Mr Gaetano Grieve: Erection of 4 Dwellings, Installation of Sewage Treatment Plants and Formation of 2 Vehicular Accesses: Land West of Komani Aros Mains, Aros, Isle of Mull (Ref: 25/01248/Pp)
Argyll and Bute Council · 18 November 2025
Back to Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee — 18 November 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Argyll and Bute Council Development & Economic Growth Planning Application Report and Report of Handling as required by Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 relative to applications for Planning Permission or Planning Permission in Principle Reference No: 25/01248/PP Planning Hierarchy: Local Development Applicant: Mr Gaetano Grieve Proposal: Erection of 4 dwellinghouses, installation of sewage treatment plants and formation of 2 vehicular accesses Site Address: Land West of Komani Aros Mains, Aros, Isle of Mull DECISION ROUTE ☐Delegated - Sect 43 (A) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 ☒Committee - Local Government Scotland Act 1973 (A) THE APPLICATION (i) Development Requiring Express Planning Permission • Erection of four dwellinghouses • Installation of private drainage systems • Formation of two vehicular accesses (ii) Other specified operations • Connection to public water supply (B) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and reasons appended to this report. (C) CONSULTATIONS: Argyll and Bute Council – Area Roads Authority Report dated 03.11.2025 advising of no objections to the application subject to conditions relating to the formation of the accesses at the junction with the public road; the clearance and maintenance of visibility splays; the provision of a system of surface water drainage; the provision of parking and turning areas; the culverting of the roadside ditches at the site accesses; the provision of bin storage areas; and the provision of proportionate improvements to the public approach road to include the provision of an additional passing place and the levelling of the road verges to create a level step off for pedestrians.
Page 2
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Scottish Water Letter dated 06.08.2025 advising of no objection to the application and confirming that the proposed development is within the Tobermory Water Treatment Works catchment. Scottish Water further advised that there is no public waste water infrastructure within the vicinity of the proposed development and therefore private arrangements will be required. The above represents a summary of the issues raised. Full details of the consultation responses are available to view via the Public Access section of the Council’s website. (D) HISTORY: 24/01849/PP Erection of 6 dwellinghouses, installation of sewage treatment plants and formation of 2 vehicular accesses Withdrawn on 15.07.2025 (E) PUBLICITY: The proposal has been advertised in terms of Regulation 20 and Neighbour Notification procedures, overall closing date 28.08.2025. (F) REPRESENTATIONS: (i) Representations received from: 27 objections, 1 representation and 2 expressions of support have been received to the application. OBJECTIONS Mr Hugh Andrew, Keepers Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (07.08.2025) David Hartley (07.08.2025) Dr Lesley Graham, Keepers Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (12.08.2025) Ms Celia Thomson, 19 Garden House Drive, Acomb, Hexham, NE46 4RZ (13.08.2025) Mrs Abigail Macleod, Riverside House, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (13.08.2025) Mr Alistair Cameron, Glenaros Lodge, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (13.08.2025) Mrs Fae Cameron, Glenaros Lodge, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (13.08.2025) Prof. Mauvis Gore, Komani, Aros Mains, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP – by email only (14.08.2025) Dr Rupert Ormond, Komani, Aros Mains, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP – by email only (14.08.2025) Mr James MacLennan, Seileasdair, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (15.08.2025) Mr Richard Kellett, Main Cottage, Castle Steadings, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (15.08.2025) Mrs Maggie Thomson, Aros Mains House, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (15.08.2025) Miss Evie Kellett, Main Cottage, Castle Steadings, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (15.08.2025)
Page 3
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Christina Thomson Jones, Grianan, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP – by email only (13.08.2025) Mr Roderick Thomson, 11 Queens Walk, London, W5 1TP (17.08.2025) Mrs Alison Spence, Bridges Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (17.08.2025) Mrs Kirsten Bennett, Main Cottage, Castle Steadings, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (17.08.2025) Ms Leonora Thomson, 98 Taff Embankment, Cardiff, CF11 7BH (18.08.2025) Mr Richard Pells, 13 Valley View, Liskeard, PL14 4QH (18.08.2025) Ms Natasha Smailes, West Highland Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (18.08.2025) Mrs Caitlin MacLennan, Seileasdair, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (18.08.2025) Mr Stuart Davidson, Riverside Cottage, Aros Bridge, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (18.08.2025) Mr Duncan Spence, Bridges Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (18.08.2025) Mrs Linda Devlin, 2 Aros Mains, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP – by email only (19.08.2025) Harriet Smailes, West Highland Cottage, Aros Mains, PA72 6JP – by email only (17.08.2025) Nick Holmes, 2 Aros Mains, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (19.08.2025) Ms Alison Holt, Heriot Cottage, Aros, Isle of Mull, PA72 6JP (20.08.2025) REPRESENTATIONS Oban & District Access Panel – by email only (18.08.2025) SUPPORT Mr Grant Holland, Toomeran Lodge, Lochbuie, Isle of Mull, PA62 6AA (25.08.2025) Ms Juliet Knight, 25/3 Mentone Terrace, Edinburgh, EH9 2DF (27.08.2025) Representations are published in full on the planning application file and are available to view via the Public Access section of the Council’s website. (ii) Summary of issues raised: OBJECTION Water supply and drainage • The ground to which this application relates sits on a number of private water supplies. Existing private water supplies would be compromised. The existing pipes are buried shallow and require to be accessed to resolve blockages. If the pipes are disturbed during construction, water supplies would be cut off. • The development references soakaways with further potential for permanent impact on water supply and quality. • Local residents were requested to cut mains usage due to water shortages. Has the applicant got any assurance that they would be accepted on to mains water supply. • The proposed development is not near a public sewer and will therefore require sewage treatment, from which the outflow will discharge into soakaways. Properties located below the proposed development are
Page 4
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 supplied by a spring located in proximity to the proposed development. The proposal would breach SEPA’s guidance with regards to proximity to existing springs supplying domestic water and to an existing watercourse. There is concern that the quality of existing water supplies would be biologically compromised, contrary to LDP2 Policy 60. • There is no guarantee that these properties can be attached to mains water. If Scottish Water decline to supply the development, water will have to be provided by a private supply. This would interfere with existing supplies. • The increased water and sewage runoff could harm the health and affect wildlife at the river and the estuary. The effect on the estuary and its significant and unique estuarine flora and fauna is unknown and potentially disastrous. Officer Comment: The Council’s Building Standards Service will apply sufficient control over the treatment plant arrangements at Building Warrant stage. The proposed drainage system would be regulated under the building standards to ensure that it is capable of being provided to a safe, effective and appropriate technical standard. Any discharge to the water environment would be regulated by SEPA under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (as amended). It is the responsibility of the installer and owner to ensure that the drainage system is installed and maintained correctly. Pollution enforcement is the responsibility of SEPA and as the proposed development is not located within a Waste Water Drainage Consultation Area there is no reason to assume that a safe and effective private wastewater system cannot be utilised. The rights of third parties to access the application site for purposes relating to the existing private water supplies is a Civil Matter to be resolved between the affected parties. The application indicates a connection to the public water supply. Scottish Water have been consulted on the application and raised no objection to the application, confirming that the proposed development is within the Tobermory Water Treatment Works catchment. In the event that a public water supply connection cannot be obtained an alternative private water supply would constitute a material amendment requiring the submission of a further planning application. Visual impact • The building of tall structures on a rising bank at the top of another steep bank is going to be unavoidably extremely prominent. Much is made of the screening effect of the trees; this is on separate private ground and for half the year it is bare and provides minimal screening. The benefit of the screening cannot be relied upon for considering visual impact in the future. The visual impact will be severe in winter months when the trees are without leaves. • The road passage on the far side of the Aros Water and on to Tobermory is one of the most used roads on the west coast of Scotland. The view across the water to Aros Castle is one of the most iconic on the west coast. It is a historic landscape, and visitors will now see a ribbon development along the skyline. The development represents a very substantial intrusion into one of the more famous and photographed views of the Hebrides. Plot 4 would be
