include an allowance for climate change. The climate change allowance percentage used for development proposals in fluvial flood risk areas is dependent on: l Development site location within a specific river basin region l The total river catchment area at the development site. Guidance on climate change allowance can be found in “SEPA Climate change allowances for flood risk assessment in land use planning – Version 3” (April 2023). 6.3 A key requirement of the FRA is it must consider all sources of flooding (with the specific exclusion of internal sewer flooding as defined in the Act). 6.4 As indicated in NPF4 Policy 22(b) (February 2023), “Small scale extensions and alterations to existing buildings will only be supported where they will not significantly increase flood risk”. The definition of “significant” in this context is dependent on numerous factors such as: l Size of proposed structure and its proportion to existing structures. l Location within flood risk area. 8 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 292
Page 293
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance The below flow chart shows the decision process for Flood Risk information required for submission with a planning application. Please note that this is a general decision and maybe subject to specific site information held within Flood Risk Management. 9 Flood Risk Assessment Required? No No No Yes Yes Yes Coastal Fluvial (river) What type of flooding is the development at risk from? Development may be supported with specific stipulations & investigations (per specific NPF4 policy) Development may be supported with specific stipulations & investigations (per specific NPF4 policy) Development may be supported with specific stipulations & investigations (per specific NPF4 policy) Is the site protected by an existing formal Flood Alleviation Scheme – See Section 6.11 Is the Development designated as Essential Infrastructure Water compatible use Redevelopment of an existing site (per NPF4 Glossary of terms) No further flood risk information required Does the FRA indicate the development is subject to Flood Risk Level 2 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) required See Section 6.5 or 7.3 Site is located in a Fluvial/ Coastal Flooding area (1 in 200 Year R.P.) Check SEPA Flood Maps No flood risk on site No further flood risk information required Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment required See Section 6.5 or 7.3 Site is adjacent or close to Fluvial/Coastal Flooding area (1 in 200 Year R.P.) Development may not be supported Page 293
Page 294
Levels of Flood Risk Assessment 6.5 There are different levels of FRA, dependent on the complexity of the flood risk mechanisms, the site and the severity of the risk, which is affected by its location and to an extent the vulnerability of the proposed development. FRA’s should be required for development in medium to high areas, and in some cases for medium to low areas. l Level 1 is a flood statement with basic information with regard to flood risk. It will usually be required for a development or structure that is not at direct flood risk but close to flood risk areas. l Level 2 is a full FRA providing details of flood risk from all sources, results of hydrological and hydraulic studies and proposed mitigation. 6.6 If the outcome of a FRA indicates the development is at risk of flooding and mitigation is not possible then Moray Flood Risk Management will object to the application. Permitted development types within fluvial flood risk areas 6.7 If a proposed site is located within a known flood risk area, its development type can affect whether it may be supported. NPF4 Policy 22(a) (February, 2023) details development types that are permitted within flood risk areas. 6.8 Proposals redevelopment sites located in flood risk areas are also subject to further requirements to ensure flood resilience. 6.9 Development that is deemed to be acceptable within a flood risk area may still require a FRA and should seek to reduce flood risk within and from the development. Development sites protected by existing formal flood schemes 6.10 Certain locations within Moray are currently protected by formal Flood Alleviation Schemes (FAS). These areas were previously subject to fluvial flooding and as of 2023, protected to annual probability flood levels between 1% and 0.5% depending on the location. 6.11 The following settlements contain certain areas that are protected by fluvial FAS: l Elgin l Aberlour l Forres l Rothes l Lhanbryde l Dallas l Newmill l Longmorn l Rafford 10 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 294
Page 295
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 6.12 The level of protection that the FAS provide can be taken into account when determining flood risk to a development. NPF4 Policy 22(a) (February, 2023) details additional criteria that must be demonstrated within a FRA if development is to be supported for sites protected by an existing FAS or one that is undergoing construction. 6.13 Further information on existing formal FAS can be requested using a FOI (Freedom of Information) request to Moray Council, Flood Risk Management. 6.14 It is recommended that an appropriate level of FRA be carried out as soon as the site is considered for development. The level of FRA required must be discussed with the Council prior to submitting a planning application. The FRA must be completed by a professional with relevant experience in flood risk and drainage design. Guidance on appropriate levels of FRA required can be found in CIRIA Report 624 Development and flood risk – guidance for the construction industry, which can be purchased at CIRIA online bookshop. 11 Page 295
Page 296
7 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) - Coastal Erosion 7.1 Where Development Management, in consultation with the Flood Risk Management Team, considers there might be a risk of coastal flooding to a proposed development or that the development may increase flood risk elsewhere, it will require a FRA to be submitted in support of the application. 7.2 The FRA must demonstrate the development is not at risk of flooding during a 0.5% annual probability flood event, which should include an allowance for climate change and consider wave overtopping. The climate change uplift level used for development proposals in coastal flood risk areas is dependent on: l The development site location on the coast. l Design life of the development Guidance on climate change allowance can be found in “SEPA Climate change allowances for flood risk assessment in land use planning – Version 3” (April 2023). Levels of Flood Risk Assessment 7.3 There are different levels of FRA, dependent on the complexity of the flood risk mechanisms, the site and the severity of the risk, which is affected by its location and to an extent the vulnerability of the proposed development. l Level 1 is a flood statement with basic information with regard to flood risk. It will usually be required for a development or structure that is not at direct flood risk but close to coastal flood risk areas. l Level 2 is a full FRA providing details of flood risk from all sources, including wave over topping, extreme tides, results of hydrological and hydraulic studies and proposed mitigation. 7.4 If the outcome of a FRA indicates the development is at risk of flooding and mitigation is not possible then Moray Flood Risk Management will object to the application. Permitted development types within coastal flood risk areas 7.5 NPF4 Policies 10 and 22 both apply to proposed development within a coastal flood risk area. 7.6 If a proposed site is located within a known coastal flood risk area, the development location and situation can affect whether it may be supported. NPF4 Policy 10(a) (b) (February, 2023) outline requirements for permitted development, which are dependent on whether the existing site is developed (brownfield) or undeveloped (Greenfield). 7.7 If a proposed site is located within a known coastal flood risk area, its development type can affect whether it may be supported. NPF4 Policy 22(a) (February, 2023) details development types that are permitted within flood risk areas: l Essential infrastructure where the location is required for operational reasons; l Water compatible uses; l Redevelopment of an existing building or site for an equal or less vulnerable uses; or l Redevelopment of previously used sites in built up areas where the Local Development PLan (LDP) has identified a need to bring these into positive use and where proposals demonstrate that longterm safety and resilience can be secured in accordance with relevant SEPA advice. 12 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 296
Page 297
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 7.8 Development that is deemed to be permitted within a coastal flood risk area will still require a FRA and should seek to reduce flood risk within the development. Coastal Erosion 7.9 NPF4 Policy 10(c) and (d) set out guidance for developments to ensure they will be supported with regards to coastal erosion: l Nature based solutions should be utilised where possible l Should be consistent with coastal and marine plans l Permanent hard defences will generally only be supported to defend essential assets 7.10 Where a proposed development is assessed to be at risk from coastal erosion a Design Statement should be submitted in support of the application. This should detail the long-term coastal vulnerability to the site and proposed resilience measures to reduce future risk. The below flow chart shows the decision process for coastal erosion information required for submission with a planning application. Please note that this is a general decision and maybe subject to specific site information held within Flood Risk Management. 13 NoYes Is a Coastal Erosion Statement Required? Check Dynamic Coast website Site in High Emission scenario zone Site out with High Emission scenario zone Are all structures and development sited out with the zone No further information required on the erosion Erosion Statement required confirming any structures or development are out with the zone High possibility that application will not be supported unless suitable mitigation is put in place Page 297
Page 298
