Agenda Document Pack - Local Review Body - 15/06/2026
Midlothian Council · 15 June 2026
Back to Local Review Body — 15 June 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Notice of Meeting and Agenda Local Review Body Venue: Normandy Court/ Hybrid, Normandy Court, Normandy Drive, Dalkeith, EH22 1GJ Date: Monday, 15 June 2026 Time: 13:00 Executive Director : Place Contact: Clerk Name: Democratic Services Clerk Telephone: Clerk Email: democratic.services@midlothian.gov.uk Further Information: This is a meeting which is open to members of the public. Privacy notice: Please note that this meeting may be recorded. The recording may be publicly available following the meeting. If you would like to know how Midlothian Council collects, uses and shares your personal information, please visit our website: www.midlothian.gov.uk Page 1 of 94
Page 2
1 Welcome, Introductions and Apologies 2 Order of Business Including notice of new business submitted as urgent for consideration at the end of the meeting. 3 Declaration of Interest Members should declare any financial and non-financial interests they have in the items of business for consideration, identifying the relevant agenda item and the nature of their interest. 4 Minute of Previous Meeting 4.1 Minute of the Meeting of Local Review Body of 11 May 2026 submitted for approval 3 - 6 5 Public Reports Notice of Reviews - Determination Reports by Chief Officer Place 5.1 Notice of Review: Land North 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade Determination Report 7 - 94 6 Private Reports No items for discussion 7 Date of Next Meeting The next meeting will be held on Monday 21 September 2026. Plans and papers relating to the applications on this agenda can also be viewed at https://planning-applications.midlothian.gov.uk/OnlinePlanning Page 2 of 94
Page 3
INTERNAL USE ONLY DRAFT BY/DATE: REVIEW BY/DATE: 1-993 Minute of Meeting Local Review Body Monday 15 June 2026 Item No 4.1 Local Review Body Date Time Venue Monday 11 May 2026 13.00 Normandy Court/MS Teams Present: Councillor Imrie (Chair) Councillor Alexander (Virtual) Councillor Cassidy Councillor McEwan Councillor McManus (Virtual) Councillor Smaill In attendance: Peter Arnsdorf, Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer Hannah Forbes, Democratic Services Officer 1. Welcome and Apologies The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting of the Local Review Body (LRB). Apologies were submitted by Councillor Bowen and Councillor Winchester. 2. Order of Business The order of business is as outlined the agenda. 3. Declaration of Interest The Chair invited the LRB Members to declare their interest at this point or during the discussion of the item in the agenda. No declarations of interest were intimated at this stage of the proceedings. 4. Minutes of Previous Meeting The Minute of the LRB Meeting of 23 March 2026 was unanimously approved as a correct record. Page 3 of 94
Page 4
5. Reports and Items for Discussion Report No. Report Title Presented by: 5.1 Notice of Review: Land Adjacent 34 Mavisbank, Loanhead Determination Report. Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer The Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer advised the purpose of this report is to provide a framework for the Local Review Body to consider a ‘Notice of Review’ for the change of use of public open space to private garden ground at land adjacent 34 Mavisbank, Loanhead. The Chair thanked the Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer for the report and opened to questions and comments from LRB Members. Councillor Cassidy highlighted the importance of the site visit that was conducted today as they felt the report did not match what they saw today. Councillor Cassidy shared that they did not see a problem with the change of use from a public open space to a private garden ground and therefore moved to uphold the appeal and grant planning permission. Councillor McEwan advised they were happy to second Councillor Cassidy, although asked the Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer if there could be an additional condition that the height of the fence or hedge be kept at the permissible height according to the Council policy. The Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer highlighted to LRB Members that one of the recommended conditions is to remove permitted developer rights, meaning any type of work like the fencing would be subject to a further application. Councillor Alexander also shared they concur with Councillor Cassidy and Councillor McEwan adding that they would like the area to be considered as the front garden with the fencing/hedging height being limited to 1 meter. The Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer confirmed that if Elected Members want to remove the rights of the developer, it means that if they applied, they could take on board Elected Members preferences regarding the height of the fencing/hedging. Councillor Smaill added that a properly constructed fence on the enclosure of that land will allow it to become more attractive and therefore would be in favour of granted the planning permission with the condition of the area being enhanced. The Chair concluded the discussion and noted that LRB Members were in favour of uploading the appeal and to grant the permission and asked The Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer to confirm the conditions in the report. The Head of Placemaking and Chief Planning Officer explained that the condition is to remove permitted developer rights and if any changes to the land were to be made, they would need to submit an application. Page 4 of 94
Page 5
Councillor Cassidy added their opinion of the land is not an asset to Midlothian Council at the moment and is in fact a liability that the Council need to maintain. The Chair agreed with Councillor Cassidy’s statement adding that any piece of land that the Council own will be determined on their own merits and this application being approved should not be seen as a precedent for a fast-track route. The Chair closed the meeting noting that LRB Members agreed to uphold the review and grant planning permission subject to conditions in the report. Decision LRB determined to uphold the appeal and grant planning permission subject to conditions specified in the report. Action Planning Advisor will prepare a decision notice for issuing through the Chair of the LRB. 6. Date of next meeting The meeting concluded at 13:09pm. The next meeting of the LRB is scheduled for Monday 8 June 2026. Page 5 of 94
Page 6
Page 6 of 94
Page 7
Local Review Body Monday 15 June 2026 Item No 5.1 Notice of Review: Land North 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade Determination Report Report by Chief Officer Place 1 Purpose of Report 1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide a framework for the Local Review Body (LRB) to consider a ‘Notice of Review’ for the erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land north 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade. 2 Background 2.1 Planning application 25/00125/DPP for the erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land north 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade was refused planning permission on 17 April 2026; a copy of the decision is attached to this report. 2.2 The review has progressed through the following stages: 1 Submission of Notice of Review by the applicant. 2 The Registration and Acknowledgement of the Notice of Review. 3 Carrying out Notification and Consultation. 3 Supporting Documents 3.1 Attached to this report are the following documents: • A site location plan (Appendix A); • A copy of the notice of review form and supporting statement (Appendix B). Any duplication of information is not attached; • A copy of the case officer’s report (Appendix C); • A copy of the decision notice, excluding the standard advisory notes, issued on 17 April 2026 (Appendix D); and • A copy of the key plans/drawings (Appendix E). 3.2 The full planning application case file and the development plan policies referred to in the case officer’s report can be viewed online via www.midlothian.gov.uk. 4 Procedures 4.1 In accordance with agreed procedures, the LRB: Page 7 of 94
Page 8
• Have determined to undertake a site visit (only elected members attending the site visit can participate in the determination of the review); and • Have determined to progress the review by written submissions. 4.2 The case officer’s report identified that there were four consultation responses (including an objection from the Bonnyrigg and District Community Council), and four representations received (objections). As part of the review process the interested parties were notified of the review – no additional comments have been received. All comments can be viewed online on the electronic planning application case file. 4.3 The next stage in the process is for the LRB to determine the review in accordance with the agreed procedure: • Identify any provisions of the development plan which are relevant to the decision; • Interpret them carefully, looking at the aims and objectives of the plan as well as detailed wording of policies; • Consider whether or not the proposal accords with the development plan; • Identify and consider relevant material considerations for and against the proposal; • Assess whether these considerations warrant a departure from the development plan; and • State the reason/s for the decision and state any conditions required if planning permission is granted. 4.4 In reaching a decision on the case the planning advisor can advise on appropriate phraseology and on appropriate planning reasons for reaching a decision. 4.5 Following the determination of the review the planning advisor will prepare a decision notice for issuing through the Chair of the LRB. A copy of the decision notice will be reported back to the LRB for noting. 4.6 A copy of the LRB decision will be placed on the planning authority’s planning register and made available for inspection online. 5 Conditions 5.1 In accordance with the procedures agreed by the LRB at its meeting of 20 June 2022, and without prejudice to the determination of the review, the following condition has been prepared for the consideration of the LRB if it is minded to uphold the review and grant planning permission. 1. The development to which this permission relates shall commence no later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: To accord with the provisions of Section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019). Page 8 of 94
Page 9
2. Development shall not begin on site until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority: a) Details of all external finishing materials for the house; b) Details of the materials of all external doors; c) Details of the colour of all external doors; d) Details of the proposed materials of the areas of hardstanding; e) Details of the design, position, dimensions, materials and finish of all proposed walls, fences, gates or other means of enclosure; f) Details of the proposed bin storage areas, including any related structures; g) Details of the proposed ground air source heat pumps; h) Details of the proposed surface water management scheme; and i) A landscape plan, including details of a scheme of landscaping for the site. Details shall include the position, number, size and species of all trees and shrubs proposed, as well as identifying all trees on site which are proposed to be removed and retained. Thereafter, the development hereby approved shall accord with the details agreed in terms of this condition. Reason: These details were not submitted as part of the application: to ensure the houses are finished in high quality materials; to protect the visual amenity of the surrounding area; to ensure the houses are provided with adequate amenity; to help integrate the proposal into the surrounding area. In accordance with NPF4 policies 1,2, 3, 6, 8, 14, 16 and 22 and MLDP policies DEV5, DEV6, DEV7, ENV1, ENV7 and ENV10. 3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority the area of hardstanding agreed in terms of condition 2d) shall be surfaced in a porous material. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately drained in the interests of the amenity of the area. In compliance with NPF4 policies 2 and 22 and MLDP policy ENV 10. 4. Development shall not begin on site until an updated tree survey has been submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. 5. Development shall not begin on site until an arboricultural method statement and tree protection plan have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. These shall include details of tree protection fencing and a construction detail for the access track, including cellweb or geocell to reduce compaction within the Root Protection Areas of all trees to be retained onsite. Any works within the Tree Protection Zone of the trees to be retained shall be carried out with an above ground construction method. 6. The tree protection measures approved as per by condition 2i) above shall be in place before any work on the development is begun, including site clearance, and shall be retained until the development is completed. Within the area enclosed by the protection measures there shall be no excavation, no removal of Page 9 of 94
Page 10
soil, no placing of additional soil, no storage of any kind, disposal of any waste or fires lit. These works shall be carried out in accordance with BS5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Development. Reason for conditions 4 - 6: To ensure that the trees and landscaping to be retained are protected from damage during development; to protect the appearance of the surrounding rural area. In compliance with NPF4 policies 1, 2, 3,6 and 14 and MLDP policies ENV1 and ENV11. 7. The scheme of landscaping hereby approved in condition 2i) shall include details of replacement and reinforcement tree planting around the application site boundaries and along the burn corridor. This shall include species set out in section 7.2 of the approved Ecology Survey 8. The scheme of landscaping hereby approved in condition 2i) shall include details of a range of native species planting. This shall include species rich wildflower mixes such as a Mavisbank meadow mix in open areas, a woodland meadow mix along woodland edges and a wet meadow mix towards the burn corridor as set out in section 7.3 of the approved Ecology Survey. Reason for conditions 7 and 8: To ensure that appropriate replacement planting is provided at the site, to maintain and enhance the character and appearance of the surrounding area and also perpetuate canopy cover; to optimise biodiversity ad habitat value. In compliance with NPF4 policies 1, 2, 3,6 and 14 and MLDP policies ENV1 and ENV11. 9. The scheme of landscaping hereby approved in condition 2j) shall be carried out and completed within six months of the house either being completed or brought into use, whichever is the earlier date. Any trees removed, dying, severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced in the following planting season by trees of a size and species similar to those originally required. Reason: To ensure the landscaping is carried out and becomes successfully established. In compliance with NPF4 policies 1, 2, 3,6 and 14 and MLDP policies ENV1 and ENV11. 10. Development shall not begin until a scheme to deal with any contamination of the site and/or previous mineral workings has been submitted to and approved by the planning authority. The scheme shall contain details of the proposals to deal with any contamination and/or previous mineral workings and include: i. the nature, extent and types of contamination and/or previous mineral workings on the site; ii. measures to treat or remove contamination and/or previous mineral workings to ensure that the site is fit for the uses hereby approved, and that there is no risk to the wider environment from contamination and/or previous mineral workings originating within the site; Page 10 of 94
Page 11
iii. measures to deal with contamination and/or previous mineral workings encountered during construction work; and iv. the condition of the site on completion of the specified decontamination measures. Before any part of the site is occupied for residential purposes, the measures to decontaminate the site shall be fully implemented as approved by the planning authority. 11. On completion of the decontamination/ remediation works required in condition 11 and prior to the dwellinghouse being occupied on site, a validation report or reports shall be submitted to the planning authority confirming that the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. No part of the development shall be occupied until this report has been approved by the planning authority. Reason for conditions 11 and 12: To ensure that any contamination on the site/ground conditions is adequately identified and that appropriate decontamination measures/ground mitigation measures are undertaken to mitigate the identified risk to site users and construction workers, built development on the site, landscaped areas, and the wider environment; to ensure the remediation works are undertaken. In accordance with NPF4 policies 23 and MLDP policy ENV16. 12. Development shall not begin until details, including a timetable of implementation, of superfast broadband have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The details shall include delivery of superfast broadband prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouse. The delivery of superfast broadband shall be implemented as per the approved details. Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is enhanced by the provision of appropriate digital infrastructure in accordance with the requirements of policy IT1 of the MLDP. 13. Development shall not begin until details of the provision and use of electric vehicle charging point within the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details or such alternatives as may be approved in writing by the planning authority. Reason: To ensure the development accords with the requirements of policy TRAN5 of the MLDP. 14. Development shall not begin until details of a sustainability/biodiversity scheme for the site, including the provision of house bricks and boxes for bats and swifts and hedgehog highways throughout the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the Page 11 of 94
Page 12
approved details or such alternatives as may be approved in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the development accords with the requirements of policy DEV5 of the MLDP. 15. The works hereby approved shall not be carried out during the months of March to August inclusive, unless approved in writing by the planning authority after a check for nesting birds is completed by a suitably competent person within 48 hours of works commencing and, in the event an active nest is found, an appropriate protection zone to the satisfaction of the planning authority is in place within which there can be no works until the related chicks have fledged. Reason for conditions 16: To protect and enhance the local biodiversity of the site; there is potential for the disturbance of breeding birds at the site during bird breeding season. In compliance with NPF4 policy 3 and MLDP policy ENV15. 16. The Design and installation of the heat pump(s) is such that any associated noise complies with NR20 (window open standard) when measured within any neighbouring living apartment 17. Pre-commissioning tests of any consented pump(s) are carried out to demonstrate that the NR20 criterion has been met prior to the unit being brought into use. Reason for conditions 16 and 17: To ensure that the dwelling and neighbouring dwellings are afforded an adequate level of amenity, in compliance with NPF4 policy 17 and MLDP ENV18. 6 Recommendations 6.1 It is recommended that the LRB: a) determine the review; and b) the planning advisor draft and issue the decision of the LRB through the Chair Peter Arnsdorf Head of Placemaking Date: 3 June 2026 Report Contact: Jack Wilson, Planning Officer Jack.Wilson2@midlothian.gov.uk Background Papers: Planning application 25/00125/DPP available for inspection online. Page 12 of 94