Page 5
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 particularly visible in what is an iconic view. The deterioration of the area would impact upon the local tourist sector. The proposed development would stand out against the skyline and would detract from the historically important setting. • Given the small size of Aros Mains, the development would represent a significant expansion of the settlement outside of the settlement boundary. A smaller development, at the same level, consistent with the existing houses, would be less visually obtrusive and more in keeping with the area. • LDP2 notes that most development should be within the settlements and not within the countryside. The proposal does not represent infill, rounding off or redevelopment. The development would be a new estate rather than being in keeping with the existing area. • There is concern that the granting of the application would bring similar plans that would provide the area with a ‘strip mall’ appearance. The proposed development would extend into the open countryside. • LDP2 encourages appropriate development along the Dalmally-Oban- Craignure-Tobermory corridor. However the applicant is interpreting this policy incorrectly for development at any location along this route. This would result in a strip of development along the whole of the north coast of Mull between Craignure and Tobermory, adversely impacting upon the coastal landscape of the area. • The size and location of the proposed development would be contrary to LDP2 Policy 71. • The previously withdrawn application proposed to utilise more discreet facing materials. • The proposed development would lead to overdevelopment. The development would double the number of properties served by the access and would bring a suburban style ribbon development. The development would be out of scale and would alter the character of the area. Four large, elevated houses would dominate the view. The development of four properties with two access points is unreasonable when considered in the context of the location and density of the existing dwellings. • There are no plans for landscaping. Any planting would need to be maintained until it was able to manage on its own. The impact on local character and landscape could be further reduced if there were areas of planting of native shrubs and trees. • The visualisations submitted with the application are being used to mislead and misrepresent the impact of the proposed development. Officer Comment: The application site is not covered by any specific environmental or landscape designations. Notwithstanding this, the application has been submitted with a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment to assist in the assessment of the likely significance of the effects of change resulting from the proposed development upon the landscape, views and visual amenity.
Page 6
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 The proposed development would be set towards the south of the site and would sit no higher in the landscape than the adjacent properties to the east. There are a number of substantial properties in proximity to the site, and the proposed development would form a well-contained, distinct grouping, respecting the wider plot densities. The ground to the north of the site continues to rise, which would provide an appropriate backdrop to the proposed development. Whilst the established trees are outwith the application site, they would provide a degree of screening; it is acknowledged that the trees may be felled, however the proposed development would remain backdropped and viewed in the context of existing, established clusters of development. The settlement pattern of the wider area is characterised by clusters of development, and the proposed development would contribute to this. The proposed development has been reduced in scale since the submission of the initial planning application relating to the site, which was withdrawn (our reference 24/01849/PP). This current application seeks to address the concerns raised following the submission of the previous application, including the reduction of the number of dwellinghouses from six to four, and amendments to the siting to ensure that the proposal would not lead to a two-tiered development pattern. The proposed facing and roofing materials are considered appropriate to the context of the site and would be similar in appearance to the facing and roofing materials of the existing dwellings to the east. A scheme for boundary treatment, surface treatment and landscaping is to be secured via planning condition, to include the submission of details any proposed walls, fences and gates; surface treatment; and hard and soft landscaping works. Housing need • There is no evidence that the intention of the applicant is to develop affordable housing. The specifications and size of the dwellings make it clear that this is a development to be sold for high prices to maximise profit. What guarantees will be given to ensure that the development is affordable, built to the standards stated, and that it is not to maximise land value. • The proposal is for luxury houses that will, without regulation, most likely be either second homes or holiday lets. Approval should be subject to a Section 75 Agreement requiring local occupancy by persons with an agreed local connection, affordability safeguards, prohibition of short-term letting or second home use without further consent, and delivery in accordance with the submitted high quality design; this should be monitored and enforced. Without such safeguards, the proposal risks undermining the housing strategy of the island by adding to the stock of premium or recreational housing rather than meeting identified community need. • The existing housing shortage is not for large houses but for affordable accommodation and cheaper starter homes. The proposed houses are unlikely to be affordable to those on low or moderate incomes. Officer Comment: The proposal the subject of this planning application seeks consent for the erection of four dwellinghouse. It is important to ensure that new housing developments meet the varied needs of all sectors of communities; the number of dwellinghouses proposed would be of a small scale and the proposal
Page 7
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 does not reach the threshold for the number of units required to contribute a proportion of affordable housing. Whilst it is acknowledged that the future occupancy or tenure of the dwellinghouses is unknown, the Council currently has no planning policies that could control this and, in that regard, this is not considered a planning issue of any overriding material significance. Neighbour notification • For an area like Argyll and Bute, the adoption of a 20-metre planning impact radius means that those affected by a planning application are unlikely to be made aware of a neighbouring proposed development. • The application did not appear to have been published anywhere. This is unacceptable. Officer Comment: The Council is required to notify those with an interest in “neighbouring land” of a planning application - this constitutes land within 20 metres of the boundary of the land for which the development is proposed. Where such neighbouring land consists of open fields, countryside or woodland with no obvious premises on it, then an advert would be necessary; in this instance, the application is advertised in the Oban Times under Regulation 20 procedures. Access • The road is not suitable for construction traffic or the increase in usage which the proposed development would lead to on top of the existing housing. One of the occupants along the road works in essential services and the road is a vital link for medical services on the island. The increased traffic from construction and occupation would delay emergency response times, risking lives. The proposal does not show how safe access will be maintained nor how increased traffic volumes can be safely managed. • The road is a narrow, single track with few passing places and has no pavement. Vehicles have to reverse around corners to get to the nearest passing places, which are not long enough or wide enough. The road is regularly used by walkers and visitors to the historic Aros Castle. The development would considerably increase traffic and the tight turn offs to the development could be hazardous. • The proposed exit plans for Plot 3 and Plot 4 suggest that the land is owned outright by the applicant; this is incorrect and misleading. • The use of the access road would lead to an increase in noise and exhaust pollution. • Four properties are likely to generate around eight vehicles for the residents, in addition to visitor vehicles and leisure vehicles. The information submitted with the application does not detail the containment of run-off from the access and parking areas. Officer Comment: The Council’s Roads Authority have been consulted on the application and advised of no objections subject to conditions. Such conditions include off site highway improvements to address the increase in vehicular traffic on the public approach road that would result from the proposed development. An