14 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 8 Drainage Impact Assessment - Pluvial Flooding & Surface Water Drainage 8.1 Surface water drainage is a material consideration at the planning stage of a development and due consideration must be given to the impact of the proposed development, both during and after construction. This is highlighted in NPF4 Policy 22 (c), which requires any surface water generated from all development to be managed through Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS). 8.2 SuDS proposals for a development will be submitted as a Drainage Statement (DS) or Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA). The requirements of each will be dependent on the site characteristics. The Council will usually request a DS for smaller developments, but a full DIA may be required for these developments if the surface water management for the site is challenging. The DS and the DIA should be submitted with the planning application. If the required drainage information is not submitted with the application, then it will be objected to by FRM. 8.3 When quantifying rainfall levels within a development, a percentage allowance for climate change should be included. The climate change allowance percentage used for development proposals is dependent on the development site location within a specific river basin region. Guidance on climate change allowance can be found in “SEPA Climate change allowances for flood risk assessment in land use planning – Version 3” (April 2023). 8.4 The below flow chart shows the decision process for surface water drainage information required for submission with a planning application. Please note that this is a general decision and maybe subject to specific site information held within Flood Risk Management. Drainage Impact Assessment Required? Check SEPA flood maps Pluvial Flood Risk on siteNo Pluvial Flood Risk on site Is the proposed development larger than: 3 dwellings (if domestic) or 100m2 (if commercial) Is the proposed development larger than: 3 dwellings (if domestic) or 100m2 (if commercial) Drainage Statement (DS) required See Section 8 Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) required See Section 8 Drainage Statement (DS) required See Section 8 Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) required See Section 8 No further drainage information required Is the proposed development and extension with an impermeable area greater than 25 m² No Yes NoYes NoYes Page 298
Page 299
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 15 Drainage Statement (DS) 8.5 All developments of less than 3 new dwellings or a non-householder development under 100 square metres, will need to provide a DS. The DS should describe the proposed drainage arrangements for the development, such as a soakaway or outlet to watercourse. Plans submitted with the application should include: l Proposed layout of the drainage proposals. l If the proposed drainage system involves infiltration, information on ground conditions should also be provided. l The statement should demonstrate, that the post- development runoff rate does not exceed the pre- development runoff rate or increase flood risk through discharge to a receiving watercourse. l Minimum design rainfall events of a 1 in 30 year return period plus climate change allowance should be considered. Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) 8.6 A full DIA will be required for all proposed developments other than those identified above. The DIA should meet the basic requirements listed below. Advice regarding specific requirements for major applications will be provided at pre-application consultation stage. 8.7 The DIA should demonstrate that the surface water drainage system adopts SUDS principles and specifications in accordance with current legislation and guidelines, such as CIRIA C753 - The SUDS Manual, Sewers for Scotland - A design and construction guide for developers in Scotland, and Water Assessment and Drainage Assessment Guide. Applicants should use the Simple Index Approach as described in Section 26.7.1 of The SUDS Manual. 8.8 When considering the appropriate SUDS design for the development the most sustainable methods, such as rainwater harvesting, green roofs, bio retention systems, soakaways, and permeable pavements, must be considered first. This is highlighted in NPF4 Policies 3 and 22(e). 8.9 If it is necessary to include surface water attenuation as part of the drainage system, only above ground attenuation solutions will be considered, unless this is not possible due to site constraints. If below ground attenuation is proposed the developer must provide a robust justification for this proposal. It should be noted that over development of a site or a justification on economic grounds will not be acceptable. 8.10 The SUDS principles must conform to the Controlled Activities Regulations (CAR), which requires that all reasonable steps must be taken to ensure the discharge does not result in pollution of the water environment. The regulations provide for three types of authorisation, details of which can be found in the CAR practical guide; General Binding Rules; Registration; and Licenses. 8.11 Any discharge to a watercourse must have the appropriate permission from the Council and SEPA, in terms of compliance with the relevant CAR General Binding Rule. Discharge to a sewer must be agreed with Scottish Water and the letter of agreement must be included in the DIA. Page 299
Page 300
8.12 Plans of the proposed drainage system must show: l Drainage catchment and sub-catchment areas; l Permeable and impermeable zones; l Phasing details; l Existing and proposed site sections and levels; l Long and cross-sections for the proposed drainage system; l Exceedance flow management routes; l Finished floor levels; and l Details of connections to watercourses and sewers. 8.13 The DIA must demonstrate, that the post-development runoff rate does not exceed the pre-development runoff rate or increase flood risk through discharge to a receiving watercourse. Details of any flow limiting device(s) must be included in the DIA. If discharging to a body of water, the proposed rate of discharge, point of discharge and outfall structure must be included. 8.14 Where infiltration is proposed, an acceptable infiltration assessment must be submitted, including geotechnical test results and evaluations. The infiltration test for proposed infiltration devices must be undertaken in line with the requirements in Building Research Establishment (BRE) Digest 365, which can be purchased at BREbookshop.com, or similar recognised methodology (developer to make clear which methodology has been used). These tests must be representative, i.e. they must be taken on or near the proposed area for infiltration. 8.15 The requirements for drainage should be taken into account when determining the overall layout of the development. For large developments with separate zones that will be constructed at different stages or by different developers, a drainage master plan covering the whole development will be required. 8.16 The capacity of the drainage system including attenuation measures such as SUDS features should be designed to withstand a minimum 1 in 30 year event, without surcharging. Exceedance events up to and including the 1 in 200 year event plus climate change must be contained and managed on site, such that they do not increase flood risk. Details of the method used to manage this flow must be provided in the DIA. This method must also be shown on the general arrangement drawing. 8.17 If attenuation systems take longer than 24 hours to drain completely, long duration events must be assessed to ensure that storage is not overwhelmed. 8.18 To aid review and understanding, all calculations must be annotated to provide descriptive text of the logic, reasoning and methodology used. 8.19 A schedule detailing inspection and maintenance arrangements for the entire drainage system must be submitted at the same time as the design. This document must include how the various elements are accessed for maintenance operations – as per Construction Design Management (CDM) 2015. 8.20 The body responsible for management of the SUDS system must be identified in the DIA and a letter of agreement with the responsible body must be included. If the overall management of the system is to be undertaken by a factor employed jointly by the property owners, this arrangement must be made clear in the title deeds. 16 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 300
Page 301
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 9 Roads surface water drainage 9.1 If the road is to be adopted by the Council the developer must consult the Council’s Transport Development Section before submitting the planning application. 9.2 When producing a DIA, drainage of the road network must be considered. Roads are drained either by off-the- edge diffuse drainage to grass filter strips and swales or stone filled filter trenches; or by point collection in gullies and other off-lets for discharge to sewers, trenches, swales, etc. A more sustainable approach will be favoured by both Scottish Water and the Council as a Roads Authority. 9.3 Road drainage is designed for the annual or 1 in 2 year return period storm, but systems must be able to accommodate up to a 1 in 30 year storm without flooding. Storms greater than 1 in 30 years will cause water to flow/pond on the road surface. These flows must be managed for up to and including 1 in 200 year event plus climate change, to reduce the risk of flooding to property. Guidance on roads drainage is available in www.scotsnet.org.uk/assets/SudsforRoads.pdf 17 Page 301
Page 302
10 Final Drainage Design As drainage/SUDS is an important part of development infrastructure, it must be considered at the start of the development process to ensure the development layout does not restrict the SUDS options available. A final drainage design must be submitted and approved by the Planning Authority (in consultation with SEPA where applicable) before the commencement of any development. Submission of this document will be required for full planning approval. The Council must be given the opportunity to inspect drainage systems during and after construction. Built drawings of the drainage systems must be submitted to the Council’s Flood Risk Management Team on completion of the development. 11 Certification, Checklist & Accuracy of Information Level 1 Flood Risk Statement and Drainage Statement may be completed and submitted by the applicant, architect or agent acting for the client. Level 2 FRA and Level 2 DIA must be undertaken and signed-off by a competent professional who is a Chartered member of a relevant professional institution, with experience of flood risk/drainage assessment management. The Council requires FRAs and DIAs to be submitted with a signed compliance certificate (Appendix 2 and 3) to certify the assessments have been carried out in accordance with this Guidance, relevant documents and legislation. An individual certificate is required for each assessment. Evidence that the signatory holds Professional Indemnity Insurance, up to and including the value of £1,000,000, for each and every claim, must be submitted with each certificate. Evidence will take the form of a copy of the insurance policy, and a valid certificate of insurance. It is the responsibility of the author(s) to ensure that the detailed calculations and computations are technically accurate. A checklist providing a summary of key information in line with the Council’s requirements (Appendix 1) must be attached to the front cover of the FRA and DIA. 18 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 302
Page 303