Page 13
N Midlothian Council Fairfield House 8 Lothian Road Dalkeith, EH22 3AA Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationary Office. Crown copyright reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Planning Service Place Directorate Midlothian Council Licence No. AC0000811376 (2026) Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works. Land north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade. File Nos. 25/00125/DPP Scale 1:1250 Appendix A Page 13 of 94
Page 14
Page 1 of 5 Fairfield House 8 Lothian Road Dalkeith EH22 3ZN Tel: 0131 271 3302 Fax: 0131 271 3537 Email: planning- applications@midlothian.gov.uk Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid. Thank you for completing this application form: ONLINE REFERENCE 100753313-001 The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application. Applicant or Agent Details Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application) Applicant Agent Agent Details Please enter Agent details Company/Organisation: Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * First Name: * Building Name: Last Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Telephone Number: * (Street): * Extension Number: Address 2: Mobile Number: Town/City: * Fax Number: Country: * Postcode: * Email Address: * Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? * Individual Organisation/Corporate entity Derek Scott Planning Derek Scott Lansdowne Crescent 21 0131 535 1103 EH12 5EH Scotland Edinburgh enquiries@derekscottplanning.com Appendix B Page 14 of 94
Page 15
Page 2 of 5 Applicant Details Please enter Applicant details Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * Other Title: Building Name: First Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Last Name: * (Street): * Company/Organisation Address 2: Telephone Number: * Town/City: * Extension Number: Country: * Mobile Number: Postcode: * Fax Number: Email Address: * Site Address Details Planning Authority: Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available): Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Address 4: Address 5: Town/City/Settlement: Post Code: Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites Northing Easting Mr Bernard Midlothian Council Flanagan Grosvenor Street 18 EH12 5EG Land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian Scotland 666160 Edinburgh 329578 Page 15 of 94
Page 16
Page 3 of 5 Description of Proposal Please provide a description of your proposal to which your review relates. The description should be the same as given in the application form, or as amended with the agreement of the planning authority: * (Max 500 characters) Type of Application What type of application did you submit to the planning authority? * Application for planning permission (including householder application but excluding application to work minerals). Application for planning permission in principle. Further application. Application for approval of matters specified in conditions. What does your review relate to? * Refusal Notice. Grant of permission with Conditions imposed. No decision reached within the prescribed period (two months after validation date or any agreed extension) – deemed refusal. Statement of reasons for seeking review You must state in full, why you are a seeking a review of the planning authority’s decision (or failure to make a decision). Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. If necessary this can be provided as a separate document in the ‘Supporting Documents’ section: * (Max 500 characters) Note: you are unlikely to have a further opportunity to add to your statement of appeal at a later date, so it is essential that you produce all of the information you want the decision-maker to take into account. You should not however raise any new matter which was not before the planning authority at the time it decided your application (or at the time expiry of the period of determination), unless you can demonstrate that the new matter could not have been raised before that time or that it not being raised before that time is a consequence of exceptional circumstances. Have you raised any matters which were not before the appointed officer at the time the Yes No Determination on your application was made? * If yes, you should explain in the box below, why you are raising the new matter, why it was not raised with the appointed officer before your application was determined and why you consider it should be considered in your review: * (Max 500 characters) Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian Please refer to attached Review Request Statement Page 16 of 94
Page 17
Page 4 of 5 Please provide a list of all supporting documents, materials and evidence which you wish to submit with your notice of review and intend to rely on in support of your review. You can attach these documents electronically later in the process: * (Max 500 characters) Application Details Please provide the application reference no. given to you by your planning authority for your previous application. What date was the application submitted to the planning authority? * What date was the decision issued by the planning authority? * Review Procedure The Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine your review and may at any time during the review process require that further information or representations be made to enable them to determine the review. Further information may be required by one or a combination of procedures, such as: written submissions; the holding of one or more hearing sessions and/or inspecting the land which is the subject of the review case. Can this review continue to a conclusion, in your opinion, based on a review of the relevant information provided by yourself and other parties only, without any further procedures? For example, written submission, hearing session, site inspection. * Yes No In the event that the Local Review Body appointed to consider your application decides to inspect the site, in your opinion: Can the site be clearly seen from a road or public land? * Yes No Is it possible for the site to be accessed safely and without barriers to entry? * Yes No Checklist – Application for Notice of Review Please complete the following checklist to make sure you have provided all the necessary information in support of your appeal. Failure to submit all this information may result in your appeal being deemed invalid. Have you provided the name and address of the applicant?. * Yes No Have you provided the date and reference number of the application which is the subject of this Yes No review? * If you are the agent, acting on behalf of the applicant, have you provided details of your name Yes No N/A and address and indicated whether any notice or correspondence required in connection with the review should be sent to you or the applicant? * Have you provided a statement setting out your reasons for requiring a review and by what Yes No procedure (or combination of procedures) you wish the review to be conducted? * Note: You must state, in full, why you are seeking a review on your application. Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. You may not have a further opportunity to add to your statement of review at a later date. It is therefore essential that you submit with your notice of review, all necessary information and evidence that you rely on and wish the Local Review Body to consider as part of your review. Please attach a copy of all documents, material and evidence which you intend to rely on Yes No (e.g. plans and Drawings) which are now the subject of this review * Note: Where the review relates to a further application e.g. renewal of planning permission or modification, variation or removal of a planning condition or where it relates to an application for approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the application reference number, approved plans and decision notice (if any) from the earlier consent. Please refer to attached Review Request Statement 25/00125/DPP 17/04/2026 05/03/2025 Page 17 of 94
Page 18
Page 5 of 5 Declare – Notice of Review I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is an application for review on the grounds stated. Declaration Name: Mr Derek Scott Declaration Date: 08/05/2026 Payment Details Online payment: XMEP00009275 Payment date: 08/05/2026 11:23:00 Created: 08/05/2026 11:24 Page 18 of 94
Page 19
1 REVIEW REQUEST STATEMENT 25/00125/DPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian Prepared by Derek Scott Planning Planning and Development Consultants 21 Lansdowne Crescent Edinburgh EH12 5EH www.derekscottplanning.com Tel No: 0131 535 1103 E-Mail: enquiries@derekscottplanning.com On behalf of Mr Bernard Flanagan Page 19 of 94
Page 20
2 Executive Summary Review Request 25/00125/DPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian • This statement has been prepared by Derek Scott Planning, Chartered Town Planning and Development Consultants on behalf of our client, Mr. Bernard Flanagan. It is in support of a request being made to Midlothian Council’s Local Review Body to review the decision of the appointed Planning Officer to refuse a planning application which had sought detailed planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian. • The application site, as outlined in red on the location planadjacent, lies tothe southof Lasswade Roadand extends to some 0.45 hectares (c.1.11 acres) in area. It forms part of a larger area of land owned by our client as outlined in blue. The site is located to the north of Wadingburn Lane (No. 5) with its northern boundary defined by the Wading Burn. It slopes broadly from south to north towards the burn and contains scattered trees alongside the lane, along the burn and on the site’s northwestern boundary. • Planning permission was previously granted to our client on 25th September 2023 under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP for the erection of a dwelling house on the adjoining site to the southeast of the current application site via a request to the Council’s Local Review Body following the refusal of the application by the Appointed Planning Officer. The circumstances were almost identical with that application and have created a precedent in support of the current application. For the avoidance of doubt, the current application seeks permission for an additional dwelling house and not to replace or act as a substitution for the dwelling house previously approved. • Thecurrentapplication,assubmitted to the Council,hadsought detailed planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house and garage with all associated landscaping and infrastructure works on the site. The proposed dwelling, which covers an area of approximately 400 sq. metres is located within the western half of the site. It is two storeys in height, of modern design incorporating a flat green roof and extensive areas of glazing. Page 20 of 94
Page 21
3 External finishes include a mix of natural sandstone to the ground floor and larch cladding to the upper floor. Windows and doors are aluminium, coloured anthracite grey. The roof, as noted, will be green in its construction, with a solar array and large central roof light. A new vehicular access will be formed off Wadingburn Lane to service the dwelling running broadly parallel with the lane and serving a proposed garage and parking area. • The application was refused on the 17th April2026 under delegated powers by the Appointed Planning Officer for the two reasons noted below which related to Green Belt and Prime Agricultural Land considerations. The reasons referred specifically to Policies 5 (Soils) and 8 (Green Belt) in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Policies ENV1 (Green Belt) and ENV4 (Prime Agricultural Land) in the Midlothian Local Development Plan. 1. It has not been demonstrated that the house is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity, nor that there are material planning considerations to otherwise justify approval of the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 8 of the National Planning Framework 4 and policy ENV1 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. 2. The proposed development would result in the permanent loss of an area of prime agricultural land without justification and does not fulfil the requirements of related Policy 5 of the National Planning Framework 4 or policy ENV4 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 which seeks to protect such areas. • We disagree with the refusal of the application and would respond to the two reasons cited above in the following terms. 1. (Green Belt) - Whilst the dwelling house proposed generates a degree of friction with Policies 8 in NPF4 and ENV1 in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, the following material considerations should be given greater weight in the determination of the application: (i) The wider area within which the application site lies does not exhibit classic green belt characteristics due to the pattern of surrounding development - the character and spatial density of which is more urban than rural in nature. Page 21 of 94
Page 22
4 (ii) The application site itself is an infill site within a wider homogenous group of existing and proposed dwellings, lying to the east of which is a site with the benefit of planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house granted previously by the Council under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP; to the south of which is Wadingburn Lane; to the north of which is the Wading Burn; and to the west of which is established woodland – all providing established long term defensible boundaries to the site and ensuring that the dwelling can be accommodated in the landscape without adverse impact. The defensible boundaries referred to will define and enclose the overall group and prevent any further development taking place to the west. (iii) The site does not contribute to overarching green belt objectives and its development for the dwelling house proposed in this application will not impact on the landscape setting of the City (Edinburgh) or on other settlements within the Green Belt; it will not create, result or contribute to coalescence between settlements within the Green Belt; and it does not impact on the protection or provision of access to open space. 2. (Prime Agricultural Land) – The application site falls within an ‘Urban’ Area in the Land Capability Map for Scotland as prepared by the Hutton Institute. Whilst it may be identified as Prime Agricultural Land in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, its inclusion as such in that Plan was in error – an error which has been acknowledged previously by the Council but for whatever reason have been overlooked, presumably again in error, on this occasion. In light of these considerations, the second reason for the refusal of the application should not have been included in the decision notice issued. • Other considerations advanced in support of the application include the following: - Thesite is accessible to a range of local facilities and services including bus based public transport services via foot, bicycle and other forms of wheeling. - Landscaping and planting measures proposed in association with the dwelling house proposed will contribute positively to the site’s biodiversity credentials. - The dwelling proposed will contribute positively to the site’s character and appearance by creating and finishing a compact cohesive group of dwellings within a quasi-urban/rural setting. - The dwelling houses proposed will increase the range and choice of housing provision within this part of the Council Area. - There are no known infrastructure constraints preventing the development of the site for the residential purposes proposed. It is effective and immediately capable of development and no objections have been lodged by technical consultees. Page 22 of 94
Page 23
5 • In light of the considerations and benefits outlined it is respectfully requested that planning permission be granted for the dwelling house as has been applied for. Page 23 of 94
Page 24
6 REVIEW REQUEST STATEMENT 25/00125/DPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction Page 8 2. Location and Description of Site Page 9 3. Description of Proposed Development Page 12 4. Assessment of Development Proposals Page 18 5. Comments on Reasons for Refusal Page 51 6. Summary and Conclusions Page 53 Page 24 of 94
Page 25
7 REVIEW REQUEST STATEMENT 25/00125/DPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian LIST OF DOCUMENTS Document 1 – Copy of Planning Application submitted to Midlothian Council 1a – Application Forms Refused Drawings & Documents 1b – Proposed Floor Plan – L(20)003 1:50 GROUND FLOOR 1c – Proposed Floor Plan – L(20)004 1:50 FIRST FLOOR 1d – Elevations Sheet 1 of 2 – L(20)006 1:50 1e – Elevations, Floor Plan and Cross Sections – L(20)009 1:50 GARAGE 1f – Site Location – PSAD L(20)000 1:1250 1g – Roof Plan – PSAD L(20)005 1:100 1h – Proposed Side Elevations 2 of 2 – PSAD L(20)007 1:50 1i – Existing and Proposed Block Plan – L(20)001 A 1:500 1j – Proposed Site Plan – L(20)002 A 1:200 1k – Proposed Landscaping Plan – L(20)0010 A 1:200 1l – Design and Access Statement 1m – Planning Statement 1n – Noise Report 1o – Tree Survey & Arboricultural Impact Assessment 1p – Ecology/Wildlife Report/Survey – Revision C Document 2 – Copy of Decision Notice relating to Planning Application Reference Number 25/00125/DPP Document 3 – Document 4 – Copy of Appointed Planning Officer’s Report of Handling relating to Planning Application Reference Number 25/00125/DPP Extracts from Review Request relating to Planning Application Reference Number 22/00811/DPP Page 25 of 94
Page 26
8 REVIEW REQUEST STATEMENT 25/00125/DPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian 1. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND 1.1 This statement has been prepared by Derek Scott Planning, Chartered Town Planning and Development Consultants on behalf of our client, Mr. Bernard Flanagan. It is in support of a request being made to Midlothian Council’s Local Review Body to review the decision of the appointed Planning Officer to refuse a planning application which had sought detailed planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works on land to the north of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade, Midlothian. 1.2 The application referenced was originally submitted to the Council on 06th March 2025 and registered under Planning Application Reference Number 25/00125/DPP on 11th March 2025. Whilst the application documentation is accessible on the Council’s Planning Portal it is attached withinDocument 1for ease of reference.The applicationwas refused on the 17th April 2026 under delegated powers for the following reasons: (i) It has not been demonstrated that the house is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity, nor that there are material planning considerations to otherwise justify approval of the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 8 of the National Planning Framework 4 and policy ENV1 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. (ii) The proposed development would result in the permanent loss of an area of prime agricultural land without justification and does not fulfil the requirements of related Policy 5 of the National Planning Framework 4 or policy ENV4 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 which seeks to protect such areas. Copies of the Decision Notice and the Planning Officer’s Report of Handling are attached as Documents 2 and 3 respectively. Page 26 of 94
Page 27