Page 8
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 appropriate condition will secure the provision of an additional passing place and levelling off the roadside verges between the proposed site accesses and junction of the UC79 with the A848 to create a level step off for pedestrians. Suitability and use of the site • The applicant states that the site is an agricultural field which is used for grazing cattle and sheep; it has been used for grazing in recent times. One of the current tenant farmers will be evicted. • The proposed development would aggravate the flooding issue affecting the properties along the shore below Aros Mains. House plots are not permeable and the development would occupy a significant area of land. Local flooding will become more severe given the increasing rainfall expected with climate change. Runoff from new hard surfaces would worsen the problem of flooding on the stretch of road near Aros Mains, increasing ice hazards in winter weather. • If soakaways and drains are unmaintained in the long term, there would be an increased risk of flooding to the existing properties below the proposed development. Officer Comment: The ceasing of the agricultural use of the land does not form a material planning consideration. In terms of the land capability for agriculture, the application site falls within Class 5.1 where the land is capable for use as improved grassland. The proposed development would be of a small scale and would not impact upon prime agricultural land, or land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important for primary use. The site for the proposed development is located outwith all flood extents as per the SEPA Future Flood Maps. A suitable condition will secure the provision of sustainable urban drainage systems to ensure that the proposed development would effectively manage rain and surface water. Systems of surface water drainage are required to prevent water passing onto the public road, and the provision of such systems will be secured via planning condition. REPRESENTATION • The Panel advise that the site is an eminently suitable location for disabled people who need ready access to medical and other essential services and facilities. The Panel suggest that an overlay internal layout floorplan based on Inclusive Design principles for one of the houses is provided. This would enable disabled people to ascertain the prospects of adapting the layout on disabled-friendly principles. Officer Comment: The agent has since provided a plan to show how the internal layout of one of the proposed house types could be varied to provide accessibility. SUPPORT • The potential of new houses in the Aros area is essential to provide adequate properties for permanent residents for either current or future families on Mull. As evidenced by other local land sales close by in Salen, uptake is quick and those plots already host young families and frontline workers. This
Page 9
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 planning type is essential for the regeneration and survivability of the island. The site is currently used as a grazing field for minimal livestock; the potential of four new homes far outweighs the impact on agricultural usage. • It is imperative that land is freed up to build new homes on the island for communities to thrive and to allow workers to move their families and to move up the housing ladder. There is a critical shortage of housing which makes it difficult for businesses to attract and retain staff or to fill essential roles. Many houses are holiday properties serving the tourist industry and land available for building is extremely limited. There are people at all stages of the housing ladder who either already live on Mull or need to move there for work. • Aros is well served by public transport, with access to schools, shops and other amenities. The area is accessed via a good road with low traffic levels and no existing residential property looks onto the proposed development. The proposed development is sensitively designed and, as there are already new houses along the road, they will not look out of keeping. Officer Comment: The expressions of support are noted by the Planning Authority. (G) SUPPORTING INFORMATION Has the application been the subject of: (i) Environmental Impact Assessment Report: ☐Yes ☒No (ii) An Appropriate Assessment under the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994: ☐Yes ☒No (iii) A Design or Design/Access statement: ☒Yes ☐No A Design & Access Statement has been submitted with the application. (iv) Sustainability Checklists (with reference to the requirements of LDP2 Policy 04) TN06 Sustainability Checklist TN07 Sustainable Buildings Checklist ☒Yes ☐No ☒Yes ☐No The relevant Sustainability Checklists have been submitted and examined. It is the assessment of the Case Officer that the applicant has understood and given adequate consideration to the sustainability aspects of
Page 10
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 the proposed development, sufficient to accord with the core sustainability requirements of both national and local planning policy, specifically the relevant details of the ‘Sustainable Places’ group of policies within NPF4 and LDP2 policies 04, 08 and 09. (v) A report on the impact of the proposed development eg. Retail impact, transport impact, noise impact, flood risk, drainage impact etc: ☐Yes ☒No (H) PLANNING OBLIGATIONS Is a Section 75 agreement required: ☐Yes ☒No (I) Has a Direction been issued by Scottish Ministers in terms of Regulation 30, 31 or 32: ☐Yes ☒No (J) Section 25 of the Act; Development Plan and any other material considerations over and above those listed above which have been taken into account in the assessment of the application (i) List of all Development Plan Policy considerations taken into account in assessment of the application. National Planning Framework 4 (Adopted 13th February 2023) Part 2 – National Planning Policy Sustainable Places NPF4 Policy 1 – Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises NPF4 Policy 2 – Climate Mitigation and Adaption NPF4 Policy 3 – Biodiversity NPF4 Policy 4 – Natural Places NPF4 Policy 5 – Soils NPF4 Policy 9 – Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings (includes provisions relevant to Greenfield Sites) NPF4 Policy 11 – Energy NPF4 Policy 12 – Zero Waste NPF4 Policy 13 – Sustainable Transport Liveable Places NPF4 Policy 14 – Design, Quality and Place
Page 11
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 NPF4 Policy 15 – Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods NPF4 Policy 16 – Quality Homes NPF4 Policy 17 – Rural Homes NPF4 Policy 18 – Infrastructure First NPF4 Policy 22 – Flood Risk and Water Management Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan 2 (Adopted 2024) Spatial and Settlement Strategy Policy 02 – Outwith Settlement Areas Policy 04 – Sustainable Development High Quality Places Policy 05 – Design and Placemaking Policy 08 – Sustainable Siting Policy 09 – Sustainable Design Policy 10 – Design – All Development Connected Places Policy 34 – Electric Vehicle Charging Points Policy 35 – Design of New and Existing, Public Roads and Private Access Regimes Policy 36 – New Private Accesses Policy 39 – Construction Standards for Private Accesses Policy 40 – Vehicle Parking Provision Policy 41 – Off Site Highway Improvements Sustainable Communities Policy 60 – Private Sewage Treatment Plants and Wastewater Drainage Systems Policy 61 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) Policy 63 – Waste Related Development and Waste Management Homes for People Policy 67 – Provision of Housing to Meet Local Needs Including Affordable Housing High Quality Environment Policy 73 – Development Impact on Habitats, Species and Biodiversity Policy 79 – Protection of Soil and Peat Resources Policy 83 – Safeguarding Agricultural and Croft Land (ii) List of all other material planning considerations taken into account in the assessment of the application, having due regard to Annex A of Circular 3/2013. • Third Party Representations • Consultation Reponses • Planning History • ABC Technical Note – Biodiversity (Feb 2017) • ABC draft Technical Note – Argyll and Bute Windows (April 2018)
Page 12
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 • TN06 Sustainability Technical Note and Checklist (Oct. 2023) • TN21 VII and LVIA Light Technical Note (Oct. 2023) • TN07 Sustainable Buildings Technical Note and Checklist (Oct. 2023) • ABC Housing Needs and Demand Assessment • ABC Housing Emergency Statement (K) Is the proposal a Schedule 2 Development not requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment: ☐Yes ☒No (L) Has the application been the subject of statutory pre-application consultation (PAC): ☐Yes ☒No (M) Does the Council have an interest in the site: ☐Yes ☒No (N) Requirement for a pre-determination hearing: ☐Yes ☒No Whilst there has been considerable objection raised, primarily from residents in the immediate locality of the development, it is noted that the representations relate largely to existing water supplies, the suitability of the access to serve the proposed development, and the visual impact resulting from the proposed development. The application site is not covered by any specific environmental or landscape designations and the Officer’s recommendation is aligned with the consultation responses received from both the Council’s Roads Authority and Scottish Water and as such it is not considered that a pre- determination hearing would add significant value to the decision making process. (O)(i) Key Constraints/Designations Affected by the Development: • N/A (O)(ii) Soils Agricultural Land Classification: Class 5.1 - Land capable of use as improved grassland. Few problems with pasture establishment and maintenance and potential high yields. Peatland/Carbon Rich Soils Classification: ☐Class 1 ☐Class 2 ☐Class 3 ☒N/A Peat Depth Classification: N/A Does the development relate to croft land? ☐Yes ☒No Would the development restrict access to croft or better quality agricultural land? ☐Yes ☒No ☐N/A Would the development result in fragmentation of croft / better quality agricultural land? ☐Yes ☒No ☐N/A