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 12 Adoption of SUDS The Scottish Government has charged Scottish Water and Local Authorities (as Roads Authorities) to make the most cost effective arrangements for draining new development sites. This will involve adopting the drainage scheme on completion of a development where the road is to be adopted. The ongoing maintenance of this system would then be agreed by Scottish Water and the Local Authority under Section 7 of the Sewerage (Scotland) Act 1968. Details of the framework for these agreements are currently under discussion. Until such time as this framework is agreed, developers must provide details of the party responsible for the long term maintenance of the drainage system in each new development. If the overall management of the system is to be undertaken by a factor employed collectively by the property owners, this arrangement must be made clear in the title deeds. This information must be provided at detailed planning stage. 19 Page 303
Page 304
Channel width (this includes ditches and culverted watercourses) 6 m 12m 20m Minimum buffer strip width for urban areas on a shallow gradient ≤25˚ Up to 5m Up to 15m 15m+ 13 Riparian Buffer Strip & Ownership The Council requires a buffer strip of at least 6m between the top of the bank of any body of water within an application site and the proposed new development (Policy EP12). Any request to reduce this requirement needs to be appropriately justified. This strip must be kept free from any development in order to allow access to the waterbody for the purpose of assessment and maintenance, to ensure bank stability and aid water and ecological quality. Riparian buffer strips may be secured by a planning condition. SEPA requirements for buffer strips, as set out in its Development Management Water Environment guidance is provided below. Development Management requirement 1 : Buffer strips A buffer strip must be provided between built development and the water environment. The WFD defines the water environment to include all wetlands, rivers, lochs, transitional waters (estuaries), coastal waters and groundwater. Buffer strips are areas of land surrounding water which are maintained in permanent vegetation. Measurements outlined in the table below are the minimum buffer strips that apply in built up urban areas on a shallow gradient. Sites may come forward where wet poorly drained soils, steep slopes (>25°), the presence of sensitive water bodies, flood risk etc mean that SEPA consider buffer width should be increased. In urban areas on a shallower gradient ≤25° the following minimum buffer widths apply. Any request from a developer to reduce this requirement needs to be appropriately justified. In upland areas on a high gradient≥25° producing high levels of surface water runoff, a buffer strip width of 50 m will apply. Sites bordering still water (i.e. lochs and ponds) require a buffer strip of 6m for ponds and 12m for lochs. Where SEPA are aware of site specifics relating to a proposal e.g. local ground conditions or the presence of sensitive water bodies (e.g. those with designations due to the presence of water-dependent species) and consider this merits a wider buffer strip requirement, this will be brought to the attention of the Planning Authority/applicant at the earliest opportunity. A wider strip may be requested to allow for watercourse migration, in areas with erodible soils or steeply sloped river banks. The additional width required will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and will be proportionate to the nature of the watercourse at the development site and the associated risk. This request would be made in consultation with the Flood Risk Management Team. Where a buffer strip is required there should be no encroachment of this strip during any stage of the development. Title to this area must not be sold to individual householders and must not form part of the garden ground, i.e. boundary fences and walls should be erected outside the buffer strip. Ownership and maintenance responsibility must stay with the developer or its factor. 20 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 304
Page 305
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 14 Disclaimer This document is for information purposes only and is a statement of Moray Council’s requirements in relation to FRA and SUDs. Applicants will be required to satisfy themselves as to the current statutory and/or legal requirements in relation to FRA and SUDs. 21 Page 305
Page 306
22 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Brief statement/ screening. General description of the development, its size, location and surrounding topography. Description of existing drainage arrangements on site and any sewers. FR from all sources considered/ commented on (based on authors’ knowledge/ observations/ experience). Reference to SEPA flood maps where applicable As Flood Risk Statement providing a full report including drawings/ calculations/ figures. Flood risk from all sources considered. Desk study approach. Consultation with SEPA & Scottish Water. Details of proposed development design/ mitigation measures. Level 1 Flood Risk Statement Essential SourceDocument Reference Signatory (eg architect, Applicant, Agent) Level 2 Flood Risk Assessment Essential Signatory (e.g. Civil Engineer, Hydrologist or equivalent Chartered Member of professional institution e.g. ICE, CIWEM, ISTRUCTE) SourceDocument Reference Appendix 1 - Checklist Flood Risk Page 306
Page 307
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 23 Level 1 Drainage Statement- <3 (including) property developments Extensions between 25- 100m2. Change of use (not involving substantial new hardstanding/ buildings). Essential SourceDocument Reference Signatory (eg architect, Applicant, Agent) Drainage Results of hydraulic / hydrological modelling or justification why this is not required. Details of proposed flood resilient materials. Topographic survey data used to assess flood routing /depths. Calculations for provision of compensatory storage. Brief statement. General description of the development, its size, location and surrounding topography and land uses. Description of existing drainage arrangements on site and any sewers. A concept drawing of the development and proposed/ likely means of providing foul and surface water drainage. Evidence of proposed runoff rates and storage volumes for a variety of return periods. Page 307
Page 308
24 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Level 2 Drainage Impact Assessment- A full DIA will be required for all proposed developments other than those identified for a Level 1. Essential SourceDocument Reference Signatory (e.g. Civil Engineer, Hydrologist or equivalent Chartered Member of professional institution e.g. ICE, CIWEM, ISTRUCTE) Report including drawings/calculations/ figures. Description of existing drainage rights/ arrangements on site. Assessment of pre/ post runoff rates, changes in impermeable areas. Evidence of proposed runoff rates and storage volumes for a variety of return periods. Outline Drainage Design showing use/ application of SUDS supported by calculations/ model results. Wastewater drainage proposals including a letter of agreement from Scottish Water to accept foul flows (if applicable). Reporting of onsite infiltration tests (where suitable). Proposals relating to discharge rate control methods, receiving water bodies, structures etc. Page 308
Page 309
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 25 Appendix 2 - FRA Compliance Certificate Flood Risk Assessment Compliance Certificate I certify that all reasonable skill, care and attention to be expected of a qualified and experienced professional in this field have been exercised in carrying out the attached Assessment. I also confirm that I maintain the required Professional Indemnity Insurance*. The report has been prepared in support of the below named development in accordance with the reporting requirements issued by Moray Council. Assessment Ref No: Assessment Date: Assessment Revision: Name of Development: Planning Application No: Name of Developer: Supporting Information Name and Address of Organisation preparing this Assessment: Signed: Name: Date: Position Held: Qualification ** * Please attach appropriate evidence of Professional Indemnity Insurance ** A chartered member of a relevant professional institution Page 309
Page 310
Appendix 3 - DIA Compliance Certificate 26 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Drainage Impact Assessment Compliance Certificate I certify that all reasonable skill, care and attention to be expected of a qualified and experienced professional in this field have been exercised in carrying out the attached Assessment. I also confirm that I maintain the required Professional Indemnity Insurance*. The report has been prepared in support of the below named development in accordance with the reporting requirements issued by Moray Council. Assessment Ref No: Assessment Date: Assessment Revision: Name of Development: Planning Application No: Name of Developer: Supporting Information Name and Address of Organisation preparing this Assessment: Signed: Name: Date: Position Held: Qualification ** * Please attach appropriate evidence of Professional Indemnity Insurance ** A chartered member of a relevant professional institution Page 310
Page 311
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 27 Appendix 4 - Roles and Duties of Stakeholders ROLES AND DUTIES OF STAKEHOLDERS WITH REGARD TO FLOOD RISK A number of organisations, including local planning authorities, SEPA and Scottish Water have a duty under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 to work in partnership to reduce overall flood risk. One very important method employed by these organisations is to avoid increasing flood risk through promoting responsible development. Developers, landowners and householders also have responsibilities with regard to flood risk. A summary of the roles and responsibilities for each party is listed below. THE DEVELOPER 1. Provide sufficient information to demonstrate their development proposals will not increase flood risk to the site and elsewhere, as per SPP 196 to 211. 2. Provide sufficient information to demonstrate their proposals will safeguard water quality 3. Provide details of the maintenance arrangements for sustainable features such as SUDS; and the party responsible for these arrangements. THE HOUSEHOLDER 1. Protect their property from flooding. 2. Acquire home contents and building insurance. 3. Take action to prepare for flooding. 4. Maintain private drainage, including gullies and drains on shared private access roads/courtyards. LANDOWNERS 1. Maintain watercourses and other water bodies within their property boundary. 2. Maintain private flood defences and private drainage systems. 3. Should not increase flood risk to other areas. MORAY COUNCIL 1. Prepare maps of water bodies and SUDS. 2. Assess water bodies for conditions likely to create a flood risk. 3. Undertake maintenance works in water bodies, including clearance of watercourses where the works will significantly reduce flood risk. 4. Maintain existing flood risk management assets. 5. Maintain drainage including gullies. 6. Assess proposed development. 7. Work with the emergency services in response to flooding. 8. Coordinate reception centres for people evacuated from their homes and arrange temporary accommodation if appropriate. 9. Coordinate the clear up operation after a flood. 10. Deal with road closures (except on trunk roads). 11. Prepare Flood Risk Management Plans. 12. Promotion of new flood risk management schemes, where these can be justified and funding is available. Local authority powers to protect properties from flooding under the Act are permissive; there is no obligation to do so unless the action is included in a Local Flood Risk Management Plan. 13. Update and implement the Council’s emergency plan, which sets out action that will be taken during a flood event, including the provision of sandbags and emergency evacuation. 14. Provide advice to property owners in flood prone locations on how to protect their own property. 15. Prepare Surface Water Management Plans. Page 311