9 2. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site, as outlined in red on the location plan below, lies to the south of Lasswade Road and extends to some 0.45 hectares (c.1.11 acres) in area. It forms part of a larger area of land owned by our client which is outlined in blue. Location Plan Photographs of application site from Wadingburn Lane Page 27 of 94
Page 28
10 2.2 The site is located to the north of Wadingburn Lane (No. 5) with its northern boundary defined by the Wading Burn. It slopes broadly from south to north towards the burn and contains scattered trees alongside the lane, along the burn and on the site’s northwestern boundary – all of which are detailed in the accompanying Tree Survey & Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Document 1o) and the Ecology Report (Document 1p) submitted in support of the application. Photographs of application site from Wadingburn Lane 2.3 Planning permission was granted to our client previously for the erection of a dwelling house on the adjoining site to thesoutheastof the current application sitevia a request to the Council’s Local Review Body. This was granted on 25th September 2023 under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP. For the avoidance of doubt, the current application seeks permission for an additional dwelling house and not to replace or act as a substitution for the dwelling house previously approved. Dwelling house granted planning permission on adjoining site to east under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP Page 28 of 94
Page 29
11 2.4 Wadingburn Lane, which forms part of a designated Core Path runs in a westerly direction off Wadingburn Road at a point approximately 100 metres to the south of Lasswade Road. Although located within an area defined as the Green Belt in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, it does not exhibit classic Green Belt characteristics but more so urban characteristics due to the spatial density and character of surrounding residential development. Site lies within an area exhibiting urban rather that rural (Green Belt) characteristics. 2.5 The site is highly and sustainably accessible to a range of services and facilities including public transport. Bus stops to the north and south of Lasswade Road exist within approximately 250 metres of the application site which provide direct access to the 1, 3, 31, 140, 141, 800, N31, X31 and X33 services, thereby providing for safe and convenient access to a range of other towns and villages in Midlothian and to Edinburgh City Centre, the latter being within a c. 10 km journey. Lasswade’s High Street, where there are a range of local amenities lies within approximately 1 km of the site and is also conveniently accessed on foot, by bicycle and other forms of wheeling in addition to the bus. It should be mentioned that the site also benefits from excellent accessibility to the Edinburgh By-pass to the north. Page 29 of 94
Page 30
12 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3.1 The application submitted to the Council and subsequently refused by the Appointed Planning Officer had sought detailed planning permission forthe erection of a dwelling house and garage, the formation of an access off Wadingburn Lane and all associated landscaping and infrastructure works on the site. The proposed dwelling,which covers an area of approximately 400 sq. metres is located on the westernmost part of the site and has been repositioned since the initial submission of the application to take account of findings in the Arboricultural and Ecology Surveys (Refer to Documents 1o and 1p). Proposed Site Plan 3.2 The dwelling proposed is two storeys in height of modern design incorporating a flat green roof and extensive areas of glazing. External finishes include a mix of natural sandstone to the ground floor and larch cladding to the upper floor. Windows and doors are aluminium, coloured anthracite grey. The roof, as noted will be green in its construction, with a solar array and large central roof light. A new vehicular access will be formed off Wadingburn Lane to service the dwelling broadly parallel with the lane and serving a proposed garage and parking area. Page 30 of 94
Page 31
13 Proposed Front Elevation Proposed Ground Floor Plan Page 31 of 94
Page 32
14 Proposed Rear Elevation Proposed First Floor Plan Page 32 of 94
Page 33
15 Proposed Side Elevation 3.3 The full design rationale for the dwelling house is outlined in the accompanying Design and Access Statement which should be read in association with this statement. Please note that elements of the proposal have changed slightly since the application was submitted although the design of the dwelling house itself remains as originally submitted. Proposed Side Elevation Page 33 of 94
Page 34
16 View to front of house View to rear of house Page 34 of 94
Page 35
17 View at night to rear of house Birds Eye View of Dwelling to Rear Page 35 of 94
Page 36
18 4. PLANNING POLICY 4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) states that: ‘where in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.’ 4.2 In the context of the above it is worth referring to the House of Lord’s Judgement on the case of the City of Edinburgh Council v the Secretary of State for Scotland 1998 SLT120. It sets out the following approach to deciding an application under the Planning Acts: • identify any provisions of the development plan which are relevant to the decision; • interpret them carefully, looking at the aims and objectives of the plan as well as detailed wording of policies; • consider whether the proposal accords with the development plan; • identify and consider relevant material considerations, for and against the proposal; and • assess whether these considerations warrant a departure from the development plan. 4.3 The relevant development plan for the area within which the application site lies comprises National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Midlothian Local Development Plan. Other material considerations which should be considered in the determination of the application includes Planning History, Consultation Responses and Third Party Representations. National Development Framework 4 4.4 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) was adopted by Scottish Ministers on 13th February 2023 and contains 33 no. policies against which applications for development proposals require to be assessed. Section 24(3) (i) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) 1997 Act states that ‘in the event of any incompatibility between a provision of the National Planning Framework and a provision of a local development plan, whichever of them is the later in date is to prevail.” This means that if there is anything in the Midlothian Local Development Plan Page 36 of 94
Page 37
19 that is deemed to be incompatible with a comparable provision in NPF4, it is the provision in NPF4 that is to be taken into consideration by the Council in its decision-making, with the LDP policy in question being treated as having been effectively superseded. In a letter dated 8th February 2023 dealing with the transitional arrangements for NPF4, the Minister for Planning and the Chief Planner of Scotland gave the following advice to decision-makers in relation to the application of NPF4: ‘Section 25 of the 1997 Act requires that decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Application of planning judgement to the circumstances of an individual situation remains essential to all decision making, informed by principles of proportionality and reasonableness. It is important to bear in mind NPF4 must be read and applied as a whole. The intent of each of the 33 policies is set out in NPF4 and can be used to guide decision-making. Conflicts between policies are to be expected. Factors for and against development will be weighed up in the balance of planning judgement.’ (highlighting added) 4.5 Policies within National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) considered to be of relevance to the application proposals include the following: Policy 1 – Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises Policy 2 – Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Policy 3 – Biodiversity Policy 4 – Natural Places Policy 5 – Soils Policy 6 – Forestry, Woodland, and Trees Policy 7 – Historic Assets and Places Policy 8 – Green Belts Policy 13 – Sustainable Transport Policy 14 – Design, Quality and Place Policy 15 – Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods Policy 16 – Quality Homes Policy 18 – Infrastructure First Policy 20 – Blue and Green Infrastructure Policy 22 - Flood Risk and Water Management Policy 23 – Health and Safety Policy 25 - Community Wealth Building Policy 1 – Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises 4.6 The intent of Policy 1 in NPF4 on ‘Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises,’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crisis.’ Characteristics of the development proposal supporting the global and nature crises include, inter-alia, the following: • The dwelling will be designed and constructed to meet or exceed the requirements of the Scottish Building Standards – Section 6 (Energy) current at the time of Building Warrant submission. It will adopt a fabric first approach to sustainability which involves meeting the required carbon reduction requirements by increasing thermal performance and minimising air infiltration. It will incorporate low carbon heating Page 37 of 94
Page 38
20 technology, principally a Ground Source Heat Pump providing space heating and domestic hot water. Roof photovoltaic panels will also be introduced to further reduce operational carbon emissions; • The embodiment of low energy LED lighting throughout the dwelling proposed; • The inclusion of an EV Charging point; and • The development of the site for the dwelling house as proposed with associated garden areas (including a green ‘living’ roof) and landscaping/planting will enhance the site’s biodiversity credentials. The development proposed, as a consequence of the above considerations, is considered to comply with the requirements of Policy 1 in NPF4. Policy 2 – Climate Mitigation and Adaptation 4.7 The intent of Policy 2 in NPF4 on ‘Climate Mitigation and Adaptation’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate development that minimizes emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change.’ The policy states the following: ‘a) Development proposals will be sited and designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible. b) Development proposals will be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risks from climate change. c) Development proposals to retrofit measures to existing developments that reduce emissions or support adaptation to climate change will be supported.’ 4.8 The characteristics of the development highlighted in Section 4.6 above under our assessment of Policy 1, facilitates a development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change thereby rendering it compliant with the terms of Policy 2 in NPF4. Page 38 of 94
Page 39
21 Policy 3 – Biodiversity 4.9 The intent of Policy 3 in NPF4 on ‘Biodiversity’ is ‘to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks.’ Parts (a), (c) and (d) of the policy are particularly relevant to small scale local developments and state the following: (a) Development proposals will contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity, including where relevant, restoring degraded habitats and building and strengthening nature networks and the connections between them. Proposals should also integrate nature-based solutions, where possible. (b) Proposals for local development will include appropriate measures to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity, in accordance with national and local guidance. Measures should be proportionate to the nature and scale of development. Applications for individual householder development, or which fall within scope of (b) above, are excluded from this requirement. d) Any potential adverse impacts, including cumulative impacts, of development proposals on biodiversity, nature networks and the natural environment will be minimised through careful planning and design. This will take into account the need to reverse biodiversity loss, safeguard the ecosystem services that the natural environment provides, and build resilience by enhancing nature networks and maximising the potential for restoration.’ 4.10 The Ecological Appraisal(Refer toDocument 1p)submitted in support of the applicationstates in its summary and conclusions that ‘planting wildflower meadow mixes, native trees and shrubs, and installing bat and bird boxes will enhance the local habitat for local wildlife,’ thereby fulfilling the requirements of Policy 3. Our client would suggest the imposition of a condition on any permission granted which required the submission of a landscaping and biodiversity enhancement scheme for the approval of the Planning Authority and its subsequent implementation thereafter in association with the development of the dwelling house proposed. Policy 4 – Natural Places 4.11 The intent of Policy 4 in NPF4 on ‘Natural Places’ is ‘to protect, restore and enhance natural assets making best use of nature-based solutions.’Part (a)of the policy states that‘development proposals which by virtue of type, location or scale will have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment, will not be supported.’ 4.12 As noted in our response to Policy 3 above, the application proposals will not have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment or affect any site designated for natural heritage purposes. In fact, the proposals will enhance biodiversity and the general character Page 39 of 94
Page 40
22 and appearance of the area through the planting and landscaping measures proposed. The proposals are consequently considered to be compliant with the terms of Policy 4. Policy 5 – Soils 4.13 The intent of Policy 5 in NPF4 on ‘Soils’ is ‘to protect carbon-rich soils, restore peatlands and minimise disturbance to soils from development.’ Criterion (b) in Policy 5 states the following: ‘b) Development proposals on prime agricultural land, or land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important for primary use, as identified by the LDP, will only be supported where it is for: 1. Essential infrastructure and there is a specific locational need and no other suitable site; 2. Small-scale development directly linked to a rural business, farm or croft or for essential workers for the rural business to be able to live onsite; 3. The development of production and processing facilities associated with the land produce where no other local site is suitable; 4. The generation of energy from renewable sources or the extraction of minerals and there is secure provision for restoration; and In all of the above exceptions, the layout and design of the proposal minimises the amount of protected land that is required.’ 4.14 The Land Capability for Agriculture (LCA) classification is used to rank land based on its potential productivity and cropping flexibility. This is determined by the extent to which the physical characteristics of the land (soil, climate, and relief) impose long term restrictions on its use. The LCA is a seven-class system. Class 1 represents land that has the highest potential flexibility of use, whereas Class 7 land is of very limited agricultural value. Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3.1 are classed as prime agricultural land. The datasets are provided by the James Hutton Institute. A map of the soils within which the application site is located, produced by the Hutton Institute, is available online at Scotland's Soils - soil maps (www.environment.gov.scot). An extract from that Land Capability Mapbelow shows conclusively and without ambiguity that the application site lies within an urban area (coloured grey) and as such is not prime agricultural land (coloured yellow and green). As a consequence of that the proposal does not involve development on Prime Agricultural Land and does not therefore contravene the terms of Policy 5. Unfortunately the Midlothian Local Development Plan, when produced in 2017, identified, in error, the application site and surrounding lands as being of Prime Agricultural Quality whereas they should have been identified as ‘Urban’ and with no classification insofar as their agricultural quality was concerned. Whilst the error in the plan has been acknowledged by the Council previously (Refer to Document 4) the same mistake has been made by the Appointed Officer in dealing with the current application. Page 40 of 94
Page 41
23 Soil Map as produced by the Hutton Institute identifies the site as ‘Urban’ coloured grey and not ‘Prime Agricultural’ coloured green and yellow. Policy 6 – Forestry, Woodland, and Trees 4.15 The intent of Policy 6 in NPF4 on ‘Forestry, Woodland and Trees’ is ‘to protect and expand forests, woodland and trees.’ Parts (a) and (b) of Policy 6 state the following: ‘a) Development proposals that enhance, expand and improve woodland and tree cover will be supported. b) Development proposals will not be supported where they will result in: i. Any loss of ancient woodlands, ancient and veteran trees, or adverse impact on their ecological condition; ii. Adverse impacts on native woodlands, hedgerows and individual trees of high biodiversity value, or identified for protection in the Forestry and Woodland Strategy; iii. Fragmenting or severing woodland habitats, unless appropriate mitigation measures are identified and implemented in line with the mitigation hierarchy; iv. Conflict with Restocking Direction, Remedial Notice or Registered Notice to Comply issued by Scottish Forestry.’ 4.16 As noted in the Planning Officer’s Report of Handling (Refer to Document 3), the tree survey submitted in support of the application advises that the trees within the application site are generally of low arboricultural value and the ecological report advisesthatthey are of moderate to high ecological value. In order to facilitate the development of the dwelling house proposed, three individual trees in fair to good condition will be removed and one group of trees in fair condition will be removed. As previously noted in our response to Policy 3, our client is proposing and would be delighted to undertake compensatory tree planting works, and it is again suggested that these be the subject of a suitably worded condition in the event of planning permission being granted. Given the circumstances outlined we are of the view that the proposal does not conflict with the terms of Policy 6. Page 41 of 94
Page 42
24 Policy 7 – Historic Assets and Places 4.17 The intent of Policy 7 in NPF 4 on ‘Historic Assets and Places’ is ‘to protect and enhance historic assets and places, and to enable positive change as a catalyst for the regeneration of places.’ Parts (a), and (c) of the policy are of direct relevance to the application proposals and state the following: ‘a) Development proposals with a potentially significant impact on historic assets or places will be accompanied by an assessment which is based on an understanding of the cultural significance of the historic asset and/or place. The assessment should identify the likely visual or physical impact of any proposals for change, including cumulative effects and provide a sound basis for managing the impacts of change. Proposals should also be informed by national policy and guidance on managing change in the historic environment, and information held within Historic Environment Records. c) Development proposals for the reuse, alteration or extension of a listed building will only be supported where they will preserve its character, special architectural or historic interest and setting. Development proposals affecting the setting of a listed building should preserve its character, and its special architectural or historic interest.’ 4.18 There are two listed buildings on the southern side of Wadingburn Lane, the Category B Listed, Fettes Mount and the Category C Listed, Carlethon House. The dwelling house as proposed in this application does not have an adverse impact on the setting of either property and as such the proposal is compliant with the terms of Policy 7. Policy 8 – Green Belts 4.19 The intent of Policy 8 on ‘Green Belts,’ is to ‘encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably.’ The outcomes desired from the policy of designating Green Belts are stated as: • Development is directed to the right locations, urban density is increased and unsustainable growth is prevented. • The character, landscape, natural setting and identity of settlements is protected and enhanced. • Nature networks are supported and land is managed to help tackle climate change. 4.20 Policy 8, as worded in NPF4, states the following: ‘a) Development proposals within a green belt designated within the LDP will only be supported if: i) they are for: • development associated with agriculture, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland (including community woodlands); • residential accommodation required and designed for a key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment where the presence of a worker is essential to the operation of the enterprise, Page 42 of 94