Page 13
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 (O)(iii) Woodland Will the proposal result in loss of trees/woodland? ☐Yes ☒No Does the proposal include any replacement or compensatory planting? ☐Yes ☐No details to be secured by condition ☒N/A (O)(iv) Land Status / LDP Settlement Strategy Status of Land within the Application ☐Brownfield ☐Brownfield Reclaimed by Nature ☒Greenfield ABC LDP2 Settlement Strategy ☐Settlement Area ☒Countryside Area ☐Remote Countryside Area ☐Helensburgh & Lomond Greenbelt ABC LDP2 Allocations/PDAs/AFAs etc: N/A (P) Summary assessment and summary of determining issues and material considerations The proposal the subject of this planning application is seeking to secure planning permission for the erection of four dwellinghouses, the installation of private drainage systems and the formation of two vehicular accesses. With regard to the planning history for the site, a previous application was submitted for the development of the site with six dwellinghouses and associated works (our reference 24/01849/PP); this application was subsequently withdrawn following concerns raised by the Planning Authority with regard to the density and siting of the proposed development. The current application proposes an amended scheme, seeking to address the previous concerns. In terms of the adopted LDP2 the site is defined as ‘Outwith Settlement Areas’ within an area identified as ‘Countryside Area' where Policy 02 of LDP2 gives a presumption in favour of sustainable development where it is of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for its countryside location, as set out in the relevant sustainable siting and design policies of LDP2. Policy 02 further states that certain development will be supported, generally without the need for detailed environmental assessments, with these comprising, infill, redevelopment opportunities of clusters; or previously developed sites. In Countryside Areas, where there are nature conservation or landscape designations in place, Policy 02 details that development proposals will have to demonstrate that they are compatible with the designation interests. The application site comprises an area of sloping managed grassland to the north of the UC79 public road, sited approximately 400 metres to the east of the A848 public road. The site as existing features a single agricultural building within the southeast corner, accessed via an existing track. A dense mature tree belt is situated to the
Page 14
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 south of the UC79 public road, which follows the line of the road. Further to the south, an additional access closely follows the edge of the bay to provide access to dwellings at the mouth of the River Aros. There are a number of existing residential properties in proximity to the application site, with three houses immediately to the east and an additional cluster of dwellings at the end of the UC79 public road. The proposed dwellings would be accessed by two new private accesses which would extend from the UC79 public road; Plot 1 and Plot 2 would share a new access and parking area set a short distance immediately to the north of the public road, and Plot 3 and 4 would be accessed via a shared hard landscaped area that would be of sufficient size to allow turning for larger delivery, maintenance and emergency vehicles. Water supply would be via connection to the public water supply and foul drainage would be via private domestic sewage treatment plants and associated soakaways due to the lack of public infrastructure within the vicinity of the site. All access, parking and infrastructure matters are considered acceptable and are discussed in detail in the main assessment of the proposal within Appendix A of this report. The proposal has elicited 27 objections, 1 representation and 2 expressions of support. The key factor in the assessment of this application is whether or not the erection of four dwellinghouses and associated development are of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for their countryside location and whether the development is consistent with the provisions of adopted National and Local Planning Policy. It is the opinion of Planning Officers that the siting, scale and design of the proposed dwellinghouses and the associated development would pay appropriate regard to the characteristics of the area within which it proposed to ensure no significant adverse impact arises and the proposal is considered to accord with the provisions of the current Development Plan and with national planning policy. Taking account of the above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions appended to this report. A full report is provided within Appendix A. (Q) Is the proposal consistent with the Development Plan: ☒Yes ☐No (R) Reasons why Planning Permission or Planning Permission in Principle Should be Granted: The proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan, and there are no other material considerations of sufficient significance, including issues raised by third parties, to indicate that it would be appropriate to withhold planning permission having regard to Section 25 of the Act. (S) Reasoned justification for a departure to the provisions of the Development Plan N/A
Page 15
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 (T) Need for notification to Scottish Ministers or Historic Environment Scotland: ☐Yes ☒No Author of Report: Emma Shaw Date: 04.11.2025 Reviewing Officer: Tim Williams Date: 04.11.2025 Fergus Murray Head of Development & Economic Growth
Page 16
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION REF. NO. 25/01248/PP Standard Time Limit Condition (as defined by Regulation) Standard Condition on Soil Management During Construction Additional Conditions 1. PP - Approved Details & Standard Notes – Non EIA Development The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details specified on the application form dated 22.07.2025, supporting information and, the approved drawings listed in the table below unless the prior written approval of the planning authority is obtained for an amendment to the approved details under Section 64 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Plan Title. Plan Ref. No. Version Date Received Location Plan 677_PL_001 C 28.07.2025 Site Plan – Existing 677_PL_002 28.07.2025 Site Sections – Existing 677_PL_003 A 28.07.2025 Site Plan – Ground Floor 677_PL_010 C 28.07.2025 Site Plan – First Floor 677_PL_011 D 28.07.2025 Site Plan – Roof 677_PL_012 D 28.07.2025 Site Plan – Aerial photomontage 677_PL_013 B 28.07.2025 Site Sections – Proposed 677_PL_020 A 28.07.2025 House Type A1 677_PL_101 C 28.07.2025 House Type A2 677_PL_102 D 28.07.2025 House Type B1 677_PL_103 B 28.07.2025 House Type B variant plans – accessibility study 677_PL_104 23.10.2025 Reason: For the purpose of clarity, to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with the approved details. 2. Timescale to be Agreed for Completion No development shall commence until details of the proposed timescale for completion of the approved development have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the duly approved timescale for completion unless an alternative timescale for completion is otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: In order to comply with the requirements of NPF4 Policy 16F. 3. Sustainable Drainage System
Page 17