Page 312
SEPA 1. Provide a flood warning service for Scotland and operate flood line. 2. Provide advice to local authorities on flood risk and planning. 3. SEPA also has a role to coordinate flood risk management policy and activities across Scotland and this includes; a. Development and publication of the National Flood Risk Assessment. b. Development of flood risk management strategies. c. Assessment of flood risk across Scotland including publication of flood risk and hazard maps. d. Establishment of national and local flood risk advisory groups. e. Preparation of maps of artificial structures and natural features. f. Publishing of National Flood Risk Management Plans. SCOTTISH WATER 1. Maintain water supply and drainage infrastructure. 2. Manage the discharge of surface water that enters the public drainage system. 3. Work in partnership with the local authority and emergency services. 4. Deal with flood damaged mains and any flooding caused by burst and choked pipes. 5. Liaise with SEPA, local authorities and the emergency services during flood events to alleviate any flooding from public sewers. 6. Scottish Water is responsible for assessing the risk of flooding from surface water and combined (surface and foul) sewers. Once risks are identified, Scottish Water, working with local authorities and SEPA, will look for opportunities to reduce those risks through its capital investment programme. This will be coordinated with other work to address surface water flooding. MET OFFICE 1. Production of weather forecasts. 2. Warning of extreme weather events. 3. Provide a dedicated weather forecast service to SEPA’s flood warning team. SCOTTISH FLOOD FORUM 1. The Scottish Flood Forum is a charitable organisation, currently funded by Scottish Government, which offers support and advice on flood protection, insurance, recovery, establishment of community flood groups and business continuity planning. 2. The forum also represents the interests of people affected by, or at risk of flooding. TRANSPORT SCOTLAND 1. Maintenance of gullies, gutter and drain covers for trunk roads. 2. Closure of trunk roads. SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT 1. Setting National policy on flood risk management and flood warning. 2. Setting Scottish Planning policy. 3. Approve Flood Risk Management Strategies and Plans. POLICE 1. Coordinate the actions of all agencies involved during the course of a major flood incident. 2. Will control the scene at its outer limits by setting up cordon points and setting up a traffic management system in conjunction with the local authority. 3. Responsible for public safety, coordinating evacuation and public information. FIRE AND RESCUE 1. The Fire and Rescue Service has a duty to save lives, in the event of serious flooding that can cause or is likely to cause death, serious injury or serious illness. This includes rescuing people trapped or likely to be trapped by water and protecting them from serious harm. 28 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 312
Page 313
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 29 Appendix 5 - FRA Reference Documents Scottish Planning Policy, Scottish Government, Feb 2010 Planning Advice Note 51: Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation Planning Advice Note 69: Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding Planning Advice Note 79: Water and Drainage Scottish Environment Protection Agency – Technical Flood Risk Guidance for Stakeholders Scottish Environment Protection Agency – Flood Risk Assessment checklist Scottish Environment Protection Agency Policy No 22: Flood Risk Assessment Strategy Scottish Environment Protection Agency Position Statement on Culverting of Watercourses Scottish Environment Protection Agency Policy No 41: Development at Risk of Flooding: Advice and Consultation The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (CAR) (as amended) CIRIA C753: The SuDS Manual CIRIA C768: Site Handbook for the Construction of SuDS CIRIA C624: Development and Flood Risk Guidance for the Construction Industry CIRIA R168: Culvert Design Manual Dynamic Coast (www.dynamiccoast.com/) Flood Estimation Handbook, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford Flood Studies Report, NERC, London National River Flow Archive Website for Gauging Station Data and the UK Coastal Flood Boundary dataset which is available from SEPA SEPA Flood risk guidance supported by the land use planning background paper on flood risk SEPA planning information note on proposed development protected by a flood protection scheme explains how we consider development in these areas Green Infrastructure Policies in the CSGN – A Review of Local Authority Policies on Green Infrastructure in Built Development (www.gcvgreennetwork.gov.uk/publications/790- gi-policies-in-the-csgn) Edinburgh Design Guidance, The City of Edinburgh Council (www.edinburgh.gov.uk/local-development-plan-guidance/edinburgh-design-guidance) Open Space and Designing New Residential Developments’, South Ayrshire Council (www.south-ayrshire.gov.uk/documents/planningopenspace.pdf) Page 313
Page 314
Appendix 6 - DIA Reference Documents Scottish Planning Policy, Scottish Government, June 2014 Planning Advice Note 51: Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation Planning Advice Note 69: Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding Planning Advice Note 79: Water and Drainage Scottish Environment Protection Agency – Technical Flood Risk Guidance for Stakeholders Scottish Environment Protection Agency – Flood Risk Assessment checklist Strategic Flood Risk Assessment: SEPA Technical Guidance to Support Development Planning document Scottish Environment Protection Agency Position Statement on Culverting of Watercourses Scottish Environment Protection Agency Policy No 41: Development at Risk of Flooding: Advice and Consultations The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (CAR) (as amended) CIRIA C753: The SuDS Manual CIRIA C768: Guidance on the Construction of SuDS CIRIA C624: Development and Flood Risk Guidance for the Construction Industry CIRIA C689: Culvert Design and Operation Guide Dynamic Coast (www.dynamiccoast.com/) Flood Estimation Handbook, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford Flood Studies Report, NERC, London National River Flow Archive Website for Gauging Station Data and the UK Coastal Flood Boundary dataset which is available from SEPA SEPA Flood risk guidance supported by the land use planning background paper on flood risk SEPA planning information note on proposed development protected by a flood protection scheme explains how we consider development in these areas 30 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 314
Page 315
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Appendix 7 - Glossary AEP Annual Exceedance Probability. For example a flood with a 1% AEP has a statistical probability of being reached or exceeded in each year of 1%. This is often referred to as the “once in 100 year flood”. It should be noted however, that the occurrence of a flood event does not change the statistical probability of another flood occurring. CAR Water Environment (Controlled Activities) Regulations 2011 CIRIA Construction Industry Research and Information Association FEH The Flood Estimation Handbook is a Centre for Ecology and Hydrology publication, giving guidance on rainfall and river flood frequency estimation in the UK NPF4 National Planning Framework 4 SEPA Scottish Environment Protection Agency Sources of Flooding Fluvial – flooding originating from a watercourse either natural or culverted. Coastal – flooding originating from the sea (open coast or estuary) where water levels exceed the normal tidal range and flood onto the low-lying areas that define the coast line. Pluvial – urban or rural flooding which results from rainfall- generated overland flow before the runoff enters any watercourse, drainage system or sewer. Groundwater - flooding due to a significant rise in the water table, normally as a result of prolonged and heavy rainfall over a sustained period of time. Drainage - flooding as a result of surcharging of man-made drainage systems including combined sewers where the capacity of the system to discharge runoff has been exceeded. Infrastructure Failure – flooding due to failure of manmade infrastructure including hydro-dams, water supply reservoirs, canals, flood defence structures, underground conduits, water treatment tanks etc. SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems SW Scottish Water MC Moray Council 31 Page 315
Page 316
Multiple Benefits of SUDS Well designed, planned and managed SUDS can support high quality placemaking and have the potential to incorporate a wide range of environmental, economic and social benefits in the delivery of the system. Developers should give early consideration to the multiple potential benefits and opportunities in order to deliver a SUDS with the best results. Benefits include:- l Climate resilience – capture and stores carbon and other greenhouses gases, improving air quality and reducing air and water pollution. l Biodiversity – increases biodiversity and quality of ecosystems by creating and linking habitats for new and existing wildlife. l Flood risk management – reduces the risk of flooding to communities from development. l Water quality management – reduces the impact of diffuse pollution. l Enabling development – creates headroom (capacity) within established drainage networks. l Amenity – increases the aesthetic value of area, providing an open space that can create better communities through social cohesion. l Recreation and health – increases access to open, green space which can also act as sport/plat areas thereby improving the physical and mental health and wellbeing of communities. 32 Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance Page 316
Page 317
Flood Risk Management NPF4 Planning Policy Guidance 33 Page 317
Page 318
October 2024 Page 318
Page 319