Page 43
25 or retired workers where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available; • horticulture, including market gardening and directly connected retailing, as well as community growing; • outdoor recreation, play and sport or leisure and tourism uses; and developments that provide opportunities for access to the open countryside (including routes for active travel and core paths); • flood risk management (such as development of blue and green infrastructure within a “drainage catchment” to manage/mitigate flood risk and/or drainage issues); • essential infrastructure or new cemetery provision; • minerals operations and renewable energy developments; • intensification of established uses, including extensions to an existing building where that is ancillary to the main use; • the reuse, rehabilitation and conversion of historic environment assets; or • one-for-one replacements of existing permanent homes. and ii) the following requirements are met: • reasons are provided as to why a green belt location is essential and why it cannot be located on an alternative site outwith the green belt; • the purpose of the green belt at that location is not undermined; • the proposal is compatible with the surrounding established countryside and landscape character; • the proposal has been designed to ensure it is of an appropriate scale, massing and external appearance, and uses materials that minimise visual impact on the green belt as far as possible; and • there will be no significant long-term impacts on the environmental quality of the green belt.’ 4.21 Whilst it is accepted that the dwelling house as proposed does not meet any of the listed exceptions against thegeneralpresumption of development in areas lying within the Green Belt as cited in Policy 8 (a) (i), it is important, in considering the current application to assess the impact of the development proposed on the underlying objectives of Green Belt designation. As previously advised in Section 2, the wider area within which the site is located does not exhibit classic Green Belt characteristics but more so those of an urban environment due to the spatial density and character of the surrounding development existing. The application site, within that established and referenced context is essentially an infill site within an established group of dwellings lying between the dwelling house approved separately under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP to the east and the established woodland to the west. Given the contained nature of the site due to the established landscaping surrounding it, the development of the dwelling house proposed will not have an adverse impact on the character, setting or identity of any settlement as so defined in the Council’s Local Development Plan. It has also been demonstrated that the development of the dwelling house proposed will result in an enhancement of the site’s biodiversity credentials thus ensuring that Page 43 of 94
Page 44
26 nature networks are supported in the interests of tacking climate change. Finally, it has been conclusively demonstrated, in our response to Policy 13 below in particular, that the site is sustainably accessible to a range of facilities and services via foot, bicycle, other forms of wheeling and by public transport. Application site has the characteristics of an Infill Site within an Urban Built Up Area rather than a site in the Green Belt 4.22 Given the considerations and situation described above, it is neither considered nor accepted that the development of the dwelling house proposed will have an adverse impact on the character, appearance or overriding function of the Green Belt insofar as it relates to this particular location. The fact that permission has already been granted for a dwelling house on the adjacent site under the terms Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP is important in this regard as it creates a strong precedent in support of the development of such sitesand the current application site in particular. In thatearlier precedent referenced,the Local Review Body concluded that ‘The proposed single dwellinghouse by means of its scale, siting, design and materials will not be detrimental to the local landscape, residential amenity or the green belt and as such is considered acceptable as an exception to establish restrictive green belt policy as set out in Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 and National Planning Framework 4.’ It is difficult to comprehend, in light of that decision, and light of the characteristics of the current application site, how the refusal of this current application can be supported. Page 44 of 94
Page 45
27 Policy 13 – Sustainable Transport 4.23 The intent of Policy 13 in NPF4 on ‘Sustainable Transport’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel use and reduce the need to travel unsustainably.’ Part (b) of the policy states the following: ‘Development proposals will be supported where it can be demonstrated that the transport requirements generated have been considered in line with the sustainable travel and investment hierarchies and where appropriate they: (i) Provide direct, easy, segregated and safe links to local facilities via walking, wheeling and cycling networks before occupation; (ii) Will be accessible by public transport, ideally supporting the use of existing services; (iii) Integrate transport modes; (iv) Provide low or zero-emission vehicle and cycle charging points in safe and convenient locations, in alignment with building standards; (v) Supply safe, secure and convenient cycle parking to meet the needs of users and which is more conveniently located than car parking; (vi) Are designed to incorporate safety measures including safe crossings for walking and wheeling and reducing the number and speed of vehicles; (vii) Have taken into account, at the earliest stage of design, the transport needs of diverse groups including users with protected characteristics to ensure the safety, ease and needs of all users; and (viii) Adequately mitigate any impact on local public access routes.’ 4.24 As noted in Paragraph 2.5 previously, the site is highly and sustainably accessible to a range of services and facilities including public transport. Bus stops to the north and south of Lasswade Road exist within approximately 250 metres of which provide direct access to the 1, 3, 31, 140, 141, 800, N31, X31 and X33 services, thereby providing for safe and convenient access to a range of other towns and villages in Midlothian and also to Edinburgh City Centre, the latter being within a c. 10 km journey. Lasswade’s High Street, where there are a range of local amenities lies within approximately 1 km and is also conveniently accessed on foot, by bicycle and other forms of wheeling in addition to the bus. As a consequence of such considerations the application proposals are considered to be entirely compliant with the terms of Policy 13. Policy 14 – Design, Quality and Place 4.25 The intent of Policy 14 in NPF4 on ‘Design, Quality and Place’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate well designed development that makes successful places by taking a designed-led approach and applying the Place Principle.’ The policy as worded states the following: Page 45 of 94
Page 46
28 (a) Development proposals will be designed to improve the quality of an area whether in urban or rural locations and regardless of scale. (b) Development proposals will be supported where they are consistent with the six qualities of successful places: Healthy: Supporting the prioritisation of women’s safety and improving physical and mental health. Pleasant: Supporting attractive natural and built spaces. Connected: Supporting well connected networks that make moving around easy and reduce car dependency Distinctive: Supporting attention to detail of local architectural styles and natural landscapes to be interpreted, literally or creatively, into designs to reinforce identity. Sustainable: Supporting the efficient use of resources that will allow people to live, play, work and stay in their area, ensuring climate resilience, and integrating nature positive, biodiversity solutions. Adaptable: Supporting commitment to investing in the long-term value of buildings, streets and spaces by allowing for flexibility so that they can be changed quickly to accommodate different uses as well as maintained over time. Further details on delivering the six qualities of successful places are set out in Annex D. c) Development proposals that are poorly designed, detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area or inconsistent with the six qualities of successful places, will not be supported. 4.26 The design rationale for the proposed dwelling house is outlined in the accompanying Design and Access Statement (Refer to Document 1l). The proposals are considered to be of a high quality, generating a sense of place and befitting of a bespoke high-quality, and attractive dwelling house. In line with criterion (b), the proposal has been developed to reflect the six qualities of successful places: Healthy - The development supports health and wellbeing by providing a safe and inclusive environment. Natural surveillance, appropriate lighting, and clear sightlines have been incorporated to enhance safety. Access to outdoor space, noting in this respect private usable garden space, the adjoining and integrated wooded areas and user-friendly design, will encourage physical activity and support mental wellbeing. Page 46 of 94
Page 47
29 Pleasant - The design prioritises high-quality, attractive spaces, integrating landscaping and green infrastructure to create a visually appealing development within a mature context. The proposal respects the character of the surrounding area while enhancing local amenity. Connected - As noted in our response to Policy 13 previously, the site is well integrated with existing movement networks, promoting walking, wheeling, and cycling. Connections to public transport and local services are prioritised, reducing reliance on private cars and supporting sustainable travel patterns. Distinctive - The proposal responds to the architectural style associated with the dwelling adjacent which was previously approved under Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP and its wider landscape context, incorporating materials and design elements that reinforce a strong sense of place. This approach ensures the development is both contextually appropriate and visually distinctive. Sustainable - Sustainability principles are embedded throughout the design, including efficient use of resources, energy-conscious construction, and measures to enhance biodiversity. The development contributes to climate resilience and supports long-term environmental goals. Adaptable - The scheme has been designed with flexibility in mind, allowing spaces within the dwelling proposed to adapt to changing needs over time. Durable materials and thoughtful design will ensure longevity and ease of maintenance. 4.27 The proposal, as a consequence of the considerations outlined above, is considered to be fully compliant with the terms of Policy 14. The Appointed Planning Officer seems to be of the same view having not referenced Policy 14 in the reasons for the refusal of the application and stating in his Report of Handling, the following: ‘The proposed house is contemporary in its design, simple in form and treatment of materials with large areas of glazing. A green roof is proposed which is welcomed to provide additional biodiversity gain to the site. The design of the dwelling would be in keeping with the approved house design to the east of the site. While a different approach to the other surrounding dwellings, the Planning Authority consider that the proposed development, in terms of its design, would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.’ Policy 15 – Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods 4.28 The intent of Policy 15 in NPF4 on ‘Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods’ is ‘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, preferably by walking, wheeling or cycling or using sustainable transport options.’ The policy as worded states the following: Page 47 of 94
Page 48
30 ‘a) Development proposals will contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20 minute neighbourhoods. To establish this, consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area, including local access to: • sustainable modes of transport including local public transport and safe, high quality walking, wheeling and cycling networks; • employment; • shopping; • health and social care facilities; • childcare, schools and lifelong learning opportunities; • playgrounds and informal play opportunities, parks, green streets and spaces, community gardens, opportunities for food growth and allotments, sport and recreation facilities; • publicly accessible toilets; • affordable and accessible housing options, ability to age in place and housing diversity.’ 4.29 Whilst the concept or branding of ‘Local Living and the 20 minute neighbourhood’ is perceived by some as ‘new,’the principles associated with them have been long embodied in good planning practice. The application site lies within close proximity to Lasswade and benefits from strong integration with the existing quasi urban pattern of development. It is not isolated or car- dependent in nature. The surrounding road network and path allows for direct and legible connections to adjacent residential areas, local centres, and key services. Pedestrian routes and local roads provide permeability, enabling residents to move easily and safely between the site and nearby destinations including bus stops on Lasswade Road which provide public transport services across the region. The site, as a consequence of the facilities and services described, and the variety of sustainably led transport opportunities to access them, will contribute positively to the principles of local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods and as such is considered to comply, in an exemplary fashion, with the terms of the Policy 15. Policy 16 - Quality Homes 4.30 The intent of Policy 16 in NPF4 on ‘Quality Homes’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes, in the right locations, providing choice across tenures that meet the diverse housing needs of people and communities across Scotland.’ Criteria (c), and (f) of the policy, which are of particular relevance state the following: c) 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, will be supported. This could include: Page 48 of 94
Page 49
31 i. self-provided homes; ii. accessible, adaptable and wheelchair accessible homes; iii. build to rent; iv. affordable homes; v. a range of size of homes such as those for larger families; vi. homes for older people, including supported accommodation, care homes and sheltered housing; vii. homes for people undertaking further and higher education; and viii. homes for other specialist groups such as service personnel.’ f) Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the LDP will only be supported in limited circumstances where: i. the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out; and ii. the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods; iii. and either: • delivery of sites is happening earlier than identified in the deliverable housing land pipeline. This will be determined by reference to two consecutive years of the Housing Land Audit evidencing substantial delivery earlier than pipeline timescales and that general trend being sustained; or • the proposal is consistent with policy on rural homes; or • the proposal is for smaller scale opportunities within an existing settlement boundary; or • the proposal is for the delivery of less than 50 affordable homes as part of a local authority supported affordable housing plan.’ 4.31 The principle of the dwelling house proposed is supported by the terms of Policy 16 (c) in that it is a self-provided or self-built property increasing choice and adaptability to changing purposes including ‘aging in place.’ Whilst the site is not specifically allocated for development and lies in the Green Belt,we have previously opined that its development will not detrimentally impact on Green Belt objectives and is a suitable location for a new dwelling house it light of its characteristics, noting its landscape fit; the benefits arising to biodiversity and its sustainability characteristics in terms of accessibility to facilities and services. As a consequence of such considerations the proposal does not contravene the terms of Policy 16. Page 49 of 94
Page 50
32 Policy 18 – Infrastructure First 4.32 The intent of Policy 18 in NPF4 on ‘Infrastructure First’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate an infrastructure first approach to land use planning, which puts infrastructure considerations at the heart of placemaking.’ As worded the policy states the following: ‘a) Development proposals which provide (or contribute to) infrastructure in line with that identified as necessary in LDPs and their delivery programmes will be supported. b) The impacts of development proposals on infrastructure should be mitigated. Development proposals will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that provision is made to address the impacts on infrastructure. Where planning conditions, planning obligations, or other legal agreements are to be used, the relevant tests will apply. Where planning obligations are entered into, they should meet the following tests: – be necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms – serve a planning purpose– relate to the impacts of the proposed development – fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development – be reasonable in all other respects Planning conditions should only be imposed where they meet all of the following tests. They should be: – necessary – relevant to planning – relevant to the development to be permitted – enforceable – precise – reasonable in all other respects.’ 4.33 There are no infrastructure constraints preventing the development of the site for the dwelling house proposed. The site can be satisfactorily accessed off Wadingburn Road/Wadingburn Lane. Foul drainage arrangementswill be provided via a septic tank/treatment plan with surface water attenuated and treated prior to discharge to the receiving source in accordance with sustainable urban drainage principles. As any other impacts arising from the development proposed can be satisfactorily mitigated, if or where necessary and/or appropriate, through the imposition of conditions on any consent granted, they are considered to be compliant with the terms of Policy 18 in NPF4. Policy 20 – Blue and Green Infrastructure 4.34 The intent of Policy 20 on ‘Blue and Green Infrastructure’ is ‘to protect and enhance blue and green infrastructure and their networks.’ There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal on elements of blue or green infrastructure. The additional planting and landscaping which will be implemented in association with the development of the site for the dwelling houseproposed will enhance green infrastructure. The proposals are, as a consequence of these considerations compliant, with the terms of Policy 20 in NPF4. Page 50 of 94
