Agenda Document Pack - Planning Committee - 10/06/2025
Midlothian Council · 10 June 2025
Back to Planning Committee — 10 June 2025 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 Planning Committee Venue: Council Chambers/Hybrid, Midlothian House, Dalkeith, EH22 1DN Date: Tuesday, 10 June 2025 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 208
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 Planning Committee Minutes of 29 April 2025 submitted for approval 3 - 13 5 Public Reports 5.1 Midlothian Local Development Plan 2 - Housing Land and Shortlisting 14 - 29 5.2 Midlothian Local Development Plan 2 - Green Belt Review and Newbattle Strategic Green Space Review 30 - 92 5.3 Parking Standards 93 - 138 5.4 24.00537.S36 - Salter's Park Battery Energy Storage System, Dalkeith - Scottish Ministers' Decision 139 - 170 5.5 24.00581.ADV - Lidl, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik - Appeal Decision 171 - 181 5.6 24.00661.DPP and 24.00663.LBC - Penicuik High School Report and Planning Application 182 - 208 6 Private Reports No items for discussion 7 Date of Next Meeting The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 26 August 2025. Page 2 of 208
Page 3
INTERNAL USE ONLY DRAFT BY/DATE: Maria REVIEW BY/DATE: 1-993 Minute of Meeting Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 4.1 Planning Committee Date Time Venue Tuesday 29 April 2025 13.00 Council Chambers/MS Teams Present: Councillor Imrie (Chair) Councillor Alexander (Virtual) Councillor Bowen (Virtual) Councilor Cassidy Councillor Curran (Virtual) Councillor Drummond (Virtual) Councillor McCall Councillor McEwan Councillor McKenzie Councillor McManus (Virtual) Councillor Parry Councillor Pottinger (Virtual) Councillor Russell Councillor Scott Councillor Smaill Councillor Virgo Councillor Winchester In attendance: Derek Oliver, Chief Officer Place Peter Arnsdorf, Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer William Venters, Principal Solicitor Louise Middleton, Democratic Services Officer Maria Perez, Democratic Services Officer Nicola Thorburn, Democratic Services Officer 1. Welcome and Apologies Councillor Imrie (Chair) welcomed everyone to the meeting of the Planning Committee. Apologies were received from Councillor Milligan. Page 3 of 208
Page 4
2. Order of Business The Order of Business was as per the agenda, other than the minute from the Planning Committee of 21 January 2025 which were submitted as a late paper. The Chair asked the Committee whether they would accept the inclusion of the minute of 21 January 2025 as a late paper in the agenda or would wish for the item to be carried forward to the following Planning Committee meeting. Councillor McCall moved to accept the late paper, and Councillor Mc Ewan seconded the motion. The Chair confirmed the inclusion of the late paper and advised it would be added as item 4.2 in the agenda. 3. Declarations of Interest The Chair reminded the Committee that interest may be declared at this stage or when the individual items of the agenda were discussed. Councillor Smaill expressed their intention to recuse themselves from agenda item 5.5 in the agenda as their wife is a member of the local Community Council. Councillor Scott disclosed they were previously contacted by applicants and opponents on item 5.5 but noted they did not respond. Councillor Cassidy disclosed that one of the objectors for item 5.5 is a customer who uses their business but not a personal acquaintance. Councillor Bowen disclosed they called the application in item 5.5 to the Planning Committee, and were also present when this application was discussed at the Community Council meeting in late 2024 but advised they did not express a view on the matter. The Principal Solicitor advised that if the Elected Members had retained an open mind in relation to the merits of the application, they would not be precluded from being part of the discussion for item 5.5 in the agenda, but these comments noting prior knowledge of the application or the parties involved would be duly noted for transparency purposes. 4. Minute of Previous Meeting Report No. Report Title Presented by: 4.1 Minute of Additional Planning Committee of 24 March 2025 Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The minute of the Additional Planning Committee Meeting of 24 March 2025 was submitted for approval. Page 4 of 208
Page 5
Decision The minute of the Additional Planning Meeting of 24 March 2025 was approved as the correct record. Report No. Report Title Presented by: 4.2 Minute of Planning Committee of 21 January 2025 Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The minute of the Planning Committee Meeting of 21 January 2025 was submitted for approval. Decision The minute of the Planning Committee Meeting of 21 January 2025 was approved as the correct record. 1. Reports and Items for Discussion Report No. Report Title Presented by: 5.1 Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian – Number 17 Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer presented the report for approval. The Scottish Government requires that all Local Authorities submit a yearly update on their local Development Plan Scheme (DPS). The report informs of Midlothian Council’s local development plan position, as well as setting activities scheduled for the next 12 months, the timetable for the new plan’s preparation and how interested parties can present representations to the Planning Authority. The Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian report contains the programme for the introduction of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2 (MLDP2). A public consultation was carried out in February and March 2025, with 19 comments received, and a summary of the comments received, and proposed responses, are included in Appendix A of the report. The Commitee is recommended to approve the Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian with no material changes and publish the plan on the Council’s website and provide a copy in all Council libraries as well as submit to the Scottish Ministers as per regulatory requirement. Page 5 of 208
Page 6