REPORT TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES COMMITTEE ON 22 OCTOBER 2024 SUBJECT: FOOD LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DELIVERY PLAN 2024/2025 BY: DEPUTE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE) 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 To request the Committee to approve the Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan 2024/2025 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III (E) (16) of the Council's Scheme of Administration relating to exercising the statutory functions of the Council as The Environmental Health Authority. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Committee approves the Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan 2024/2025. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 Food Standards Scotland (FSS) was established by the Food (Scotland) Act 2015 and one of its key roles is to act as the central competent authority in overseeing official feed and food controls undertaken by local authorities. Powers enabling FSS to monitor and audit Local Authorities are contained in the Food Standards Act 1999 and the Official Feed and Food Controls Regulations 2009. 3.2 The Framework agreement on Official Feed and Food controls by local authorities issued by FSS recognises that service plans are an important part of the inspection/intervention process to ensure that national priorities and standards are addressed and delivered locally. Item 14 Page 319
Page 320
3.3 Moray Council’s Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan is developed annually to ensure compliance with the framework agreement. The plan for 2023/2024 is attached as Appendix 1 4. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Assists the Council to meet its priorities. (b) Policy and Legal This authority has a statutory duty to comply with the framework Agreement in accordance with the Food Standards Act 1999.These include requirements for the planning, management and delivery of the local Food Law Enforcement Service. (c) Financial implications The Plan was developed with due consideration to available resources and will be delivered within existing budgets. It should be noted that any future budget cuts will adversely affect the performance achievable. (d) Risk Implications Failure to provide and implement the Service Plan could expose the Council to criticism and challenge from FSS for failing in its statutory duties. FSS can exercise its default powers to take over the running of the food service at full cost to the Council. Failure to implement the Service Plan may result in increased food borne illness and complaints with a consequential cost to food businesses and the community. There may also be a negative impact on Moray’s excellent reputation for food production. (e) Staffing Implications The Plan will be delivered within existing staff resources. There remain challenges in recruiting qualified staff. (f) Property None. (g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact None. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts Nil. Page 320
Page 321
(i) Consultations Consultation has taken place with the Depute Chief Executive (Economy, Environment and Finance), the Acting Head of Economic Growth and Development, the Legal Services Manager, the Equal Opportunities Officer, the Chief Financial Officer and Lissa Rowan (Committee Services Officer) have been consulted and comments received have been incorporated into the report. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 Moray Council is required to provide a Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan 2024/2025. 5.2 Failure to approve and implement the plan could result in adverse action by Food Standards Scotland. Author of Report: Russell Anderson, Principal Environmental Health Officer Background Papers: Ref: Page 321
Page 322
Page 322
Page 323
1 Appendix 1 ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FOOD LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DELIVERY PLAN 2024 - 2025 Item 14 Page 323
Page 324
2 MORAY COUNCIL FOOD LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DELIVERY PLAN 1. SERVICE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 1.1 The Service Environmental Health exists to maintain and improve standards relating to; food safety, health and safety at work, environmental protection, including contaminated land, public health, private water supplies, housing and animal health and welfare, so that the quality of life of those living, working and visiting Moray is enhanced. Environmental Health will provide effective, efficient advice and services to the public, commercial sector and other internal and external agencies on all matters for which it has a statutory responsibility. Environmental Health will eliminate unnecessary enforcement activity that impacts on responsible business. Environmental Health will promote sustained compliance with the Law, ensure that duty holders take action to deal immediately with serious breaches of the Law and hold to account those who breach Legal requirements which may include recommending prosecution or serving statutory notices. Environmental Health will, through advice given to legitimate businesses particularly during start up, promote good business without stifling entrepreneurial activities. To enable this, businesses must behave ethically, engage early and openly with Regulators and strive to comply. Environmental Health will endeavour to comply with the requirements of the Regulators code in all enforcement matters as it exemplifies best practice and identifies the need for Regulatory Services to adopt a positive and proactive approach towards ensuring compliance. This will be undertaken by: Adopting a positive enabling approach by helping and encouraging businesses and individuals to understand and comply with the Law. Ensuring proportionality when dealing with breaches of the Law Use risk assessments, intelligence, and evidence to target resources to the areas that require them most. Ensure effective two-way communication with those that are Regulated. Adopt an education-based approach with a robust and effective enforcement when required. Ensure the policies are transparent, accountable, consistent, proportionate, and targeted. Pursuing continuous improvement in Regulatory practice based on the principles of better Regulation. Page 324
Page 325
3 We will provide information and advice in plain language. We will be open about how we do our work, including any charges made. We will take account of businesses, consumers, workforce representatives’ and other stakeholders’ views. We believe that prevention is better than cure and that our role therefore involves actively working with businesses, especially small and medium sized businesses, to advise on and assist with compliance. We will provide a courteous and efficient service and our staff will identify themselves by name. We will provide a contact point and telephone number for further dealings with us, and we will encourage businesses to seek advice/information from us. Applications for approval of establishments, licences, registrations etc., will be dealt with efficiently and promptly. We will ensure that, wherever practicable, our enforcement services are effectively co-ordinated to minimise overlaps and time delays. We have an effective and timely complaints procedure. In cases where disputes cannot be resolved, any right of complaint or appeal will be explained, with details of the process and the likely timescales involved. We will minimise the costs of compliance for businesses by ensuring that any action we require is proportionate for the risks. As far as the Law allows, we will take account of the circumstances of the case and the attitude of the operator when considering action. We will take particular care to work with small businesses and voluntary and community organisations so that they can meet their Legal obligations without unnecessary expense, where practicable. We carry out our duties in a fair, equitable and consistent manner. While officers are expected to exercise judgement in individual cases, we have arrangements in place to promote consistency, including effective arrangements for liaison with other Authorities and Enforcement bodies. Food Safety Food law enforcement is carried out by authorised Environmental Health Officers and Food Safety Officers within Moray Council’s Environmental Health team. The Service has two main aims: a. To maintain and improve public health within Moray by carrying out the Council’s food law enforcement responsibilities in a consistent, planned, and accountable manner to ensure that: Food (which includes drink) is safe to eat. Food is handled and produced hygienically. Foreseeable incidents of food poisoning or injury as a consequence of the consumption of food are identified and prevented. The quality, composition, labelling, presentation and advertising of food and materials in contact with food are satisfactory. Page 325
Page 326
4 b. To provide an effective, efficient, support and advice service to the public, the commercial sector and other agencies on food safety matters. Thereby securing the objective that all food purchased or traded in Moray is manufactured, described and handled safely and to consistent standards, which is essential for the well-being of consumers, food businesses and the wider economy. The Service works collaboratively with Food Standards Scotland (FSS) which was established by the Food (Scotland) Act 2015 to deliver independent consistent, evidence based and consumer focused information to protect public health, help improve the Scottish diet and protect the interests of the consumer in relation to food. The FSS Strategy for 2021-2026 incorporated a 3-year Corporate Plan, April 2021-March 2024, which had been developed by FSS and set the direction to help deliver the FSS vision. The Corporate Plan outcomes are that: Food is safe and authentic. Consumers have healthy diets. Responsible food businesses are enabled to thrive. Consumers are empowered to make choices about food. FSS is trusted and effective. The Environmental Health Service works in partnership with the public and businesses in the Moray Council area. Due regard is given to guidance issued by FSS, Scottish Government, Royal Environmental Health Institute of Scotland (REHIS), Health Protection Scotland (HPS), Scottish Food Enforcement Liaison Committee (SFELC) and Society of Chief Officers of Environmental Health in Scotland (SOCOEHS). 1.2 Links to Corporate Plans The Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan is delivered by the Environmental Health Team which forms part of Economic Growth and Development. Economic Growth and Development has many roles including developing partnerships with business and local and national agencies to promote economic development, attracting external funding, assisting vulnerable groups with financial and welfare benefit issues and ensuring public health and community safety. It seeks to protect and enhance our environment, heritage and culture and enable opportunities for development and growth. Economic Growth and Development seek to ensure development in Moray is sustainable, providing a safe and valued environment both now and in the future. The Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan is linked to the Economic Growth and Development Service Plan 2024-2025 currently being developed Page 326
Page 327