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Notwithstanding the effect of Condition 1, the development shall incorporate a surface water drainage system which is consistent with the principles of Sustainable urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) compliant with the guidance set out in CIRIA’s SuDS Manual C753 and Sewers for Scotland 4th Edition. The requisite surface water drainage shall be operational prior to the development being brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter. Reason: To ensure the provision of an adequate surface water drainage system and to prevent flooding. Note to Applicant: • Further advice on SuDS can be found in SEPA’s Standing Advice for Small Scale Development – www.sepa.org.uk . 4. Junctions with Public Road Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 1, the proposed accesses shall be formed in accordance with the Council’s Roads Standard Detail Drawing SD08/004b and visibility splays of 25 metres to point X by 2.4 metres to point Y from the centre line of the proposed access. The access shall be surfaced with a bound material in accordance with the stated Standard Detail Drawing. Prior to work starting on site the access hereby approved shall be formed to at least base course standard and the visibility splays shall be cleared of all obstructions such that nothing shall disrupt visibility from a point 1.05 metres above the access at point X to a point 0.6 metres above the public road carriageway at point Y. The final wearing surface on the access shall be completed prior to the development first being brought into use and the visibility splays shall be maintained clear of all obstructions thereafter. Reason: In the interests of road safety. Note to Applicant: • A Road Opening Permit under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 must be obtained from the Council’s Roads Engineers prior to the formation/alteration of a junction with the public road. • The access shall be constructed and drained to ensure that no surface water is discharged onto the public road. • Bin storage areas shall be located to the rear of the bay element of the Council’s Roads Standard Detail Drawing SD08/004b. 5. Parking and Turning – Further Details Required Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 1, no development shall commence until full details of the layout and surfacing of parking and turning areas to accommodate two vehicles per dwelling for House Types ‘A1’ and ‘A2’ and three vehicles for House Type ‘B’ within the application site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Council’s Roads Engineers. The duly approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the development first being occupied and shall thereafter be maintained clear of obstruction for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles.
Page 18
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Reason: In the interest of road safety. 6. Landscaping and Biodiversity Enhancement No development shall commence until a scheme of boundary treatment, surface treatment and landscaping has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of: i) Location, design and materials of proposed walls, fences and gates; ii) Surface treatment of proposed means of access and hardstanding areas; iii) Any proposed re-contouring of the site by means of existing and proposed ground levels; iv) Proposed hard and soft landscape works; v) A biodiversity statement demonstrating how the proposal will contribute to conservation/restoration/enhancement of biodiversity, and how these benefits will be maintained for the lifetime of the development; and vi) A management plan for the removal of invasive non-native species, to include a programme of monitoring and maintenance. The development shall not be occupied until such time as the physical biodiversity enhancement measures (bird nesting boxes, ‘swift bricks’, wildlife ponds, bat and insect boxes, hedgehog homes etc), the boundary treatment, surface treatment and any re-contouring works have been completed in accordance with the duly approved scheme. All biodiversity enhancement measures consisting of new or enhanced planting shall be undertaken either in accordance with the approved scheme of implementation or within the next available planting season following the development first being brought into use. All of the hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme during the first planting season following the commencement of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. The biodiversity statement should refer to Developing with Nature guidance | NatureScot as appropriate. Reason: To assist with the integration of the proposal with its surroundings in the interest of amenity. 7. Electric Vehicle Charging – Residential with off street parking Prior to the commencement of the development (or such other timescale as may be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority), a scheme detailing the provision of four minimum 7kw electric vehicle charging points shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Where charging cannot be provided then the appropriate ducting to future proof the property must be installed.
Page 19
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 The approved charging point, or where relevant, the approved cable ducting shall be installed in full prior to the first occupation of the development, and thereafter retained in perpetuity unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority Reason: To comply with the provisions of NPF4 Policy 13 Sustainable Transport and LDP2 Policy 34 – Electric Vehicle Charging. 8. Offsite Highway Improvements Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 1 no development shall commence until full details of offsite highway improvements have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Council’s Roads Engineers. Such details shall incorporate: i) The provision of an additional passing place, to be installed approximately 50 to 70 metres from the junction of the UC79 with the A848; ii) The road verges to be levelled off between the site accesses and the junction of the UC79 with the A848, to create a level step off for pedestrians; and iii) The culverting of roadside ditches at the site accesses. Prior to the dwellinghouses hereby granted being first occupied, the approved scheme of works shall be completed. Reason: In the interest of road safety to provide a standard of access commensurate with the scale of the development.
Page 20
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 COMMITTEE REPORT APPENDIX A – RELATIVE TO APPLICATION NUMBER: 25/01248/PP PLANNING LAND USE AND POLICY ASSESSMENT 1. Introduction 1.1. The proposal the subject of this application is seeking to secure planning permission for the erection of four dwellinghouses, the installation of private drainage systems and the formation of two vehicular accesses. 2. Settlement Strategy 2.1. In terms of the Settlement Strategy set out in the adopted LDP2, the site is defined as ‘Outwith Settlement Areas’ within an area identified as ‘Countryside Area' where Policy 02 of LDP2 gives a presumption in favour of sustainable development where it is of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for its countryside location, as set out in the relevant sustainable siting and design policies of LDP2. In order to address the determining issues, the key considerations in this application are: 2.1.1. Compliance with the Development Plan and other relevant planning policy 2.1.2. Any other material considerations. 3. Proposal 3.1. The site is a south facing slope with a level of 42mAOD at the highest point dropping to approximately 17mAOD at the southern boundary. The site as existing features an agricultural building and an associated track which crosses the site from east to west. With regard to the planning history for the site, a previous application was submitted for the development of the site with six dwellinghouses and associated works (our reference 24/01849/PP); this application was subsequently withdrawn following concerns raised by the Planning Authority with regard to the density and siting of the proposed development. The current application proposes to address the previous concerns, with a reduction to four dwellinghouses sited towards the southern boundary of the site with a variation in set back and orientation so as to avoid the previously proposed two-tiered development pattern. The layout of the proposed development would comprise four plots in a roughly linear formation, with two new accesses proposed to each serve two dwellings. The dwellings would be arranged to allow all the principal living spaces to gain views to the south, and the dwellings would be located within their plots to maximise south and west facing gardens. Plot 1, being the westernmost plot, would facilitate a dwelling of one and a three-quarter storey in design. The dwelling would have a ‘T’ shaped form, facilitating four bedrooms. The main section of the dwelling would comprise a narrow linear form with a dual-pitched roof and gable ends. The adjoining single storey elements would be flat-roofed. Plot 2 would be located immediately to the east of Plot 1 and would share an access with Plot 1. Plot 4 would be the easternmost plot. These plots would facilitate a dwelling of one and three-quarter storey in design. The dwellings would have a simple, narrow linear form,
Page 21
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 facilitating three bedrooms. The dwellings would have a dual-pitched roof and gable ends and would feature a small flat-roofed projection which would facilitate a porch. Plot 2, located centrally between Plots 2 and 4 and sharing an access with Plot 4, would facilitate a dwelling of one and three-quarter storey in design. The dwelling would have a simple, narrow linear form, facilitating three bedrooms. The dwelling would have a dual- pitched roof and gable ends and would feature a small flat-roofed projection which would facilitate a porch. The proposed dwellings would comprise local vernacular forms with appropriately proportioned massing and simply composed elevations. The proposed facing materials would be traditional white render, with vertical timber cladding to the flat-roofed entrances and to the single storey elements of the proposed dwelling at Plot 1. Vertical untreated timber cladding would also be used around the main windows and doors, which would weather to a silver colour over time. The roofs would be constructed using slate tiles. 4. Compliance with National Planning Framework 4 and Local Development Plan 2 Policy Argyll and Bute ‘Local Development Plan 2’ (LDP2) was adopted on 28 February 2024 which, together with NPF4 which was adopted on 13 February 2023, represent the Development Plan providing the policy background against which proposed developments are assessed. The proposal is assessed against the relevant NPF4 Policies below which include details of the associated LDP2 policies. 