Page 51
33 Policy 22 - Flood Risk and Water Management 4.35 The intent of Policy 22 in NPF4 on ‘Flood Risk and Water Management’ is ‘to strengthen resilience to flood risk by promoting avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing and future development to flooding.’ Parts (c) to (e) of the policy state the following: ‘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 blue green 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.’ 4.36 An examination of SEPA’s Flood Risk Maps for River and Surface Water and Small Watercourses (see below), reveals that the far northern part of the site next to the Wading Burn is at some risk of surface water flooding. The areas at risk are at a considerable distance from the location of the proposed dwelling house and at a significantly lower level as shown in the section below. SEPA Flood Risk Map for Surface Water and Small Watercourses Section through site shows dwelling house at a significantly higher level than the Wading Burn and not at risk of flooding Page 51 of 94
Page 52
34 The proposal as a consequence of these considerations complies with SEPA’s Standing Guidance for surface water flooding. It is respectfully suggested, in the event of planning permission being granted for the dwelling house proposed, that a condition be imposed requiring the submission of surface water drainage proposals and their subsequent implementation following such approval. The proposal is considered to be compliant with the terms of Policy 22. Policy 23 – Health and Safety 4.37 The intent of Policy 23 on ‘Health and Safety’ is ‘to protect people and places from environmental harm, mitigate risks arising from safety hazards and encourage, promote and facilitate development that improves health and wellbeing.’ Parts (d) and (e) of Policy 23 state the following: ‘d) Development proposals that are likely to have significant adverse effects on air quality will not be supported. Development proposals will consider opportunities to improve air quality and reduce exposure to poor air quality. An air quality assessment may be required where the nature of the proposal or the air quality in the location suggest significant effects are likely. e) Development proposals that are likely to raise unacceptable noise issues will not be supported. The agent of change principle applies to noise sensitive development. A Noise Impact Assessment may be required where the nature of the proposal or its location suggests that significant effects are likely.’ 4.38 Given the small scale nature of the development proposedit will not have an adverse effect on matters relating to air quality being below the threshold for formal assessment. Insofar as noise considerations are concerned the accompanying acoustic assessment prepared by RMP (Refer to Document 1n) demonstrates, that with the introduction of appropriate mitigation measures, satisfactory internal and external environments can be provided for residential purposes. As a consequence, the proposal is considered to be compliant with the terms of Policy 23. Policy 25 - Community Wealth Building 4.39 The intent of Policy 25 in NPF4 on ‘Community Wealth Building’ is ‘to encourage, promote and facilitate a new strategic approach to economic development that also provides a practical model for building a wellbeing economy at local, regional and national levels.’ The policy as worded states the following: ‘a) Development proposals which contribute to local or regional community wealth building strategies and are consistent with local economic priorities will be supported. This could include for example improving community resilience and reducing inequalities; increasing spending within communities; ensuring the use of local supply chains and services; local job creation; supporting community led proposals, including creation of new local firms and enabling community led ownership of buildings and assets. Page 52 of 94
Page 53
35 b) Development proposals linked to community ownership and management of land will be supported.’ 4.40 The proposed development accords with Policy 25 of National Planning Framework 4 by contributing, in a proportionate manner, to local community wealth building objectives. The delivery of a new home will support the local economy through the use of local contractors, suppliers and services during the construction phase, helping to retain expenditure within the area and supporting local employment. The development will also contribute to increasing the local housing stock, assisting in meeting identified need,and supporting the sustainability and resilience of the local community. The proposal, as a consequence, is considered to be compliant with the terms of Policy 25. 4.41 Having assessed the application proposals against the terms of allrelevantpolicies within NPF4 and applying the principles of proportionality and reasonableness advocated by the Planning Minister and Chief Planner in their letter dealing with the transitional arrangements for NPF4 (referred to previously in Paragraph 4.4), the proposed dwelling house, when ‘viewed in the round’ and notwithstanding some slight friction with Policy 8 on the subject of Green Belts, is considered to be largely compatible and gains significant support from the terms of NPF4. Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) 4.42 The Midlothian Local Development Plan was adopted by Midlothian Council on 07th November 2017. The application site, as noted on a number of occasions previously, is located within the Green Belt but is also identified in error as Prime Agricultural Land. Policies of relevance to the application proposals in the order that they appear in the Plan are as follows: Policy DEV 5 – Sustainability in New Development Policy DEV 6 – Layout and Design of New Development Policy DEV 7 – Landscaping in New Development Policy TRAN1 – Sustainable Travel Policy ENV1 – Protection of the Green Belt Policy ENV4 – Prime Agricultural Land (not relevant due to error in drafting of LDP) Policy ENV7 – Landscape Character Policy ENV9 – Flooding Policy ENV10 – Water Environment Policy ENV11 – Woodland, Trees and Hedges Policy ENV 15 – Species and Habitat Protection and Enhancement Policy ENV18 – Noise Policy ENV22 – Listed Buildings Page 53 of 94
Page 54
36 Policy NRG 3 – Energy Use and Low & Zero-Carbon Generating Technology Policy WAST 5 – Waste Minimisation and Recycling in New Developments 4.43 Policy DEV 5 on ‘Sustainability in New Development,’ states the following: ‘The Council will expect development proposals to have regard to the following principles of sustainability: A. building in harmony with the site including optimising on orientation and relationships to contours, provision of shelter, and utilising natural features; B. fostering and maintaining biodiversity; C. treating and conserving water on site in line with best practice and guidance on sustainable urban drainage; D. addressing sustainable energy in line with policies NRG3, NRG4, NRG5 and NRG6; E. recycling of construction materials and minimising the use of non-renewable resources; F. facilitating accessibility and adaptability; G. providing for waste recycling in accordance with standards which will be set out in planning guidance on waste separation, collection and recycling requirements for new development; H. incorporating high speed broadband connections and other digital technologies in line with policy IT1; and I. where flood risk has been identified on a development site or where a development proposal will increase flood risk elsewhere, the layout of the site will be designed to reduce flood risk on or off site, in accordance with policy ENV9.’ 4.44 Policy DEV 5 is somewhat of a‘catch-all’policy with many of the issues raised within it having previously been addressed in our responses to policies in NPF4. Within that background and context, we would respond to the various criteria contained therein as follows: A The application site benefits from a mature surrounding landscaped context in terms of both screening and shelter and thereby utilising natural features to the maximum. The sites orientation maximises opportunities for solar gain with the extent of the site providing opportunities for the incorporation of a ground source heat pump and photovoltaics in contributing to meeting energy requirements. B As noted in the Ecology Report, the development of the site for the dwelling house proposed provides an opportunity to contribute to and enhance its biodiversity credentials. A range of landscaping and planting measures have been recommended which can be the subject of a suspensive condition on any permission granted. The proposed green and living roof contributes further to the biodiversity equation. C All surface water run-off from the site will be attenuated, treated and discharged to the receiving source at rates equivalent to or less than present greenfield run off rates thereby adopting best sustainable urban drainage measures (Suds). D As noted in our response to ‘A’ above, energy requirements will be met from a combination of photovoltaics and a ground source heat pump. The design also adopts a Page 54 of 94
Page 55
37 fabric first approach to sustainability which involves meeting the required carbon reduction requirements by increasing thermal performance and minimising air infiltration. E Our client will, wherever feasibly possible, seek to recycle products during the construction process and when complete will ensure that the dwelling will operate to the maximum effect in recycling domestic waste. This will be facilitated through the incorporation of facilities within the garden area for refuse and within kitchen areas for food recycling. F Given the scale and layout of the dwelling proposed it provides for maximum flexibility and adaptability with aging in place and the forefront of the design process. G Please refer to our response to F above. H The dwelling will be provided with a high speed and wholly integrated broadband network. I The dwelling proposed is not a risk of flooding and furthermore with the incorporation of drainage arrangements developed on the principles of SUDS it will not contribute to or exacerbate incidents of flooding elsewhere. In light of the considerations outlined above, the application proposals are considered to be entirely compliant with the terms of Policy DEV5 within the Local Development Plan. 4.45 Policy DEV 6 on ‘Layout and Design of New Development,’ states the following: ‘The Council will require good design and a high quality of architecture, in both the overall layout of development proposals and their constituent parts. The layout and design of development proposals should meet the following criteria: A. the layout of development proposals should complement or enhance the character of any adjoining or nearby urban area; include attractive street frontages; provide outlook onto communal open space; and integrate the siting of buildings, landscaping, open space, boundary treatment, and pedestrian/ cycle/ vehicular routes; B. any locally prominent landscape feature or historic building should be reflected in the layout and local landmarks and viewpoints should be incorporated into the streetscape to provide a welcoming atmosphere and assist with navigation; C. good quality materials should be used in the design; D. existing pedestrian routes, including desire lines, should be taken into account and the layout should be convenient for pedestrians and cyclists, with special attention to the provision of footpaths and cycleways which create links between key destinations; E. a high standard of passive energy gain should be achieved and overshadowing of buildings should be avoided; F. pedestrian routes, open space, sustainable urban drainage features or roads should be overlooked by front or side windows of buildings and doors should face onto streets or active frontages; G. buildings should be laid along contours to avoid excessive changes in levels and underbuilding in the street scene; Page 55 of 94
Page 56
38 H. open space for different age groups should be designed and sited to minimise disturbance and protect residential amenity; I. adequate spacing between housing should be provided to ensure privacy and amenity*1; J. where there is a recognised need for new open space in the area (see policy DEV9: Open Space Standards), this should complement and/or contribute to existing open space provision and the proposed green network *2; K. private open space should be provided on a scale appropriate to the relevant dwelling type*1; L. where the proposed development is of a scale and in a location which makes the provision of bus services a realistic prospect, roads providing access through the site must be of a width and design sufficient to allow the passage of buses, with lay-bys provided to allow them to stop without obstructing other traffic; M. any roads, lighting and parking must satisfy the Council's standards; and N. cycle parking and bin stores shall be incorporated into the layout of developments. Exceptions to the above criteria may be considered where the proposed development is of a very high standard. *1 Reference should be made to the Supplementary Guidance on Quality of Place for further detailed requirements. *2 Where new open space is provided, arrangements for its long-term maintenance (typically 15 years) shall be agreed with the Council prior to any consent being issued. Such arrangements will include long-term funding for the maintenance of open space, landscaping and equipment.’ 4.46 Whilst many of the criteria contained in Policy DEV 6 are of more relevance to larger scale developments than the single dwelling house proposed in the current application, our responses to each of the criteria, where relevant, are outlined below. A As noted previously the application site benefits from strong and defensible landscaped boundaries with further trees and landscaping within the site itself. In order to protect as many trees as possible, the position of the proposed house has been changed during the progression of the application as per recommendations made by our client’s arborist and ecologist. The site is excellently serviced by pedestrian networks with Wadingburn Lane itself being a Core Path linking up with publicly accessible footpaths into Lasswade and the wider area. B As noted in our response to Policy 7 on ‘Historic Assets and Places,’ due account has been given in the identification of the site and in the siting of the dwelling house on the setting of the listed buildings to the south with no harm being caused. C The materials proposed in the dwelling house are of high quality comprising natural sandstone on the ground floor and larch cladding on the upper floor with windows and Page 56 of 94
Page 57
39 doors being aluminium coloured anthracite grey. These in combination with large, glazed areas and a green roof, will result in a striking architectural feature within landscaped surrounds. D As noted previously Wadingburn Lane forms part of Midlothian’s Core Path Network and as such the dwelling house is ideally located for sustainably based foot and cycle-based movements. E The incorporation of large, glazed areas and a fabric first approach to sustainability which involves meeting the required carbon reduction requirements by increasing thermal performance and minimising air infiltrationwill ensure that there are high levels of passive energy gain. F This particular is of more relevance to housing schemes involving multiple units rather than the single dwelling proposed in this application. G The dwelling proposed will site harmoniously within the landscape without any requirement for excessive levels of underbuilding. Section through proposed dwelling house H As the application relates to a single dwelling house there is no requirement to provide publicly accessible open space within it. Notwithstanding this, exceptionally high quality private open/amenity space will be provided within the curtilage of the dwelling for the benefit of residents. I The dwelling house proposed is sufficiently distant from other dwelling houses to ensure that it and they will maintain high levels of privacy. J Not of relevance to a single dwelling house proposal. K Not of relevance to a single dwelling house proposal. Page 57 of 94
Page 58
40 L Not of relevance to a single dwelling house proposal. However, it should be reiterated that the dwelling house proposed enjoys excellent access to bus based public transport services with bus stops existing within easy walking distance on Lasswade Road. M Sufficient levels of car parking facilities have been proposed within the site in compliance with the Council’s standards. N Provision for cycle and bin stores have been provided. In light of the considerations outlined above, the application proposals are considered to be entirely compliant with the terms of Policy DEV6. 4.47 Policy DEV 7 on ‘Landscaping in New Development,’ states the following: ‘The Council will require development proposals to be accompanied by a comprehensive scheme of landscaping. The design of the scheme should be informed by the results of an appropriately detailed landscape assessment, to ensure the landscaping proposals: A. complement the existing landscape both within and in the vicinity of the site; B. create landmarks in the development layout and use the landscape framework to emphasise these; C. provide shaded areas and shelter from prevailing winds, where possible and appropriate with regard to the overall design of the development; D. make use of tree and shrub species that are of a good appearance, hardy and require low maintenance, with a preference for indigenous species; E. provide effective screening. Where the development abuts the countryside an effective tree belt will be required to define the urban edge, allow for future growth of trees and promote pedestrian access to the countryside beyond and wider path networks; F. ensure that, where roads are to be lined with trees, these are given adequate room to grow and mature; G. make use of trees to define the edge of development areas within sites; H. promote local biodiversity and, where appropriate, community food growing; and I. ensure that finishing materials, surface textures and street furniture, together with the design of walls and fencing, combine with the landscaping to create an attractive environment. Landscaping schemes should be implemented at an early stage in the development to allow adequate time to become successfully established. Maintenance proposals must accompany schemes of landscaping.’ 4.48 As noted already, the application site benefits from the screening and shading effects of established landscaping which will be supplemented with additional landscaping (soft and hard). These measures will enhance and contribute significantly to the area’s biodiversity credentials. As suggested previously, in the event of planning permission being granted, a condition can be imposed requiring the submission of a landscaping scheme for the approval of the Planning Authority and its subsequently implantation thereafter. In light of the considerations outlined, the application proposals are considered to be entirely compliant with the terms of Policy DEV7. Page 58 of 94
Page 59