5 which in turn is linked to ʻThe Moray Local Outcome Improvement Planʼ which identifies the following priorities of the ʻCommunity Planning Boardʼ:- Growing, diverse and sustainable economy Building a better future for our children and young people in Moray Empowering and connecting communities Changing our relationship with alcohol 1.3 Workload Priorities The Service recognises that there has been a reduction in overall staff resources, 10% in 23/24, however we will endeavour to carry out the full range of functions required by the FSS Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland) which was published in 2019 and for the forthcoming year tasks will be prioritised in the following order: a. Emergencies and threats to public health: Food alerts, outbreaks/incidents, infectious diseases notifications Food fraud Formal action to protect public health, including revisits, Hygiene Emergency Prohibition Notices, Remedial Action Notices Food and Water complaints where there is a potential risk to public health. b. Planned highest risk inspections: Food premises – Group 1,2 and 3 Band D and E Approved establishments New or unrated premises where there are cross contamination risks c. Planned higher risk inspections. Food premises – Band B premises in groups 1, 2 and 3 where there are potential risks of cross contamination; those that are not “broadly compliant” with Food Law and those that are overdue for inspection. Advice to high-risk establishments Licensing of high-risk establishments d. Planned lower risk inspections. Food premises– B and C premises (not included in c above) Band D rated catering premises. e. All other work and lowest rated establishments inspected as resources permit. Page 327
Page 328
6 These priorities have been established to ensure the best practical service in addressing the food safety and public health needs of Moray within existing resources. The priorities are also based on the principles contained in the Scottish Regulators Strategic Code of Practice. 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 Profile of the Local Authority Moray Council covers an area of 2,238 square kilometres from the Cairngorm Mountains in the south to the coast of the Moray Firth in the north. The population is 95,520 which is 1.8% of the total for Scotland and just over half of the population live in the 5 main towns of Elgin, Forres, Buckie, Lossiemouth and Keith. Within Moray, the main industries are agriculture, whisky distilling, fish processing, food processing and tourism. There are also 2 Ministry of Defence Establishments namely RAF Lossiemouth and Kinloss Barracks that contribute to the local economy. Page 328
Page 329
7 2.2 Organisational Structure The Service Structure is attached at Appendix I. The Head of Economic Growth and Development has overall managerial responsibilities for all Economic Growth and Development functions. The Environmental Health & Trading Standards Manager has responsibility for management of the Food Law Enforcement Service assisted by a Principal Environmental Health Officer 2.3 Scope of the Food Service The Food Law Enforcement Service is provided through multi-disciplinary Environmental Health Officers (EHO) and a Food Safety Officer. This means in addition to food law, EHOs have responsibilities for other aspects of Environmental Health including health and safety at work, public health, environmental protection, and housing. The full scope of the Environmental Health Service is set out in Appendix II. The Food Law Enforcement Service involves: Implementing and maintaining a documented programme of food hygiene/food standards interventions. The interventions are designed to ensure the safety of food by means of a programme of inspections designed to check compliance with current Laws and Codes of Practice and to educate, train and work in partnership with all parts of the food industry. This Authority will ensure, as far as practicable, that interventions are carried out in accordance with that programme. Interventions are applied in a risk-based manner so that more intensive intervention is directed at those businesses that present the greatest risk to public health. Carrying out visits/re-visits between programmed interventions where significant contraventions are found or following intelligence or complaints. Implementing a documented Food Safety Enforcement Decision Procedure, based on the Environmental Health Enforcement Policy, which is published and available to businesses and consumers. Preparing and publishing a Microbiological and Chemical Food Sampling Policy and making it available to businesses and consumers. Identifying sampling priorities and preparing a microbiological and chemical sampling programme in consultation with the Aberdeen Scientific Services Laboratory (ASSL), Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council. Page 329
Page 330
8 Implementing a documented policy in relation to food complaints ensuring timeous and proportionate action. Implementing the Infectious Disease Incident Plan, in respect of cases of food borne diseases. This Plan contains clear links of communication and responsibility and is produced in conjunction with NHS Grampian, Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council. Implementing and documenting the procedures for responding to ‘food alerts’ received from FSS and reacting to emergencies and immediate threats to public health. Food alerts secure the withdrawal of any suspect foods from premises in Moray. Providing advice to businesses and the public and providing advice during inspections. Liaising with colleagues in Moray Council, other Local Authorities, professional bodies and central government to ensure a co-ordinated approach to food related matters including representation on the following groups: - North of Scotland Food Liaison Group - The Society of Chief Officers of Environmental Health in Scotland Participating in food safety initiatives such as the Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS), and Food Safety Week, Eat Safe and the Healthy Living Award where resources permit. Promoting the implementation of CookSafe, a written food safety management system designed to assist caterers comply with Food Safety Law. Providing guidance and raising awareness of food safety to the public and businesses to ensure compliance with Food Law. This is achieved through leaflets, seminars, display stands and training as resources permit. 2.4 Demands on the Food Service There are 1351 food businesses in Moray, all of which are included in the Intervention Programme and are subject to the Enforcement Policy. The Moray area has a relatively large number of food manufacturing companies within its boundaries. Approximately 8%of premises are manufacturers and Moray is the base for major food manufacturers including Baxter’s of Speyside and Walkers of Aberlour. In addition, there are 16 premises Approved in terms of EC Regulation 853/2004 for producing, manufacturing, or storing products of animal origin. Page 330
Page 331
9 These premises include several meat and fish processors, a fishing vessel and a cold store. There are also 5 registered egg packers and due to the packing activity involved, these businesses require to be approved in accordance with EC Hygiene Regulation 853/2004. In total there are 16 premises requiring approval within Moray. Following Brexit, two of the Approved fish processors export to the EU using the export hubs Premises Profile The food premises in Moray can be categorised as follows: - As of 01/04/24 TYPE NUMBER Caring Establishment 168 Distributors/Transporters 19 Fishing Vessel 83 Hotel/Guest House 100 Importers/Exporters 1 Manufacturers/Packers 75 Mobile Food Unit 61 Primary Producers 23 Pub/Club 65 Restaurant, Café, Canteen 175 Restaurants and Caterers - Other 109 Retailers - Others 200 School/College 63 Smaller Retailers 84 Supermarket/Hypermarket 23 Take-away 100 Restaurant/Cafe/Canteen 2 Total 1351 Primary Product Enforcement Retained EC Regulation 852/2004 Annex 1 provides food safety requirements for primary producers such as livestock, crop and horticulture farm premises. Enforcement in these businesses is the responsibility of FSS. Official Controls of Wild Pectinidae (Scallops) The official sampling controls for harvested wild scallops have been transferred from offshore to the first point of arrival at the processor and are Page 331
Page 332
10 now the responsibility of the Local Authority Environmental Health Service. There are no processors currently approved for processing Scallops in Moray. Shellfish Sampling In accordance with EC Regulations 854/2004 shellfish harvesting sites may require to be sampled to ensure compliance with official controls. There are 2 sites within Moray, namely Culbin Sands and Findhorn Bay. No sampling at present is being carried out because harvesting from these sites is subject to restriction by Scottish Natural Heritage. Imported Food There are currently no requirements for most non-animal product imports to be inspected at the point of entry into the country. It is important therefore, that checks are carried out by Authorities such as Moray to maintain public health safeguards. This is achieved by ensuring imported food is inspected for fitness and legitimate import, during routine inspections and by ensuring that Imported Food Control Legislation is enforced in accordance with the Enforcement Policy and FSS guidance on the inland enforcement of imported feed and food controls. The FSS Early Warning System provides monthly information on hazards associated with imported foods and this intelligence is considered in relation to Moray Council’s food sampling programme. External Factors An increasing number of events such as agricultural shows, music festivals, charity events, continental markets, farmer’s markets and highland games are held throughout Moray on an annual basis, particularly during the summer months. Intervention (advice, guidance or enforcement) is required in response to ‘one off’ businesses, food retailers and caterers from out with Moray attending these events. These interventions are in addition to the planned programme and place an increased demand on resources. Service Delivery Points All authorised Food Enforcement Officers are based at Council offices, High Street, Elgin. The Annexe also has a reception where documents can be dropped off and information hubs are available in all libraries where persons can access online services and free phone the contact centre. The Environmental Health team provides a service from 7am until 7pm. Officers can be available out with these hours should the situation demand. The Council’s emergency telephone number is available 7 days a week. 2.5 Enforcement Policy The Environmental Health Enforcement Policy provides detailed enforcement procedures with action taken being proportionate to the scale of the identified problem. Page 332
Page 333