The Chair thanked the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer for the report and invited questions. Elected Members raised the progress against the housing objectives for the Local Development Plan 2017, noting that the rate of building is a matter of concern for Community Councils. While the target figure of 8851 houses set by the Scottish Government is not in dispute, the Elected Members asked for clarification on how the Local Authority would get there, as there is already a deficit of homes against the number to be built as part of the previous Local Development Plan. A further concern raised is the lack of financial modelling for the impact of those properties on the Council, for example in terms of the growing school roll. The projections are based on estimates of the number of children per household, which may or may not be correct. On that basis Elected Members asked whether it would be premature to go to consultation before having answers to those questions given the financial burden this decision will have on the Council in terms of inflation and borrowing costs. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer clarified that the figure of 8851 homes is a target based on information drawn from the local housing land requirement, and the number built between now and the adoption of the next Local Development Plan does not count towards this figure. The position on the next Local Development Plan has also gone through the gate check process and was approved as correct so that is the figure Midlothian Council needs to work towards. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer advised that the matter of the numbers, and identification of new sites would be covered in a report that will be submitted to a future Planning Committee. Elected Members queried whether it may be appropriate to postpone approval of the Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian until this report is available to have further information on what the impact is, and whether infrastructure can support the level of expansion in the plan. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer added that the Local Development Plan is a corporate Midlothian strategy, and that there is expectation that other strategies, like the Learning Estate Strategy, align with it. The Planning, Sustainable Development and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer also stated that the engagement and participation element of the Local Development Plan is ongoing, and the Planning Department is engaging with communities to gain their views on the planning process and take part through a call for ideas exercise. The Chair clarified the report presented for approval concerns the Development Plan Scheme, which is required to be submitted to the Scottish Government, but acknowledged there are different perspectives on the draft Local Development Plan 2027 and those will be discussed at a later time. Elected Members also asked if Infrastructure First is viable in terms of prioritising pedestrian safety and requested updates on developer contributions. The Planning, Sustainable Development and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer confirmed Infrastructure First has been identified as the preferred policy Page 6 of 208
Page 7
direction, but it is hard to deliver unless funding is provided, and some pieces of infrastructure are dependent on developer funding. When new sites are identified, planning for road safety is given due consideration. It was also clarified developer contributions are taken towards capital spend rather than revenue spend as per the current legal framework. Elected Members noted that the Local Authority does not have control where people choose to buy, and asked whether they can help shape the development of some areas by eliciting planning restrictions in areas which would mean the right houses that meet residents’ needs are built in the right places. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer explained the housing target has been set by the Scottish Government, based on the Housing Needs Demand Assessment, local growth and migration within Scotland. It was also noted that Midlothian do not analyse individual purchases, so it is difficult to collate this data. Elected Members queried the matter of developer contributions and why, when a school has capacity, it does not get additional contributions. While there may not be capacity issues, additional pupils increase the running costs of a school and reduce the useful life of the infrastructure, so it was discussed whether retrospective reviews of pupil product can be used to see how the school roll has evolved and whether projections were correct, as it is very complicated to project need ahead of time. The Chair was unable to recall whether there have been any instances of developer contributions being declined. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer noted that there are many years of data on pupil product and school roll projections. The principle of developer contribution is to mitigate the impact of house building and at times there have been adjustments in instances of developer contribution over recovery. Elected Members agreed with the issue regarding the pace of growth stripping the Council’s capacity to build new infrastructures and pointed out that the Council is carrying the bulk of the risk. While normally the Council manages to recover most of the investment through developer contributions, rising costs make it more challenging to strike a balance and this should be considered with a view for MLDP2. Councillor McCall moved to approve the report, the motion was seconded by Councillor Cassidy. Councillor Smaill reiterated the matter of new house numbers and Community Council’s concerns about the extent of expansion and asked whether there could be a commitment on whether the numbers are going to be met and infrastructure going to be provided. Reassurances were also sought that there would be no impact on finances as the consequences for Midlothian Council could be serious and called for careful modelling. Councillor Smaill asked that his disagreement with moving the paper was formally noted. The Chair agreed it is necessary to continue modelling and remodelling to grapple with the challenges of the unknown, and noted the Committee had approved the Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian Number 17 to be submitted to the Scottish Government and published. Page 7 of 208
Page 8
Decision The Planning Committee approved the Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian Number 17 for submission to the Scottish Government as well as its publication. Action Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer to submit the Development Plan Scheme for Midlothian Number 17 to Scottish Ministers, publish on the council website and request a copy is made available in all Midlothian Council libraries. If Report No. Report Title Presented by: 5.2 21.001148.DPP Land at Former Petrol Filling Station, Hillend- Appeal Decision Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer presented the planning application appeal outcome for noting. An application was presented for the erection of nine dwelling houses, formation of a car park and associated works at the former petrol filling station, Biggar Road, Hillend. The application was refused by the Planning Authority in August 2021 and presented at the LRB meeting in December 2021 which granted planning permission subject to conditions - notifying Scottish Ministers due to a Traffic Scotland objection and registration of a planning obligation to secure developer contributions. Scottish Ministers considered the review following a report from the Reporter and determined to grant planning permission subject to securing developer contributions. It is recommended the Planning Committee notes the outcome of the appeal decision. The Chair thanked the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer for the report. Elected Members sought confirmation that the Section 75 Agreement was done under the conditions discussed at the time of the Local Review Body in December 2024. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer confirmed this is the case. Elected Members expressed their surprise at the fact the Reporter recommended there should be no developer contributions for this development and congratulated the Scottish Ministers on overturning this decision. It was noted that this could pose a threat to other developments of this nature. The Chair clarified that the Reporter request no contribution in their report, and if their report was approved by Ministers it would have come with no conditions. Page 8 of 208