41 4.49 Policy TRAN1 on ‘Sustainable Travel,’ states the following: ‘Major travel-generating uses will only be permitted where they are well located in relation to existing or proposed public transport services, are accessible by safe and direct routes for pedestrian and cyclists and accord with the Council’s Local Transport Strategy. Proposals for all new major travel-generating developments, including phases of a major development area, shall be accompanied by a Transport Assessment and a Travel Plan, setting out what provisions or measures shall be taken to provide for, and encourage the use of, alternative forms of travel to the private car. The Council will seek to develop an active travel network to promote sustainable travel and give priority to walking, cycling and public transport initiatives and developments over provision for car-based travel. The network would be a combination of existing and planned routes and infrastructure which would include: • safer routes to school; • re-prioritised road space to support walking and cycling; • dedicated routes to encourage walking and cycling to work, and for recreation and leisure; • the proposed Midlothian Green Network and Core Paths network; • the integration of new and existing housing and economic development; • contributions towards cross-boundary/long distance recreation and commuting routes; • the development and extension of the National Cycle Route Network; and • facilities for visitors and tourists. Reference should also be made to policies IMP1 (new development), IMP2 (essential infrastructure) and DEV6 (layout and design of new development).’ 4.50 As noted in our response to Policy 13 in NPF4 on ‘Sustainable Transport,’ the site benefits from excellent accessibility to bus based public transport services and is also accessible via foot, cycle and other forms of wheeling on safe routes to other local facilities in Lasswade. It is therefore entirely compliant with the terms of Policy TRAN1. 4.51 Policy ENV1 on the ‘Protection of the Green Belt,’ states the following: ‘Development will not be permitted in the Green Belt except for proposals that: A. are necessary to agriculture, horticulture or forestry; or B. provide opportunities for access to the open countryside, outdoor sport or outdoor recreation which reduce the need to travel further afield; or C. are related to other uses appropriate to the rural character of the area; or D. provide for essential infrastructure; or E. form development that meets a national requirement or established need if no other site is available. Page 59 of 94
Page 60
42 Any development proposal will be required to show that it does not conflict with the overall objectives of the Green Belt which are to: • Direct development to the most appropriate locations and support regeneration; • Protect and enhance the character, landscape setting and identity of the City and Midlothian towns by clearly identifying their physical boundaries and preventing coalescence; and • Protect and provide access to open space. Housing will normally only be permissible where it is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity (see criterion A above). The applicant will be required to show the need for the new dwelling is permanent; cannot be met within an existing settlement; and that the occupier will be employed full-time in the associated countryside activity. A planning condition limiting the occupancy of the house is likely to be attached in the event of approval.’ Extract from Midlothian Local Development Plan – Proposals Map 4.52 In a similar vein to Policy 8 on ‘Green Belts’ in NPF4, the application proposal does not conform to any of the exceptions to the general presumption against development in such areas. However, as outlined in our response to Policy 8 previously, the application site is not considered, as a result of the established spatial character and density of other development in the area surrounding, it to contain the typical characteristics of a ‘green belt’ area exhibiting more so the characteristics of an infill site within an urban area. As a consequence of that we do not consider that the development of the site for the dwelling house propose will conflict with the objectives of green belt designation as outlined in the policy. The site is considered to be entirely appropriate for development given its accessibility characteristics; its development will not impact on the regeneration of other brownfield sites; it will not impact on the landscape setting of Edinburgh; it will not create, result or contribute to coalescence between settlements; and it does not impact on the protection or provision of access to open space. Furthermore, and again as noted previously the Council’s Local Review Body has previously granted planning Page 60 of 94
Page 61
43 permission for the erection of a dwelling on the adjoining site to the east in almost identical circumstances thus creating a strong precedent in support of the current application. The Planning Officer, in their Report of Handling on the application claims that the approval of the current application would ‘result in increased ribbon development within the Green Belt.’ Whilst the concept of ‘ribbon development,’ is not defined, insofar as we can establish, within the Local Development Plan it is a term used in planning to describe a pattern of development where houses are constructed in a long, narrow strip along a road or transport route outside a settlement boundary, rather than being grouped in a compact area. We are strongly of the view, in this particular instance, that the dwelling proposed represents an addition to an emerging and established group of houses rather than ribbon development as claimed. Whilst there is clearly some friction between the proposed dwelling house and the specific wording of Policy ENV1, the dwelling house proposed, does not, in our opinion conflict with general green belt objectives in any way and as such an exception should be made in this instance. 4.53 Policy ENV4 on ‘Prime Agricultural Land,’ states the following: ‘Development will not be permitted which leads to the permanent loss of prime agricultural land (Class 1, 2 and 3.1 of the James Hutton Institute Land Classification for Agriculture system), or land of a lesser quality that is locally important, unless: A. the site is allocated as part of the development strategy of this Plan; or B. the development is necessary to meet an established need (such as essential infrastructure); where there is no alternative site available; and where the need for the development outweighs the environmental or economic interests in retaining the farmland for productive use; or C. it is a small-scale development directly linked to an existing rural business. Where proposals for mineral extraction or renewable energy are deemed acceptable under the relevant policies, conditions may be applied to ensure that acceptable restoration proposals are in place that will return the land to its former status.’ 4.54 As noted previously in response to Policy 5 on ‘Soils,’ in NPF4, the application site is included within anarea defined as ‘Prime Agricultural Land’in the Midlothian Local Development Plan. However, the boundaries of the area defined as ‘Prime Agricultural Land’ is erroneous and does not coincide with the boundaries contained in the Land Capability Map for Scotland, prepared by the Hutton Institute withinwhich it is shown as lying within an ‘Urban Area.’ The Council has previously accepted that the Midlothian Local Development Plan is erroneous in this regard (Refer to Document 4) and whilst clearly overlooking that on this occasion, the site does not involve the development of prime quality agricultural land and as such prime quality agricultural land will not be lost as a result of the dwelling house proposed. The development does therefore conflict with the terms of Policy ENV4 and that should not have been stated or claimed in the second reason for refusal. Page 61 of 94
Page 62
44 4.55 Policy ENV7 on ‘Landscape Character,’ states the following: ‘Development will not be permitted where it may have an unacceptable effect on local landscape character. Where development is acceptable, it should respect such character and be compatible in terms of scale, siting and design. New developments will normally be required to incorporate proposals to maintain the diversity and distinctiveness of local landscapes and to enhance landscape characteristics where they have been weakened.’ 4.56 As noted on now numerous occasions, the dwelling house is being proposed on an infill site which benefits from strong and established landscaped boundaries and as such will not have an adverse effect on the area’s landscape character. It is therefore compliant with the terms of Policy ENV7. 4.57 Policy ENV9 on ‘Flooding,’ states the following: ‘Proposals for development will be assessed in relation to the flood risk framework and flood risk policy as set out in Scottish Planning Policy, using the SEPA flood maps to delineate the zones of little or no risk, low to medium risk, and medium to high risk. Development will not be permitted which would be at unacceptable risk of flooding or would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere*. Flood Risk Assessments will be required for most forms of development in areas of medium to high risk, but may also be required at other locations depending on the circumstances of the proposed development. The functional flood plain will be protected; in undeveloped and sparsely developed areas development may be acceptable in areas at medium to high risk of flooding if the location is essential for operational reasons and an alternative, lower risk locationis not available. Where flood protection measures to the appropriate standard already exist or are planned (under the adopted Local Flood Risk Management Plan) in built-up areas, development for residential, institutional, commercial and industrial development may be suitable. Any loss of flood storage capacity should be mitigated to achieve a neutral or better outcome. All proposals should be considered in accordance with the flood risk framework. Flood protection scheme proposals, or further land for natural flood risk management purposes, as promoted under the adopted LFRMP, will be supported in principle and protected from development which would prejudice their delivery. Sustainable drainage systems will be required for most forms of development, so that surface water run-off rates are not greater than in the site’s pre-developed condition, and to avoid any deterioration of water quality. The Council may seek long-term management agreements with developers to maintain such features in perpetuity. * Generally, an annual probability of up to 0.5% will be acceptable for most development, but higher standards may apply to essential infrastructure and the most vulnerable uses.’ 4.58 As noted in our response to Policy 22 on ‘Flood Risk and Water Management,’ the dwelling house proposed ispositionedcomfortablyoutsideany area identified as being at riskof flooding in SEPA’s Flood Maps. All surface water will be attenuated and treated prior to discharge in Page 62 of 94
Page 63
45 accordance with sustainable urban drainage principles, thus rendering the proposal compliant with the terms of the policy. 4.59 Policy ENV10 on the ‘Water Environment,’ states the following: ‘New development should pass surface water through a sustainable drainage system (Suds) which ameliorates the water to an acceptable quality prior to release to the wider water environment. The design of the system should meet best current practice. To ensure that the biodiversity and amenity benefits of Suds are realised, the Council does not favour the use of underground tanks as a Suds measure, other than in exceptional circumstances. There is a presumption against development which changes the natural morphology of a river or other water body. The formation of new culverts is not supported. Small-scale hydropower installations will only be supported provided that no deterioration of the water body’s status occurs. Proposals that support measures identified in the River Basin Management Plan will be supported in principle, including the retrofitting of Suds features to the existing surface drainage system, the restoration of watercourses through the opening out of existing culverts, and the removal of redundant structures. There is a presumption against development which may cause a deterioration in water quality. Where development generating a foul drainage requirement takes place in an area benefiting from a public sewerage system, it should connect to that system. Where development adjoins a watercourse, buffer strips of a minimum of 6 metres in width from the top of the bank should be provided, to enable access for maintenance, promote biodiversity and improve public amenity.’ 4.60 As noted in our response to Policy ENV 9 above, all surface water will be attenuated and treated prior to discharge in accordance with sustainable urban drainage principles, thus rendering it compliant with the terms of Policy ENV10. 4.61 Policy ENV11 on ‘Woodland, Trees and Hedges,’ states the following: ‘Development will not be permitted where it could lead directly or indirectly to the loss of, or damage to, woodland, groups of trees (including trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order, areas defined as ancient or semi-natural woodland, veteran trees or areas forming part of any designated landscape) and hedges which have a particular amenity, nature conservation, biodiversity, recreation, landscape, shelter, cultural, or historical value or are of other importance. Where an exception to this policy is agreed, any woodland, trees or hedges lost will be replaced with equivalent. Removal of woodland, trees and hedges will only be permitted where it would achieve significant and clearly defined additional public benefits. If a development would result in the severing or impairment of connectivity between important woodland habitats, workable mitigation measures should be identified and implemented, preferably linked to a wider green network.’ Page 63 of 94
Page 64
46 4.62 As noted in our response to Policy 7 in NPF4 previously, the trees within the application site are generally of low arboricultural value but of moderate to high ecological value. Only three individual trees, in a fair to good condition, and one group of trees in fair condition will be removed to facilitate the development. Our client proposes to undertake compensatory tree planting to replace those trees lost and it is suggested that these be the subject of a suitably worded condition in the event of planning permission being granted. Given the circumstances outlined we are of the view that the proposal does not conflict with and is compliant with the terms of Policy ENV 11. 4.63 Policy ENV 15 on ‘Species and Habitat Protection and Enhancement,’ states the following: ‘Development that would affect a species protected by European or UK law will not be permitted unless: A. there is an overriding public need and there is no satisfactory alternative; B. a species protection plan has been submitted, which is based on survey results and includes detail of the status of protected species on site and possible adverse impacts of development; C. appropriate and effective mitigation is proposed and agreed; and if European protected species are present: D. the development is not detrimental to the maintenance of European protected species at a favourable conservation status. In the assessment of planning applications for development that would affect habitats of conservation value (although insufficient to justify a formal natural heritage designation), effects on the habitat, including the expected results of mitigation measures, will also be taken into account. Development proposals will be expected to demonstrate compatibility with the aims and objectives of the Midlothian Local Biodiversity Action Plan and related plans, by identifying appropriate measures to protect, enhance and promote existing habitats and/ or the creation of new ones, and provide for the effective management of these habitats.’ 4.64 As noted in our response to Policies 3 in NPF4 on ‘Biodiversity,’ and 4 on ‘Natural Heritage,’ the development as proposed will not result in any adverse impacts on species protected by UK or European Law. In terms of impacts on habitats specific to the site are concerned,theplanting of wildflower meadow mixes as part of the landscaping proposals, native trees and shrubs, and the installation of bat and bird boxes will enhance the local habitat for local wildlife. Further ecological benefits will derive from the green living roof proposed on the dwelling. The proposal as a consequence of these considerations is considered to be complaint with the terms of Policy ENV15. 4.65 Policy ENV18 on ‘Noise,’ states the following: ‘The Council will seek to prevent noisy development from damaging residential amenity or disturbing noise sensitive uses. Where new developments with the potential to create significant noise are proposed, these may be refused or require to be modified so that no unacceptable Page 64 of 94
Page 65
47 impact at sensitive receptors is generated. Applicants may be required to carry out a noise impact assessment either as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment or separately. Where new noise sensitive uses are proposed in the locality of existing noisy uses, the Council will seek to ensure that the function of established operations is not adversely affected.’ 4.66 As noted previously in our response to Policy 23 on ‘Health and Safety’in NPF4, the submitted acoustic assessment demonstrates that in association with appropriate mitigation measures, satisfactory internal and external environments can be created for residential purposes thereby satisfying the requirements of Policy ENV18. 4.67 Policy ENV22 on ‘Listed Buildings,’ states the following: ‘Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect the character or appearance of a listed building, its setting or any feature of special architectural or historic interest. New Development Development within the curtilage of a listed building or its setting will only be permitted where it complements its special architectural or historical character. Enabling Development New development used to fund the restoration of a listed building may be acceptable where: A. the proposed development is in the vicinity of the listed building whose restoration it is proposed to enable; and B. it is demonstrated that such development is the only means of retaining the listed building and other options for funding have been exhausted; and C. it is demonstrated that the scale of the proposed development represents the minimum necessary to enable the listed building’s conservation and reuse (with independent verification of the development costs*); and D. the resulting development is of a high quality design that respects the listed building and its setting. Demolition Demolition will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where: A. the proposed demolition is of an addition to the building which is of little architectural or historic value and its removal would result in an improvement to the quality of the original building; or B. there is an overriding requirement in the public interest to allow the redevelopment of the site, the proposed use cannot physically be accommodated elsewhere, and the listed building is incapable of adaptation without material loss to its character or appearance; or C. it is demonstrated to the Council's satisfaction that the repair of the building is not economically viable and that every effort has been made to find a party with the willingness and means to acquire and restore the building*; and, in any of these cases; D. there are approved plans for the future development of the site and agreement has been reached on the timescale for demolition and redevelopment. Page 65 of 94
Page 66