11 The enforcement policy incorporates the principles of the Scottish Regulators Strategic Code of Practice. A detailed Food Safety Enforcement Decision Procedure has been implemented to ensure compliance with Food Legislation, the FSS Framework Agreement on Local Authority Food Law Enforcement, the Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland) and associated Guidance. The Enforcement Policy and the Enforcement Decision Procedure apply to establishments owned and operated by Moray Council. All serious breaches of food law in these establishments will be brought to the attention of the Chief Executive without delay. 3. SERVICE DELIVERY 3.1 Food Premises Interventions General Food hygiene interventions are designed to ensure that food meets the requirements of Food Law, including microbiological quality, absence of pathogenic micro-organisms and safety for consumption. Food standards interventions are designed to ensure that food meets the requirements of Food Standards Law, including proper presentation, labelling, and advertising so as not to confuse or mislead; compliance with compositional standards; and the absence of non-permitted or excessive levels of additives, contaminants and residues. Additional requirements for nutritional and allergen labelling were introduced during 2014 and 2021. Since the 2019 Code of Practice, Food Standards and Food Hygiene disciplines have been combined and each premises now has a Food Law Rating System grouping and band. It should be noted that, during the period of the covid 19 pandemic the Scottish Government suspended food visits to release staff to address the public health issues. The opportunity was taken to carry out a desktop exercise to convert from the previous rating system and allocate a FLRS grouping and banding to all food premises. The programme for 23/24 and 24/25 is designed to ensure that all food premises will receive a physical visit to enable an accurate risk assessment to be carried out and the premises allocated an accurate group and band rather than the” desktop” rating. Intervention Programme The Food Law Rating Intervention Programme is produced annually on 1 April. Page 333
Page 334
12 The annual programme includes the name and address of the premises, the group and band, and the due date. Performance Monitoring All premises are held on the IDOX UNI-form database and all Officers have individual measurable intervention targets based on risk. UNI-form generates reports on interventions due and completed on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis. A monthly Manager’s monitoring report will also generated. In addition to monitoring a number of inspections quality checks will be conducted. Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland) The Food Law Code of Practice 2019 contains details of an enforcement regime based on ‘official control interventions. These include: Inspections Monitoring Surveillance Verification Auditing Sampling This Code of Practice allows enforcement authorities to select the most appropriate choice of intervention, dependent on the level of compliance of specific premises, which is not mandatorily based on inspection. The interventions must provide sufficient information to establish that food related activities carried out at food establishments comply with Food Law. The official control intervention choice for Moray during 2024-2025 has been agreed as inspection only. Page 334
Page 335
13 Food Hygiene The minimum frequency for Food Law Interventions is determined by the rating scheme in accordance with the Interventions Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland), see below: Page 335
Page 336
14 Food Hygiene Inspections Due 1/04/2023– 31/03/2024 Category Number of Inspections Group 1A 7 Group 1B 4 Group 1C 0 Group 1D 0 Group 2A 5 Group 2B 202 Group 2C 59 Group 2D 2 Group 3A 3 Group 3B 198 Group 3C 79 Group 3D 0 Unrated 0 Total 560 Revisits Revisits are carried out in accordance with the FLRS scheme. Approved Premises There are presently 11 premises subject to EC Approval for the production/manufacture/storage of products of animal origin and 5 egg packing stations. Approved Premises at 01/04/2024 Premises Number Fish Products 5 Meat Products 3 Fishing Vessel 1 Dairy Products 1 Standalone cold store 1 Egg Packing Stations 5 Total 16 In order to improve the resilience of the service approved premises across Moray are inspected by a minimum of 2 officers who have experience in inspection of these premises. In addition, all inspecting officers have the Level 4 HACCP qualification and the OCV qualification issued by FSS. These visits are carried out using the Official Control Verification process. Page 336
Page 337
15 Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS) This Authority launched the national Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS) project on 26 April 2011. All 32 Scottish Local Authorities participate in the scheme. The Scheme provides basic information to the public regarding the level of compliance of a business with the Food Hygiene (Scotland) Regulations. FHIS is easy for consumers to understand and simple for Local Authorities to apply. The 'Pass' standard represents a single level of compliance that is satisfactory in terms of consumer expectations and as an enforcement outcome. Establishments are assessed during programmed inspections; there is no need for separate inspection scheduling. It is designed to simply reflect the Local Authority's most up to date information and to fit existing enforcement procedures. The two outcomes of compliance assessment under the Scheme are 'Pass' or 'Improvement Required' (failure to achieve a Pass). The designation ‘Pass’ provides reassurance that the establishment has been inspected and meets Food Hygiene Legal requirements. The 'Pass' standard essentially represents a situation where the Officer does not consider it necessary to revisit the establishment for enforcement purposes until the next programmed intervention. 'Pass' is incompatible with the existence of even minor recurring contraventions notified at successive visits. Any establishment that falls below the required standard for a 'Pass' is classified as ‘Improvement Required'. Establishments that have registered under Hygiene Legislation but have not yet been inspected are classed as 'Awaiting Inspection'. The Scheme applies to all catering and retail operations but allows for exemptions in prescribed circumstances where both the Local Authority and the food business operator agree. The Scheme includes the following measures to ensure that it is fair to businesses: Procedures for appeal against an Officer's judgement Procedures for requesting reassessment where compliance has been achieved. Experience has shown that reassessments do not result in a significant additional burden for enforcement staff and there have been no appeals since the Scheme was introduced. Page 337
Page 338
16 3.2 Food Complaints All complaints regarding food stuffs or the hygiene of premises are investigated in accordance with the Council’s Food Complaint Policy. Investigating food complaints can be quite involved and often requires working with colleagues from other Authorities. This, along with the time taken to receive reports from the analyst etc., can increase the time taken to resolve the complaint. Complaints about food very rarely result in formal action, mainly due to the lack of evidence which could be relied on in court. Complainant’s details are confidential unless otherwise agreed. Where the complainant has agreed to have their name and address divulged, this will only occur once the investigation has been concluded. It is recognised that food complaints help identify failings in food processing and handling which require to be rectified to prevent future problems. The outcome of investigations can lead to improvements to food produced in Moray. 3.3 Home Authority Principle A Home Authority is the Local Authority where the relevant decision-making base of a business is located. Moray Council supports the Home Authority Principle as specified in the Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland). This Principle has been developed by Food and Trading Standards Authorities to provide contact points for advice and guidance to encourage good enforcement practice. The aims are to protect the consumer, encourage fair- trading, consistency, and common sense by: Encouraging Authorities to place special emphasis on goods and services originating within their area. Providing businesses with a Home Authority source of guidance and advice Supporting efficient liaison between Local Authorities Providing a system for the resolution of problems and disputes The principle is supported by Local Authorities, central government, trade and industry associations, consumer and professional Regulatory bodies. 3.4 Advice to Businesses The Environmental Health Service is keen to provide support and advice to businesses. This includes: Advice during programmed interventions ‘Drop in’ advice to businesses. Distributing advisory booklets/leaflets and business information sheets Responding promptly to queries Page 338
Page 339
17 Provision of training/seminars as resources permit Promote the FSS Cook Safe Food Safety Assurance System during inspections. 3.5 Food Sampling Food sampling is carried out to a set annual programme for microbiological, compositional, and labelling parameters agreed between ASSL, Aberdeenshire Council, Aberdeen City Council and Moray Council. The purpose of sampling is to ensure that food manufactured, distributed, prepared, and retailed within Moray is fit for human consumption and complies with the relevant Food Hygiene and Food Standards Legislation and/or guidelines for the type of food. The type of food sampled varies but sampling is targeted towards food produced locally for local consumption or for distribution out-with Moray. Whenever possible, sampling is carried out in accordance with local, regional, and national surveys, projects and/or investigations initiated by local or national intelligence or by regional and national bodies such as the North of Scotland Food Liaison Group, the Scottish Food Enforcement Liaison Committee, the Health Protection Agency or The Society of Chief Officers of Environmental Health in Scotland. Aberdeen Scientific Services is included on the list of Official Food Control Laboratories in the United Kingdom as notified to the European Commission for both chemical analysis and microbiological examination. The target for microbiological samples is 1.5 per 1000 of population and the chemical sample target is 2 per 1000. Food Samples Due1/04/2024– 31/03/2025 Category Number of Samples Microbiological 210 Chemical 140 3.6 Control and Investigation of Food Related Outbreaks and Infectious Disease The NHS Grampian Infectious Disease Incident Plan has been developed to control major outbreaks of food poisoning and communicable disease. The document which is reviewed every 2 years describes the actions to be taken to manage an incident or outbreak that presents an actual or potential risk to the public health in any setting in Grampian. The document is prepared by the NHS Grampian Clinical Lead of the Health Protection Team; reviewed by NHS Grampian Director of Public Health and approved by NHS Grampian Board, and the Environmental Health Sections of Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, and Moray Council. Page 339
Page 340