4.1. NPF4 Policy 1 – Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises NPF4 Policy 1 seeks to prioritise the climate and nature crises in all decisions; it requires to be applied together with other policies in NPF4. Guidance from the Scottish Government advises that it is for the decision maker to determine whether the significant weight to be applied tips the balance in favour for, or against a proposal on the basis of its positive or negative contribution to climate and nature crises. 4.2. NPF4 Policy 2 – Climate, Mitigation and Adaption NPF4 Policy 2 seeks to ensure that new development proposals will be sited to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible, and that proposals will be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risks from climate change. Guidance from the Scottish Government confirms that at present there is no single accepted methodology for calculating and / or minimising emissions. The emphasis is on minimising emissions as far as possible, rather than eliminating emissions. The Spatial Settlement Strategy set out within LDP2 seeks to deliver sustainable levels of growth by steering the majority of development to our existing settlements as these are where the most of our current infrastructure, services, employment opportunities, housing and community facilities are to be found, however LDP2 recognises that there are instances where a different approach to significant development has to be taken particularly where existing infrastructure or services are at capacity and where a more sustainable option would be to provide new facilities elsewhere. 4.3. NPF4 Policy 3 – Biodiversity
Page 22
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 NPF4 Policy 3 seeks to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss and deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks. In the case of the development proposed by this application, it is considered that there are no issues of compliance with Policy 3. The application proposes to develop an area of managed grassland and no material biodiversity impacts have been identified in the assessment of this application by the Planning Authority and whilst no specific proposals for biodiversity improvements have been submitted, it is considered that adequate and proportionate measures for biodiversity enhancement and protection can be delivered by planning condition. With a condition to secure adequate and proportionate biodiversity enhancement and protection measures within the development, the proposal aligns with the broad aims of NPF4 Policy 3 and is consistent with the requirements of LDP2 Policy 73, Development Impact on Habitats, Species and Biodiversity. 4.4. NPF4 Policy 4 – Natural Places NPF4 Policy 4 seeks to protect, restore and enhance natural assets making best use of nature-based solutions. The development proposed by the current planning application is considered appropriate in terms of its type, location and scale such that it has no unacceptable impact on the natural environment. The proposed development is not within any designated European site of natural environment conservation or protection, it is not located within a National Park, a National Scenic Area a SSSI or RAMSAR site, or a National Nature Reserve. Neither is it located within a site designated as a local nature conservation site or landscape area or within an area identified as wild land. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with NPF4 Policy 4 and does not conflict with any policies set out in LDP2. 4.5. NPF4 Policy 5 – Soils NPF4 Policy 5 seeks to seeks to protect carbon-rich soils, to restore peatlands and to minimise disturbance to soils from development. The development the subject of this planning application seeks to develop an area of managed grassland. The wider site within the applicant’s ownership has an area of approximately 2.2 hectares; it is proposed to develop the southern area of the site, covering an area of 0.7 hectares. The site is not within an identified area of peatland, carbon-rich soils or priority peatland habitat. Whilst the proposed development would result in the use of a small area of managed grassland, it would not weaken the viability of an agricultural unit, result in the fragmentation of field systems and the integrity of a unit, nor would the proposal result in the loss of access to field systems. The development proposed is therefore considered to be in accordance with NPF4 Policy 5 and Policies 79 and 83 of LDP2. 4.6. NPF4 Policy 9 – Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings NPF4 Policy 9 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings, and to help reduce the need for greenfield development.
Page 23
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 The site is considered to be on a greenfield site by virtue of its designation as Countryside Area in the adopted LDP2. In this regard Part (b) of Policy 9 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. However, LDP2 Policy 02, Outwith Settlement Areas, seeks to promote a more flexible approach to development in areas identified as Countryside Area, with Part A of Policy 02 giving a presumption in favour of sustainable development where it is of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for its countryside location, as detailed in the relevant sustainable siting and design policies contained within LDP2. LDP2 Policy 02 requires development proposals to demonstrate that there will be no unacceptable adverse effects (either individually or cumulatively) on natural heritage resources, built and/or cultural heritage resources, and landscape and visual amenity. For any development where there is preliminary evidence that there may be such adverse effects (and where a formal environmental impact assessment is not required), a landscape and visual impact assessment, natural heritage assessment, or built and/or cultural heritage assessment may be required. Whilst the application site is not covered by any specific environmental or landscape designations, the application has been submitted with a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. The Assessment takes into account the site’s elevated position, the proximity to the defined settlements, and the existing landscape character. The analysis of the potential effects of the proposed development upon the landscape setting and the visual amenity of the area are detailed below. The site is within a rural landscape, characterised by a south facing hillside with a band of mature woodland screening beyond the southern boundary. To the east, the proposed development is bounded by the settlement of Aros Mains and to the west, the settlement of Aros Bridge. These two settlement areas are separated by intervening ground which includes the site the subject of this application. The site is located in close proximity to the remains of Aros Castle, at a distance of approximately 350 metres, a significant historical landmark in the region. The presence of the castle remains contributes to the cultural and historical character of the surrounding landscape, with the A848 providing views of the castle over the estuary of the River Aros on the approach to Aros Bridge. The remains of Aros Castle are prominent within the landscape. The sight lines between the castle and the application site are screened through typography and woodland. The proposed dwellings would be clustered in a roughly linear formation, with variations in orientation and set back, in the southernmost part of the site where existing mature woodland beyond the site boundary would provide immediate visual screening. This siting minimises the visual impact from key viewpoints such as the approach along the A848 or the nearby settlements of Aros Bridge and Aros Mains. The site is not visible from Aros Castle. The Assessment states that during the months when the trees are in full leaf, the site would be largely if not completely concealed from the described viewpoints. Given the proximity of the distinct settlements of Aros Mains to the east and Aros Bridge to the west, there is a requirement to respect the gap between the settlements so as to avoid the risk of visual coalescence. Maintaining the separation would preserve the distinct identities of both settlements and the character of the surrounding landscape. The contextually appropriate material choices would further minimise the prominence of the proposed development, and maintaining open spaces between the site and the adjacent
Page 24