48 Extensions and Alterations Proposals for extensions and/ or alterations to a listed building will only be permitted where their siting, scale, design, materials and detailing do not detract from, and wherever appropriate enhance, the original character of the building. Change of Use The change of use of a listed building will only be permitted where it can be shown that the proposed use and any necessary alteration can be achieved without detriment to the character, appearance and setting of the building. * In circumstances involving proposed demolition or enabling development where financial viability is an issue, it is the responsibility of the applicant/ developer to bring to the attention of the Council any issue that they consider relevant. The Council reserves the right to base its decision on satisfactory evidence to that effect through an open book process.’ 4.68 As noted previously in response to Policy 7 on ‘Historic assets and places,’ the dwelling house proposed will not have an adverse impact on the setting of the two listed buildings to the south and as such the terms of Policy ENV22 are complied with. 4.69 Policy NRG 3 on ‘Energy Use and Low & Zero-Carbon Generating Technology,’ states thew following: ‘Through attention to location, development mix, phasing, site and building layout and adaptability of buildings to future use, demand for energy should be limited. Shelter and passive solar gain should be optimised in this regard. Conventional air conditioning should be avoided, as far as reasonable, through passive design including natural ventilation, vegetation and external summer shading. Each new building shall incorporate low and/or zero-carbon generating technology in order to meet the minimum carbon dioxide emission reduction target of the 2015, and any subsequent revision to, Building Regulations. The Council encourages all proposals for new development to incorporate measures to achieve the higher levels of sustainability, as defined by the Building Regulations.’ 4.70 As noted in our response to Policy 1 in NPF4 on ‘Tackling the climate and nature crises,’ and to other policies throughout, the dwelling will adopt a fabric first approach to sustainability which involves meeting the required carbon reduction requirements by increasing thermal performance and minimising air infiltration. Furthermore, the incorporation of Low and Zero Carbon Generating Technologies (LZCGT) including a Ground Source Heat Pump and Photovoltaics will be used to facilitate energy generation. The requirements of Policy NRG3 are considered to have been met in full. 4.71 Policy WAST 5 on ‘Waste Minimisation and Recycling in New Developments,’ states the following: ‘The Council requires additional points for the public to drop-off waste to be provided in connection with new retail developments or other developments providing community focal points. Planning briefs/masterplans will identify locations and requirements for new waste facilities, where appropriate. Development including residential, commercial or industrial properties should include provision for waste separation and collection to meet the requirements of the Waste (Scotland) Regulations. Locations for the collection and storage of Page 66 of 94
Page 67
49 waste should be conveniently sited for both the householder (or other user) and the Council as waste collection authority.’ 4.72 Our client will comply fully with the Council’s policy for waste recycling during both the construction process and when functional as a dwelling house. 4.73 In a similar vein to the conclusions arrived at in respect of our assessment of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), the only policy within the Midlothian Local Development Plan,in which there is a degree of friction, relates to Green Belt Policy under the terms of ENV1. Notwithstanding that friction, it has been comprehensively demonstrated that the development of the site will not compromise, in any material manner, the objectives behind the wider Green Belt designation and as such should be treated as an exception, just as the dwelling house approved under Planning Permission Reference 22/00811/DPP was. Other Material Considerations 4.74 As noted previously, under the terms of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) all applications must be assessed and determined against the terms of the development plan and all other material considerations. Significant other material considerations with this particular application include Consultation Responses, Third Party Representations and Planning History. 4.75 Consultation Responses – During the progression of the planning application, the Appointed Planning Officer consulted with the Council’s Ecology Advisor; the Council’s Senior Manager Protective Service; the Council’s Senior Manager Neighbourhood Service; and the Bonnyrigg and District Community Council. Their comments and our response to each, where required, are outlined below: • The Council’s Ecology Advisor following the submission of the Ecology Report in support of the application confirmed that they had no objections to the proposal. • The Council’s Senior Manager Protective Service initially raised concerns about the proposal in respect of its compatibility with potential traffic noise from the Lasswade Road to the north. A noise impact assessment was subsequently submitted and subject to the implementation of the recommendations contained therein deemed satisfactory. • The Council’s Senior Manager Neighbourhood Service raised no objection to the proposal. • The Bonnyrigg and District Community Council objected to the proposal raising concerns about unjustified development in the green belt; removal of trees; impact on biodiversity; disruption to the core path; design and visual impact and drainage. All of these topics have been addressed and responded to in our assessment of relevant policies in National Planning Framework 4 and in the Midlothian Local Development Plan and none are deemed sufficient to justify the refusal of the application in the specific circumstances pertaining. Page 67 of 94
Page 68
50 4.76 Third Party Representations – A total of eight representations were submitted to the Council in connection with the application proposals – four in opposition and four in support. Those in objection advanced the following concerns: • Unjustified development in the green belt; • Design matters including scale; • Visual Impact; • Impact on biodiversity; • Impact on the natural environment including trees and hedges; • Loss of prime agricultural land. Those representations submitted in support of the application drew attention to the following: • Poor condition of the site; • Use of derelict land; and • High quality and sustainable design. 4.77 All of the points raised in opposition to and in support of the application proposals have been comprehensively addressed in our assessment of policies in both National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and in the Midlothian Local Development Plan and as such merit no further comment. 4.78 Planning History – It has been referred to on numerous reasons previously but nevertheless worth re-iterating again that the Council’s earlier granting of planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house on the site adjacent to the east under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP constitutes a precedent in support of the current application to which significant weight should be given in the determination of the current application. 4.79 Having assessed the proposal against the terms of the development plan (National Planning Framework 4 and theMidlothianLocal Development Plan)and all other material considerations we are firmly of the view that the application, when viewed in the round and notwithstanding the slight degree of friction with Green Belt Policy, is nonetheless sufficiently compliant with its terms to allow for a positive determination. Page 68 of 94
Page 69
51 5. COMMENTS ON REASONS FOR REFUSAL 5.1 Following the Appointed Planning Officer’s Assessment of the application proposals as required under the terms of the Development Plan (National Planning Framework 4 and the Midlothian Local Development Plan) they have refused the application for the following reasons: (1) It has not been demonstrated that the house is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity, nor that there are material planning considerations to otherwise justify approval of the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 8 of the National Planning Framework 4 and policy ENV1 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. (2) The proposed development would result in the permanent loss of an area of prime agricultural land without justification and does not fulfil the requirements of related Policy 5 of the National Planning Framework 4 or policy ENV4 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 which seeks to protect such areas. 5.2 One must assume, from the reasons of refusal issued, that the application proposals are deemed to becompliant with all policies in the Development Plan with the exception of Policies 5 (Soils – Prime Agricultural Land) and 8 (Green Belt) in National Planning Framework 4 and with Policies ENV1 (Green Belt) and ENV4 (Prime Agricultural Land) in the Midlothian Local Development Plan. 5.3 Reason 1 (Green Belt) - As noted in our assessment of the Development Plan in Section 4, whilst the dwelling house proposed generates a degree of friction with Policies 8 in NPF4 and ENV1 in the Midlothian Local Development Plan the following considerations should be given greater weight in the determination of the application: (i) The wider area within which the application site lies does not exhibit classic green belt characteristics due to the pattern of surrounding development, the character and spatial density of which is more urban than rural in nature. (ii) The application site itself is an infill site within a wider homogenous group of existing and proposed dwellings lying to the east of which is a site with the benefit of planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house granted previously by the Council under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP; to the south of which is Wadingburn Lane; to the north of which is the Wading Burn; and to the west of which is established woodland – all providing established long term defensible boundaries which ensure that the dwelling can be accommodated in the landscape without adverse impact. The defensible boundaries referred to will define and enclose the overall group and prevent any further development taking place to the west. (iii) The site does not contribute to overarching green belt objectives and its development for the dwelling house proposed in this application will not impact on the landscape setting of the City (Edinburgh) or on other settlements within the Green Belt; it will not Page 69 of 94
Page 70
52 create, result or contribute to coalescence between settlements within the Green Belt; and it does not impact on the protection or provision of access to open space. As a consequence of these considerations, and notwithstanding the site’s location within the Green Belt, its development for the dwelling house proposed will not result in any adverse impacts. 5.4 Reason 2 (Prime Agricultural Land) – As noted in our assessment of the Development Plan in Section 4, referring in particular to Policies 5 (Soils) in NPF4 and ENV4 (Prime Agricultural Land) in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, the application site falls within an ‘Urban’ Area in the Land Capability Map for Scotland as prepared by the Hutton Institute. Whilst it may be identified as Prime Agricultural Land in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, its inclusion as such was in error – an error which has been previously acknowledged by the Council (Refer to Document 4) but for whatever reason overlooked on this occasion. In light of these considerations the second reason for the refusal of the application should not have been included in the decision notice issued. Page 70 of 94
Page 71
53 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Having considered the proposed development against the terms of both the development plan and other material considerations as required under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) we have demonstrated and are very firmly of the opinion that planning permission should be granted for the proposal. Our position on this application is summarised as follows: • The application site lies to the south of Lasswade Road and extends to some 0.45 hectares (c.1.11 acres) in area. It is located to the north of Wadingburn Lane (No. 5) with its northern boundary defined by the Wading Burn. The site slopes broadly from south to north towards the burn and contains scattered trees alongside the lane, along the burn and on the site’s northwestern boundary. • Planning permission was previously granted to our client on 25th September 2023 under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP for the erection of a dwelling house on the adjoining site to the south east of the current application site via a request to the Council’s Local Review Body following the refusal of the application by the Appointed Planning Officer. The circumstances were almost identical with that application and have created a precedent in support of the current application. For the avoidance of doubt, the current application seeks permission for an additional dwelling house and not to replace or act as a substitution for the dwelling house previously approved. • The current application as submitted to the Council had sought detailed planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house and garage with all associated landscaping and infrastructure works on the site. The proposed dwelling, which covers an area of approximately 400 sq. metres is located on the western half of the site. It is two storeys in height, of modern design, incorporating a flat green roof and extensive areas of glazing. External finishes include a mix of natural sandstone to the ground floor and larch cladding to the upper floor. Windows and doors are aluminium, coloured anthracite grey. The roof, as noted will be green in its construction, with a solar array and large central roof light. A new vehicular access will be formed off Wadingburn Lane to service the dwelling running broadly parallel with the lane and also serving a proposed garage and parking area. • The application was refused on the 17th April 2026 under delegated powers by the Appointed Planning Officer for the two reasons noted below which related to Green Belt and Prime Agricultural Land considerations and referring specifically to Policies 5 (Soils) and 8 (Green Belt) in National Planning Framework 4 and Policies ENV1 (Green Belt) and ENV4 (Prime Agricultural Land) in the Midlothian Local Development Plan. (1) It has not been demonstrated that the house is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity, nor that there are material planning considerations to otherwise justify approval of the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 8 of the National Planning Framework 4 and policy ENV1 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. Page 71 of 94
Page 72
54 (2) The proposed development would result in the permanent loss of an area of prime agricultural land without justification and does not fulfil the requirements of related Policy 5 of the National Planning Framework 4 or policy ENV4 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 which seeks to protect such areas. • We disagree with the refusal of the application andhave respondedto the two reasonscited in the following terms. 1. (Green Belt) - Whilst the dwelling house proposed generates a degree of friction with Policies 8 in NPF4 and ENV1 in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, the following considerations should be given greater weight in the determination of the application: (i) The wider area within which the application site lies does not exhibit classic green belt characteristics due to the pattern of surrounding development, the character and spatial density of which is more urban than rural in nature. (ii) The application site itself is an infill site within a wider homogenous group of existing and proposed dwellings, lying to the east of which is a site with the benefit of planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house granted previously by the Council under the terms of Planning Permission Reference Number 22/00811/DPP; to the south of which is Wadingburn Lane; to the north of which is the Wading Burn; and to the west of which is established woodland – all providing established long term defensible boundaries to the site and ensuring that the dwelling can be accommodated in the landscape without adverse impact. The defensible boundaries referred to will define and enclose the overall group and prevent any further development taking place to the west. (iii) The site does not contribute to overarching green belt objectives and its development for the dwelling house proposed in this application will not impact on the landscape setting of the City (Edinburgh) or on other settlements within the Green Belt; it will not create, result or contribute to coalescence between settlements within the Green Belt; and it does not impact on the protection or provision of access to open space. 2. (Prime Agricultural Land) – The application site falls within an ‘Urban’ Area in the Land Capability Map for Scotland as prepared by the Hutton Institute. Whilst it may be identified as Prime Agricultural Land in the Midlothian Local Development Plan, its inclusion as such in that Plan was in error – an error which has been acknowledged previously by the Council but for whatever reason overlooked on this occasion. In light of these considerations, the second reason for the refusal of the application should not have been included in the decision notice issued. • Other considerations advanced in support of the application include the following: - The site is accessible to a range of local facilities and services including bus based public transport services via foot, bicycle and other forms of wheeling. Page 72 of 94
Page 73
Page 73 of 94
Page 74
56 Derek Scott Planning 21 Lansdowne Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 5EH T - 0131 535 1103 M - 07802 431970 also at Suite 2/3, 48 West George Street, Glasgow, G2 1BP T – 0141 673 1792 M - 07802 431970 Unit 9, Dunfermline Business Centre, Izatt Avenue, Dunfermline, Fife KY11 3BZ T - 01383 620 300 M - 07802 431970 enquiries@derekscottplanning.com - E www.derekscottplanning.com - W Copyright © Derek Scott Planning 2026 No part of this statement may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior permission of Derek Scott Planning except in the case of brief quotations in reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law Page 74 of 94
Page 75
MIDLOTHIAN COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION DELEGATED WORKSHEET: Planning Application Reference: 25/00125/DPP Site Address: Land North of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade Site Description: The application site comprises an area of land adjacent to Lasswade Road, covering an area of 0.45 hectares. The site slopes down from south to north towards the Wading Burn. The site is in a natural state with scattered trees including alongside the lane, along the burn and also on the site’s northwestern boundary. The site is defined as being within the Green Belt as set out in the Midlothian Local Development Plan. Wadingburn Lane is also a designated Core Path Proposed Development: Erection of dwellinghouse, formation of access, landscaping and associated works. Proposed Development Details: A dwelling would be erected in the west of the site, covering an area of approximately 400 m2. This is to be two storeys and of a modern design with a flat roof and large areas of glazing. The exterior would be finished in a mix of natural sandstone to the ground floor and larch cladding to the upper floor. Windows and doors are to be aluminium, coloured anthracite grey. There would be a green roof with a solar array and large central rooflight. A new vehicular access is to be formed from the southern boundary with Wadingburn Lane running northwest to a proposed garage and parking area. Background (Previous Applications, Supporting Documents, Development Briefs): Application Site April 2026 - Formation of access is pending consideration (planning reference: 25/00126/DPP) Land North West of 4 Wadingburn Lane September 2023 - Erection of dwellinghouse, formation of access, landscaping and associated works was refused. The decision was appealed and overturned at the Local Review Body (planning reference: 22/00811/DPP). In determining the review the LRB concluded that the proposed single dwelling would not be detrimental to the local landscape, residential amenity or the green belt and as such is considered acceptable as an exception to established restrictive green belt policy. Appendix C Page 75 of 94