18 All cases of food related infectious disease notified “for action” by Grampian Health Board are contacted within 24 hours. Outbreaks are investigated to ensure adequate controls are in place to prevent further spread. There are fortnightly meetings between NHS Grampian, Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire and Moray Council. A documented procedure is available for the investigation of notifications of food related infectious disease. A Memorandum of Understanding between NHS Grampian Health Protection Team and Moray Council Environmental Health Service is in place. Food poisoning and other communicable disease outbreaks can place a major demand on resources, but it is anticipated that such incidents can be dealt with utilising existing staff. Informal arrangements exist with neighbouring authorities to share resources if required. 3.7 Food Safety Incidents Food safety emergencies and incidents which pose a serious risk to public safety are a priority issue for the Service. FSS issues food incident alerts through the issuing of Product Recall Information Notices, Allergy Alerts and Food Alerts for Action. These alerts contain information product withdrawals and recalls informing consumers and local authorities about problems associated with food. Food alerts marked “for action" by Local Authorities are issued by FSS where specific action requires to be taken by Local Authorities to remove a public health risk. These alerts are dealt with by Enforcement Officers in accordance with the Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland). Action taken following food alerts ensures that any suspect food supplied to premises in Moray is withdrawn from sale. Documented procedures are in place to ensure that food alerts issued by the FSS and local incidents which need to be reported to the FSS, are dealt with promptly. Out of hours contact arrangements for authorised officers are arranged through the Environmental Health Directory issued by the FSS, the emergency planning provisions and Moray Council’s emergency out of hours contact telephone service. 3.8 Food Crime Food crime is a risk to public health and to the global reputation and economy of the Scottish food and drink industry. Examples of this type of criminality could be any of the following: Page 340
Page 341
19 Fraud - food or drink that has been adulterated or substituted using poorer quality, mislabeled or dangerous ingredients, deliberate mis- labelling the product’s country of origin, for example claiming the product is Scottish when it is produced elsewhere. Illicit goods – selling a product as something it isn’t, such as counterfeit alcohol e.g., fake vodka or wine. Identity theft - fraudulently using the identity of a legitimate food business and the movement of livestock and food using falsified documents. Illegal slaughter – the slaughter of farmed and wild animals in conditions which do not meet animal welfare or hygiene standards. Unfit food - everything from putting animal by-products back into the food chain, to beef and poultry of unknown origin, or selling goods after their ‘use by’ date. The Scottish Food Crime and Incidents Unit (SFCIU) is the investigations and intelligence gathering arm of Food Standards Scotland (FSS) who focus on tackling food crime and maintaining consumer protection. Moray Council works in partnership with the SFCIU and utilises CLUE which is an FSS intelligence database shared with Food Standards Scotland and Local Authority Environmental Health services. 3.9 Liaison with other Organisations Arrangements are in place to ensure that enforcement action taken is consistent with those of neighbouring Local Authorities. This includes representation on the following committees: The North of Scotland Food Liaison Group The NHS Grampian Health Protection Group In addition, there is regular liaison with other services within Moray Council to review Building Warrant applications, Planning Applications, and Licensing Applications. The Service also works with Legal, Education and Social Care, Environmental Protection and Corporate Communications to ensure a corporate approach. 3.10 Food Safety and Standards Promotion The Environmental Health Section has a limited involvement in food safety promotional work in view of the resource implications. . Page 341
Page 342
20 4. RESOURCES 4.1 Financial Allocation The current budget for 2024/2025 for food safety enforcement is contained in an overall budget for Environmental Health which is £112,0871 net. 4.2 Staff Allocation A total of 8 Environmental Health Officers, inclusive of the Environmental Health & Trading Standards Manager, are involved in food safety enforcement and 1 part-time Food Safety Officer. All Environmental Health Officers are multi-disciplinary, undertaking a wide range of Environmental Health duties. To determine full time, equivalent the work streams and workloads of the EHOs are scrutinised and a determination made from this. The FTE of officers’ time spent on food is currently 3.7. The number of FTE Officers available to carry out Food Law enforcement has been reduced due to the deletion of posts through previous budget savings and the inability to fill vacant posts because of the national shortage of qualified Environmental Health Officers and Food Safety Officers. Increasing responsibilities due to new legislation has also reduced the time available. The difficulty in recruiting suitable staff is predicted to continue and to attempt to address this situation, a vacant EHO post, which we were not successful in filling, has been replaced with a graduate trainee post. This officer has recently commenced the university course however will not be available for food law enforcement for another 4 years. As is the case with all Scottish Local Authorities Moray Council is currently undertaking a deficit reduction process. In the case of Environmental Health in 23/24 this process resulted in a ten percent reduction in staff and, many of the statutory duties carried out by these posts e.g., dangerous dog enforcement will require to be carried by Environmental Health Officers and will therefore reduce the time available for food law enforcement and adversely affect our ability to achieve the tasks set out in this plan. The deficit reduction process is ongoing and any future reduction in staff taking effect in 24/25 will have a similar detrimental effect as workforce planning will require reallocation of duties away from food law. It is also the intention to carry out a service review in 2024 to establish what level of service can be provided given the reduced resource. It is also recognised that at least 2 officers currently in supervisory positions and involved in food law enforcement are due to retire in the next 2/3 years. While there is some succession planning in respect of the supervisory functions, it will result in less availability for food law enforcement. Given the difficulty we have and continue to have in recruiting officers and that it takes 4 years to train suitable staff the number of staff available will reduce to 6. This in turn will reduce the number of visits that are possible. and increase reaction times. Page 342
Page 343
21 Prioritisation of the highest and higher risk premises continues but failure to carry out interventions in lower risk premises can result in more premises becoming higher risk over time. To address this the 23/24 and 24/25 inspection programme is designed to ensure that all premises will have received a physical visit in this time frame to enable higher risk premises to be identified. Food Standards Scotland are also attempting to address the issue of falling resources via the SAFER project however there has been little progress to date. Resilience of this service to deal with any significant outbreak or national crisis is currently low. Significant streamlining of work processes has provided some efficiencies, and the service continues to monitor workload and direct resources as necessary to provide a quality service within the budget restrictions in place. This process will continue with the service review in 2024. 4.3 Staff Development Plan The Food Law Code of Practice (Scotland) requires that every Officer achieves a minimum of ten hours food safety training annually. Officers who are members of the Royal Environmental Health Institute of Scotland are also required to complete twenty hours training and development every year as part of the Continuous Professional Development Scheme. Where this is achieved Officers can be awarded Chartered status. 1 Environmental Health Officer in Moray has Chartered status. Where budget permits the Environmental Health Section is committed to the ongoing training of all Officers involved in food safety enforcement through attendance at update courses and conferences organised by FSS, the Royal Environmental Health Institute for Scotland, and Health Protection Scotland. All Environmental Health Officers and the Food Safety Officer participate in the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Programme as required by the COP. Cascade training is provided and there are regular staff meetings. Food Focus meetings are used to discuss caseloads, improve consistency, and ensure compliance with current Legislation and guidance. All Officers participate in the Employee Review and Development (ERDP) process, which identifies and addresses staff development needs. A record of staff training is maintained. This programme has been disrupted in the last 2 years due to Covid and the resulting lack of available courses. Page 343
Page 344
22 Authorised Officers dealing with the specialist food processes such as canning, thermal processing, vacuum packing etc. are supported and have access to expertise to enable competent inspections. This includes releasing Officers to relevant courses and providing relevant guidance and documentation and providing suitable resources to support CPD. All officers enforcing Food Law have the level 4 HACCP qualification and OCV training provided by FSS. 4.4 Service Review The Service is under review to achieve budget savings, and this will continue in 2024/2025.The effect of this review is unknown at present, but it is understood that any savings will be implemented in the current financial year. 5. QUALITY ASSESSMENT 5.1 The measures taken to assess the quality of the food safety service include: Ad hoc monitoring of inspection reports and letters. Accompanied visits. Peer accompanied visits and assessments. Food Focus meetings Quarterly monitoring of risk ratings. Regular database monitoring to ensure accuracy and consistency in database management; interventions and inspections; follow-up actions and enforcement. Ongoing Employee Review and Development Programme (ERDP). External audit by the FSS which is carried out approximately every three years. Page 344
Page 345
23 6. REVIEW 6.1 Review against the Service Plan The Economic Growth and Development Service Plan which incorporates Environmental Health performance is reviewed on a quarterly basis. Due attention is paid to specific performance targets, performance standards, targeted outcomes. Stakeholders’ comments and complaints against the Service are monitored regularly. The status and adequacy of the Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan in relation to new objectives resulting from changing circumstances will be revised annually. 6.2 Identification of any variation from the Service Plan/Areas for Improvement Variations and areas for improvement are incorporated into the Food Law Enforcement Service Delivery Plan Review. Page 345
Page 346
24 STAFF STRUCTURE @ 01 August 2024 APPENDIX I Page 346
Page 347
25 FOOD SERVICE SCOPE APPENDIX II Page 347
Page 348
Page 348