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 settlements would preserve the areas distinct character and avoid visual coalescence. The siting of the proposed development adjacent to the public road within the south of the site would assist in concealing the proposal from prominent views behind the existing mature woodland; this natural screening would assist in integrating the dwellings into the landscape and thereby reduce their visual significance. The detailed information submitted with the Assessment advises that the proposed development would avoid prominent ridgelines and respect existing vegetation and key view corridors, particularly from the A848 and across the Sound of Mull. The Assessment further advises that the proposed development would adopt simple forms and massing to reduce their visual impact within open views. A muted and natural material palette referencing traditional island structures, including timber cladding and slate roofs would by sympathetic to the surrounding built and natural context. The Assessment demonstrates that the application site has the capacity to facilitate the proposed development without any adverse landscape and visual effects. The application seeks planning permission for the erection of four dwellinghouses and associated development. The site for the proposed development is located immediately adjacent to an existing public road in proximity to the main A848 road which links the area to larger defined settlements. The scale and design of the proposed dwellinghouses, and the plot density, would respect the surrounding built environment. The site is not subject to any nature conservation or landscape designations. In this instance, therefore, the site is considered to represent an appropriate opportunity for development with a suitably sited and designed development within the Countryside Area which has been specifically designed with due regard to the context of the site in terms of its character and appearance and in this regard would be consistent with NPF4 Policy 9 which does not conflict with the spatial and settlement strategy set out in LDP2 Policy 02. 4.7. NPF4 Policy 11 – Energy NPF4 Policy 11 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate all forms of renewable energy development onshore and offshore. This includes energy generation, storage, new and replacement transmission and distribution infrastructure and emerging low-carbon and zero emissions technologies. NPF4 Policy 11(a) states that development proposals for all forms of renewable, low- carbon and zero emissions technologies will be supported. The proposed development, through the provision of solar panels upon the roofslopes of the dwellinghouses and the provision of aur source heat pumps, would contribute to the expansion of low-carbon and zero emission technologies and is thereby supported by NPF4 Policy 11 and there is no conflict with LDP2 Policy 09, Sustainable Design, which seeks proposed developments to consider renewable sources of energy. 4.8. NPF4 Policy 12 – Zero Waste NPF4 Policy 12 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate development that is consistent with the waste hierarchy as defined within the policy document. The development the subject of this planning application seeks to secure permission for four dwellinghouses. Whilst this is a development likely to generate waste when operational, it will benefit from regular waste uplifts by the Council and will be expected to comply with our adopted and enforced recycling and reuse strategy. In this regard, the proposed development is considered to be in compliance with NPF4 Policy 12 and does not conflict with the requirements of LDP2 Policy 63, Waste Related
Page 25
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Development and Waste Management which seek to ensure that effective provision for waste/recycling is provided within developments. 4.9. NPF4 Policy 13 – Sustainable Transport NPF4 13 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and reduce the need to travel unsustainably. The application is seeking to secure permission for four dwellinghouses, which is not considered to be a a proposal where it is considered important to monitor travel patterns resulting from the development. Part (b) of Policy 13 requires consideration of the sustainable travel hierarchies including provision for vehicles and cycle charging points. The provision of electric vehicle charging points will be secured via condition. The proposed dwellings would be accessed by two new private accesses which would extend from the UC79 public road; Plot 1 and Plot 2 would share a new access and parking area set a short distance immediately to the north of the public road, and Plot 3 and Plot 4 would be accessed via a shared hard landscaped area that would be of sufficient size to allow turning for larger delivery, maintenance and emergency vehicles. LDP2 Policy 41, Off Site Highway Improvements, states that, in the judgement of the Planning Authority where development proposals will significantly increase vehicular or pedestrian traffic on substandard private or public approach roads, then developments will be required to contribute proportionately to improvements to an agreed section of the public or private road network. The Area Roads Authority have been consulted on the application and advised of no objections subject to conditions relating to the formation of the accesses at the junction with the public road; the clearance and maintenance of visibility splays; the provision of a system of surface water drainage; the provision of parking and turning areas; the culverting of the roadside ditches at the site accesses; the provision of bin storage areas; and the provision of proportionate improvements to the public approach road to include the provision of an additional passing place and the levelling of the road verges to create a level step off for pedestrians. Subject to the relevant conditions, the proposed development is consistent with the broad aims of NPF4 Policy 13 and is consistent with the requirements of LDP2 Policies 35, 36, 39, 40 and 41 which collectively seek to ensure that proposed developments are served by a suitable and safe access regime and provide appropriate parking provision commensurate with the scale of the development proposed. 4.10. NPF4 Policy 14 – Design, Quality and Place NPF4 Policy 14 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate well designed development that makes successful places by taking a design-led approach and applying the ‘Place Principle’. NPF4 Policy 14(a) details that development proposals should be designed to improve the quality of an area whether in urban or rural locations, regardless of scale with Part (b) affording support to developments where they are consistent with the six qualities of successful places: Healthy, Pleasant, Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable and Adaptable.
Page 26
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 Part (c) details that development proposal which are poorly designed, detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area, or inconsistent with the six qualities of successful places, will not be supported. NPF4 Policy 14(a) requires development proposals to be designed to improve the quality of an area, whether in urban or rural locations and regardless of scale. In this instance, the proposed development would be sited adjacent to the public road, in proximity to existing residential properties, screened by the adjacent established tree cover. Whilst there would be views of the proposed development, these would be in the context of the wider surroundings which include existing residential properties, and the views would be against the backdrop of rising land to the rear of the application site. The wider surrounding settlement patterns are formed of sporadic clusters of developments which generally share an access track from the main road, are often screened from views by established vegetation, and are often sited parallel to the access road. The development proposed by this application would be accessed off the main road and would form a well contained small cluster of development. The orientations of each of the proposed dwellings would be varied so as to suit the site topography and climatic conditions of each plot and to provide variation. The siting of the proposed development in relation to the existing properties to the east of the site would be such that separation distances and the intervening topography would mean that there would be no adverse impacts upon neighbour amenity with regard to overlooking, visual intrusion or shading. Neighbour amenity would therefore be suitably retained. The proposed development is considered to be designed to an appropriate standard to ensure compliance with the six qualities of successful places set out in NPF4 Policy 14 as follows. Healthy: being situated within a quiet rural setting but within proximity to an existing community; Pleasant: being attractively designed and finished dwellinghouses that would contribute to the character of the area; Connected: situated adjacent to the public road which would connect the development with the settlements of Tobermory, Salen and Craignure, all of which provide a number of services and facilities; Distinctive: the design of the dwellings would be of a distinct, high quality design which would respond to the setting whilst respecting the surrounding natural landscape; Sustainable: the dwellings would utilise appropriately proportioned and designed fenestration which would maximise potential for natural light; Adaptable: the development would be of a high quality design that would be capable of adaption for accessibility and for alternative future uses. The development the subject of this planning application is considered to be in accordance with the broad aims of NPF4 Policy 14 and does not conflict with the sustainable siting and design policies of LDP2 namely Policy 5, Design and Placemaking, Policy 08, Sustainable Siting, Policy 09, Sustainable Design and Policy 10, Design: all policies which, in summary, collectively seek to ensure that developments are compatible with surrounding land uses, are sited sensitively within the landscape making use of existing infrastructure, are of an appropriate scale, sustainable design and finishes for their site, and ensure that no adverse visual or amenity impacts arise. 4.11. NPF4 Policy 15 – Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods NPF4 Policy 15 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the application of the Place Principle and create connected and compact neighbourhoods where people can meet the majority of their daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home.