Page 76
Consultations: • The Council’s Ecology Advisor required a Preliminary Ecology Assessment to be submitted to support the application. This was carried out and the advisor has no objections to the proposal in this regard. • The Council’s Senior Manager Protective Service have raised concerns of the potential impact of road noise from Lasswade Road. A noise impact assessment was submitted and raise no objection to the proposal subject to its conclusions being fully implemented. The service also recommended conditions relating to air source heat pumps. • The Council’s Senior Manager Neighbourhood Service raised no objection to the proposal. • The Bonnyrigg and District Community Council object to the proposal. The material considerations raised include: unjustified development in the green belt; removal of trees; impact on biodiversity; disruption to the core path; design and visual impact and drainage. Representations: Four public representations were submitted in objection to the proposal. The material considerations include: - Unjustified development in the green belt; - Design matters including scale; - Visual impact; - Impact on biodiversity; - Impact on the natural environment including trees and hedges; - Loss of prime agricultural land. A common thread in the letters of objection relate to the reason provided by the Midlothian Local Review Body in determining the appeal of application 22/00811/DPP. The reason sets out the exceptional nature of the site and an approval in this instance would undermine this decision. Four public representations were submitted in support to the proposal. The material considerations include: - Poor condition of the site; - Use of derelict land; - High quality and sustainable design; Relevant Planning Policies: The relevant policies of National Planning Framework 4 are; • Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crisis. • Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. Page 76 of 94
Page 77
• Policy 3 Biodiversity; sets out to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks. • Policy 4 Natural Places; sets out to protect, restore and enhance natural assets making best use of nature-based solutions. • Policy 6 Forestry, woodland and trees; sets out to protect and expand forests, woodland and trees. • Policy 8 Green belts; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably. • Policy 13 Sustainable Transport; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and reduce the need to travel unsustainably. • Policy 14 Design, quality and place; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate well designed development that makes successful places by taking a design-led approach and applying the Place Principle. • Policy 15 Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods; sets out 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, preferably by walking, wheeling or cycling or using sustainable transport options. • Policy 16 Quality homes; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes, in the right locations, providing choice across tenures that meet the diverse housing needs of people and communities across Scotland. • Policy 20 Blue and green infrastructure; sets out to protect and enhance blue and green infrastructure and their networks. • Policy 22 Flood risk and water management; sets out to strengthen resilience to flood risk by promoting avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing and future development to flooding. The relevant policies of the 2017 Midlothian Local Development Plan are; • Policy DEV5: Sustainability in New Development sets out the requirements for development with regards to sustainability principles. • Policy DEV6: Layout and Design of New Development states that good design and a high quality of architecture will be required in the overall layout of development proposals. This also provides guidance on design principles for development, materials, access, and passive energy gain, positioning of buildings, open and private amenity space provision and parking. • Policy DEV7: Landscaping in New Development requires development proposals to be accompanied by a comprehensive scheme of landscaping. The design of the scheme is to be informed by the results of an appropriately detailed landscape assessment. • Policy TRAN1: Sustainable Travel aims to encourage sustainable modes of travel. • Policy ENV1: Protection of the Green Belt advises that development will not be permitted in the Green Belt except for proposals that; A. are necessary to agriculture, horticulture or forestry; or Page 77 of 94
Page 78
B. provide opportunities for access to the open countryside, outdoor sport or outdoor recreation which reduce the need to travel further afield; or C. are related to other uses appropriate to the rural character of the area; or D. provide for essential infrastructure; or E. form development that meets a national requirement or established need of no other site is available. Any development proposal will be required to show that it does not conflict with the overall objectives of the Green Belt which is to maintain the identity and landscape setting of Edinburgh and Midlothian towns by clearly identifying their physical boundaries and preventing coalescence. The policy states that housing will normally only be permissible where it is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity. The applicant will be required to show the need for the new dwelling is permanent; cannot be made within an existing settlement; and that the occupier will be employed full-time in the associated countryside activity. • Policy ENV4: Prime Agricultural Land does not permit development that would lead to the permanent loss of prime agricultural land unless there is appropriate justification to do so. • Policy ENV7: Landscape Character states that development will not be permitted where it significantly and adversely affects local landscape character. Where development is acceptable, it should respect such character and be compatible in terms of scale, siting and design. New development will normally be required to incorporate proposals to maintain the diversity and distinctiveness of the local landscapes and to enhance landscape characteristics where they have been weakened. • Policy ENV10: Water Environment requires that new development pass surface water through a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) to mitigate against local flooding and to enhance biodiversity and the environment. • Policy ENV11: Woodland, Trees and Hedges states that development will not be permitted where it could lead directly or indirectly to the loss of, or damage to, woodland, groups of trees (including trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order, areas defined as ancient or semi-natural woodland, veteran trees or areas forming part of any designated landscape) and hedges which have a particular amenity, nature conservation, biodiversity, recreation, landscape, shelter, cultural, or historical value or are of other importance. • Policy ENV15: Species and Habitat Protection and Enhancement presumes against development that would affect a species protected by European or UK law. • Policy ENV18: Noise requires that where new noise sensitive uses are proposed in the locality of existing noisy uses, the Council will seek to ensure that the function of established operations is not adversely affected. Planning Issues: Page 78 of 94
Page 79
The main planning issue to be considered is whether or not the proposal complies with the development plan policies and, if not, whether there are any material planning considerations which would otherwise justify approval. Principle of Development The site lies within the Green Belt where there is a restrictive planning policy limiting housing unless the proposal complies with specific criteria. The Green Belt surrounding Edinburgh plays an important role in safeguarding and maintaining the landscape settings of the city and the individual settlements of Midlothian. The Green Belt helps to maintain the character and identity of individual settlements by restricting coalescence of neighbouring settlements. To ensure that the Green Belt is maintained and that settlements avoid coalescence planning policies do not support development within the Green Belt except where it is required for the furtherance of existing acceptable uses. The proposal would result in a single new dwelling within the Green Belt. Regarding NPF4 Policy 8, the dwelling is not required for a designed key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment where the presence of a worker is essential to the operation of the enterprise, nor has it been argued that it is required for retired workers where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available. Regarding MLDP Policy ENV1, the dwellings would not be necessary to agriculture, horticulture or forestry. Equally, the houses are not required in order to provide opportunities for access to the open countryside, nor are they related to other uses appropriate to the rural character of the area, for essential infrastructure or part of a development that meets a national requirement. While the related Supplementary Guidance provides some support for the addition of houses within established groups, where certain criteria are met, it is clearly stated that this only applies to sites within the countryside. Sites within the Green Belt are not included in this section of the SG and so there is no provision for development at housing groups here. Therefore, the site does not benefit from the housing groups policy. The agent representing the applicant makes the case for the site being a vacant plot of land, this is echoed in the letters of support. It is not the case that this site is vacant land. NPF4 is clear, defining vacant land as “Previously developed land, without physical constraint, which the Planning Authority has indicated is currently available for redevelopment”. This site is completely natural and historically free from development. As such, the site does not benefit from such policy considerations. ` The decision reached by the Local Review Body for the application site to the east (reference: 22/00811/DPP) is a relevant material consideration in this regard. The decision reached by the LRB overturned a near identical assessment conclusion to this application due to the exceptional circumstances of the site. This does not sway the assessment of this application positively as the proposal would result in increased ribbon development within the green belt and remains incompatible with national and local policy intent and considerations. Page 79 of 94
Page 80
The site is within an area identified as prime agricultural land which would be permanently lost as a result of development. It has not been demonstrated that the proposal complies with the relevant criteria to allow the loss of prime agricultural land. It is accepted that the site is not in agricultural use at present, however it falls under this designation and needs to be assessed in line with this. Given the above, the proposal does not comply with related NPF4 and MLDP policies. Notwithstanding the lack of support in principle for a house here, the details of the proposal need to be considered. Design and Layout There are a variety of housetypes in the surrounding area, meaning there is no fixed character of development in the immediate area. The site is outwith the boundary of the Lasswade and Kevock Conservation Area. The proposed house is contemporary in its design, simple in form and treatment of materials with large areas of glazing. A green roof is proposed which is welcomed to provide additional biodiversity gain to the site. The design of the dwelling would be in keeping with the approved house design to the east of the site. While a different approach to the other surrounding dwellings, the Planning Authority consider that the proposed development, in terms of its design, would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Landscaping The submissions include information on trees and landscaping, as well as details of how the design and layout has been altered to accommodate as many existing trees as possible. Where trees are to be lost, these will be replaced elsewhere. Additional planting is also proposed within the site. The site extends across an area of the Lasswade Green Belt that is characterised by grassland and native woodland, comprising both mature and young self-set trees along the course of the Wading Burn. This makes a significant contribution to the local landscape character and rural setting of the northern settlement edge of Lasswade. This is visible in approaches along Lasswade Road and the tree cover, albeit deciduous, provides a level of screening. These natural landscape features notably contrast with those parts of the burn corridor that have become characterised by residential development, such as to the east of the Wadingburn Road junction. Within this context, the site and the other land under the control of the applicant have a key role in maintaining the blue/ green network connectivity between Haveral Wood and the River North Esk, while also supporting diverse habitat for wildlife. The tree survey submitted to support the application sets out that the trees within the site are generally of low arboricultural value. However, the woodland on site has been assessed to be of moderate to high ecological value in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Assessment. As such, it was recommended that tree removal be kept to a minimum. To facilitate the development, three individual trees in fair to good condition and one group in fair condition are to be removed. This is a Page 80 of 94
Page 81
significantly lesser amount of felling compared to the initial proposal. The tree survey does refer back to the original plans and requires to be updated accordingly. The landscape plan submitted is insufficient and could not be approved as part of the application due to the low level of information included and the type of landscape proposals shown. Residential Amenity Sufficient garden ground will be provided for the proposed house. The distances between the proposed and existing surrounding properties meets the required standards. The application has been supported by a Noise Impact Assessment. It found that external amenity noise was marginally in exceedance of guidance criteria (BS8233). Due to the sites topography and the elevated position of the road, a landscaping design solution would be most appropriate. Localised screening should be designed to break line of site with the road with no gaps. Internal amenity has been demonstrated to be generally compliant with Midlothian Council criteria and provides recommendations for internal rooms that may have trickle ventilators, in order to meet the relevant internal amenity noise standards. The supporting information makes reference to Ground Source Heat Pumps, however these are not shown on the submitted plans. There can be noise issues with domestic Ground Source Heat Pumps and so conditions would be required to ensure the design and installation complies with Midlothian Council guidelines. Road safety No road safety issues have been raised by the consultee. The proposed works are fully within the site and would not impact on the core path permanently. Any works to the lane, including repairs and resurfacing, would be a private legal matter between interested parties. Flooding and Drainage Part of the site is within an area of high likelihood of surface water flooding on the SEPA flood maps. The flood map indicates this area only covers the northern part of the site and does not extend to the proposed footprint of the house. The proposal generally complies with the standing guidance for surface water flooding issued by SEPA. Should permission be approved, details of this shall be required to ensure this is appropriate given the location to the burn and surface water flooding risk area. This should also include details of how the SUDs would affect the burn through the site and ensure there is no flood risk from these works. Recommendation: Refuse Page 81 of 94
Page 82
Refusal of Planning Permission Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 Reg. No. 25/00125/DPP S2 Architecture Ltd Unit 3 5 Auchinairn Road Bishopbriggs G64 1RX Midlothian Council, as Planning Authority, having considered the application by Mr Bernard Flanagan, 18 Grovesnar Street, Edinburgh, EH12 5EG, which was registered on 11 March 2025 in pursuance of their powers under the above Acts, hereby refuse permission to carry out the following proposed development: Erection of dwellinghouse and garage, formation of access, landscaping and associated works at Land North of 5 Wadingburn Lane, Wadingburn Lane, Lasswade In accordance with the application and the following documents/drawings: Document/Drawing. Drawing No/Scale Dated Proposed Floor Plan L(20)003 1:50 GROUND FLOOR 11.03.2025 Proposed Floor Plan L(20)004 1:50 FIRST FLOOR 11.03.2025 Elevations Sheet 1 of 2 L(20)006 1:50 11.03.2025 Elevations, Floor Plan and Cross Sections L(20)009 1:50 GARAGE 11.03.2025 Site Location PSAD L(20)000 1:1250 11.03.2025 Roof Plan PSAD L(20)005 1:100 11.03.2025 Proposed Side Elevations 2 of 2 PSAD L(20)007 1:50 11.03.2025 Existing and Proposed Block Plan L(20)001 A 1:500 30.09.2025 Proposed Site Plan L(20)002 A 1:200 30.09.2025 Proposed Landscaping Plan L(20)0010 A 1:200 30.09.2025 Design and Access Statement 11.03.2025 Planning Statement 11.03.2025 Noise Report 30.09.2025 Tree Survey & Arboricultural Impact Assessment 30.09.2025 Ecology/Wildlife Report/Survey Revision C 26.01.2026 The reasons for the Council's decision are set out below: 1. It has not been demonstrated that the house is required for the furtherance of an established Green Belt activity, nor that there are material planning considerations to otherwise justify approval of the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 8 of the National Planning Framework 4 and policy ENV1 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. Appendix D Page 82 of 94
Page 83
2. The proposed development would result in the permanent loss of an area of prime agricultural land without justification and does not fulfil the requirements of related Policy 5 of the National Planning Framework 4 or policy ENV4 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 which seeks to protect such areas. Dated 17 / 4 / 2026 …………………………….. Duncan Robertson Lead Officer – Local Developments Fairfield House, 8 Lothian Road, Dalkeith, EH22 3AA Page 83 of 94
Page 84
Development Low Risk Area- STANDING ADVICE The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to the Mining Remediation Authority on 0345 762 6846 or if a hazard is encountered on site call the emergency line 0800 288 4242. Further information is also available on the Mining Remediation Authority website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/mining-remediation-authority Standing Advice valid from 1st January 2025 until 31st December 2026 Page 84 of 94
Page 85
Appendix E Page 85 of 94
Page 86
Page 86 of 94
Page 87
Page 87 of 94
Page 88
Page 88 of 94
Page 89
Page 89 of 94
Page 90
Page 90 of 94
Page 91
Page 91 of 94
Page 92
Page 92 of 94
Page 93
Page 93 of 94
Page 94
Page 94 of 94