Page 27
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 NPF4 Policy 15(a) seeks development proposals to contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20 minute neighbourhoods. To establish this, consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area, including local access to a number of facilities. The LDP2 settlement strategy seeks to deliver sustainable levels of growth by steering the majority of development to our existing settlements where the most of our current infrastructure, services, employment opportunities, housing and community facilities are to be found and thereby making best use of these resources is a sustainable approach to development. In terms of our adopted settlement strategy, the site of the proposed dwellinghouses is in an area identified as being Outwith Settlement Areas where LDP2 Policy 02 seeks to promote a more flexible approach to development in areas identified as Countryside Area, within which the site is situated, with Part A of Policy 02 giving a presumption in favour of sustainable development where it is of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for its countryside location, as detailed in the relevant sustainable siting and design policies. In this instance, it is considered that the small scale of the proposed development, and its rural location, would reasonably comply with Policy 15 of NPF4 given the existing dispersed geographical scale of the environment within which the development is to be located, and given its compliance with the existing settlement pattern and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area where people can reasonably meet the majority of their daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home. The proposed development aligns with NPF4 and there is no conflict with LDP2 Policy 02. 4.12. NPF4 Policy 16 – Quality Homes NPF4 Policy 16 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes in the right locations and providing choice of tenure to meet diverse housing needs. Policy 16(c) supports development proposals for new homes that improve affordability and choice by being adaptable to changing and diverse needs, and which address identified gaps in provision, including ‘self-provided homes’ of which the proposed development represents. With regards to Part (f) of Policy 16(i) an agreed timescale for build-out will be covered through the use of a planning condition; 16(ii), whilst the development proposed by this planning application is not on land actively allocated for housing in the LDP2, it would wholly accord with the adopted settlement strategy and would accord with the principles of ‘local living’ and ‘20 minute neighbourhoods’; 16(iii) the proposal is consistent with NPF4 Policy 17, Rural Homes, being a suitable site which is in keeping with the landscape character of the area. The proposed development is deemed to be consistent with NPF4 Policy 16 and there is no conflict with LDP 2 Policy 02, Outwith Settlement due to the proposed development being of an appropriate scale, design and use for its countryside location. 4.13. NPF4 Policy 17 – Rural Homes
Page 28
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 NPF4 Policy 17 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable rural homes in the right locations. Policy 17(a) supports development proposals for new homes in rural areas where the development is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area. It has been demonstrated at NPF4 Policy 14 above that the proposed dwellinghouses would be of a suitable scale and design for their countryside location. Policy 17(b) requires proposals for new homes in rural areas to consider how the development will contribute towards local living and take into account identified local housing needs. It has already been seen at NPF4 Policy 15 above that the proposed development is consistent with our adopted settlement strategy policies and that it would have no material harmful access or environmental impact. The proposed development seeks the introduction of four new dwellinghouses and associated works which would accord with the Council’s key planning policies aims of supporting and sustaining fragile rural communities by contributing to actions to reverse our falling rural populations and supporting the local economy. Policy 17(c) offers support to new homes in remote rural areas where such proposals (i) support and sustain existing fragile communities; (ii) support identified local housing outcomes; and (iii) are suitable in terms of location, access and environmental impact. The development proposed accords with the broad aims of NPF4 Policy 17 and does not conflict with LDP2 Policy 09, Sustainable Development, Policy 10, Design all Development, and Policy 67, Provision of Housing to Meet Local Needs. 4.14. NPF4 Policy 18 – Infrastructure First NPF4 Policy 18 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate an infrastructure first approach to land use planning, which puts infrastructure considerations at the heart of placemaking. The application indicates water supply via connection to the public network with each proposed dwellinghouse having a separate domestic sewage treatment plant, in the form of a Klargester BioDisc with associated soakaways, due to the lack of public drainage infrastructure within the vicinity of the site. The Council’s Building Standards Service will apply suitable control over the detailed arrangements of the proposed private drainage systems at Building Warrant stage. The proposed development aligns with NPF4 Policy 18 and is in accordance with LDP2 Policy 04, Sustainable Development and Policy 60, Private Sewage Treatment Plants and Wastewater Drainage Systems, which seek to ensure that suitable infrastructure is available to serve proposed developments and give support to private drainage arrangements where connection to the public system is not available. 4.15. NPF4 Policy 22 – Flood Risk and Water Management NPF4 Policy 22 seeks to strengthen resilience to flood risk and to ensure that water resources are used efficiently and sustainably. The development the subject of this planning application proposes a connection to the public water supply. Scottish Water have been consulted on the application and raised no objection to the application, confirming that the proposed development is within the Tobermory Water Treatment Works catchment.
Page 29
Report of Handling Template for PPSL and Delegated Planning Applications – Updated 10.11.2023 The management of rain and surface water at the site would be managed through the provision of a sustainable urban drainage system, which can be adequately secured through the use of a planning condition. Subject to such a condition, the proposal aligns with NPF4 Policy 22 and LDP2 Policy 61, Sustainable Drainage Systems. 5. Public Representation 5.1. At the time of writing, representations had been received from 30 respondents in relation to this planning application. 27 respondents raise objection and two provide support, with one representation. It is not considered that the objections raise any complex or technical issues that have not been addressed in the current Report of Handling. 6. Conclusion 6.1. The key factor in the assessment of this application is whether or not the erection of four dwellinghouses and the associated development is of an appropriate scale, design, siting and use for its countryside location and whether the development is consistent with the provisions of adopted National and Local Planning Policy. No objections have been received from consultees with regards to the infrastructure, servicing or access required to serve the proposed development. The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of both the adopted National and Local Policy set out above and is deemed to be in compliance with their requirements and in accordance with the recently declared ‘housing emergency’. The issues raised by third parties are not considered to amount to material planning considerations that have not been addressed through the processing of the planning application. Accordingly the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.