Page 9
Decision The Planning Committee noted the result of the appeal decision. Report No. Report Title Presented by: 5.3 25.00142.PAC Land between Braidlaw Farmhouse and A766, Penicuik- Pre application consultation Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/Chief Planning Officer presented the report for noting. The report is to advise the Committee of the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) and corresponding pre application consultation for a residential development. The Pre-Application consultation concerns 5 holiday accommodation units on the land between Braebill Farmhouse and the A766 at Penicuik. The consultation gives an opportunity for Elected Members to comment on the proposals at an early stage of the planning process. The applicants are engaging in a consultation exercise with two public drop-in sessions. The site is designated as countryside, but the development plan supports holiday accommodations in principle to improve the touristic accommodation offer to attract tourism to the Local Authority, provided the units meet design and environmental criteria. If an application is received, design matters will be given consideration. It is recommended the Planning Committee notes provision of the plan and position set in the report. Any provisional views made by Elected Members at this time do not affect the Committee in its consideration of any subsequent formal planning application. The Chair thanked the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer for the report. Elected Members noted the report refers to the project as a “major development” and asked what makes a development qualify for this description. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer explained this is connected to the size of the site as per existing regulations. Decision The Planning Committee noted the contents of the pre application consultation report. Report No. Report Title Presented by: Page 9 of 208
Page 10
5.4 24.00338.DPP Land 90M southwest of Asda, Loanhead Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer presented the report for determination. The application is in detail for mixed use development including class 1A (shops and financial), class 11 (assembly and leisure) and class 4 (business uses) as well as associated structure, car park, servicing, access arrangements and landscaping at land 90metres southwest of Asda petrol station, Loanhead. The development comprises 2 buildings towards the eastern side of the site, with a service yard to rear and car parking in front of the units. One of the buildings will comprise 2 retail units, while the other building will comprise of five roller shut units. Both buildings will be clad with modern cladding panels and utilise different profiles and shades of grey to create variety. The car park will provide 278 parking spaces and there will be two vehicular accesses and pedestrian access from the A701 at the northwest corner of the site, with improvements to the pedestrian crossing functions. The proposal includes sustainable drainage scheme to fit the infrastructure provision and appropriate to location. A strip of land measuring 28 meters wide is not included, however this land is within the built-up area of Loanhead where there is presumption given in favour of development and makes for a logical boundary to the site. The development catchment is primarily within Midlothian and complements use of adjoining areas. There are no alternative retail sites of comparable size within the town centre or nearby business parks, and the application will sit in a longstanding vacant and derelict site. There were 3 representations received, and 9 consultation responses. Planning Committee is recommended to grant planning permission subject to conditions and applicant entering a planning obligation to securing developer contributions to develop infrastructure. The Chair thanked the Planning, Sustainable Development and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer for the report. Elected Members asked whether the inclusion of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations can be included as part of the conditions. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer explained this may possible but there has been some level of dispute as to how many should be provided. The applicant proposed 6, while the council proposed the equivalent of 42 spaces so it is hoped a compromise can be reached. If the number of EV charging stations is high, it will also be requested that the applicant funds a substation. Elected Members asked about the potential level of traffic disruption to the area during the building phase. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Page 10 of 208
Page 11
Manager/ Chief Planning Officer explained that as there is already existing vehicle access to the north of the site this can be utilised for the project. While there will be a level of traffic disruption given the size of the development this has not been identified by Traffic Scotland as a concern and no road closures are expected. There is also traffic conditions proposed as part of the overall conditions to limit heavy haulage at the site. Elected Members also noted that the access road is used by the adjoining garage as overspill parking and wondered whether the Council could add parking restrictions to minimise congestion as the road is very narrow. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer explained access arrangements are part of the application. Elected Members asked whether there is any indication of what type of business is likely to go in the Class 11 units as this business use has a very broad definition. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer noted that they cannot advise of the operators for the individual units at the moment, but reassurance was given by the applicant that the application is assessed based on floor space limitations for specific uses. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer advised the applicant is mindful of the impact of changing retail dynamic and wishes to have flexibility to change units as interested parties come forward to lease these. While this is understandable, Elected Members pointed out that different types of business will have different implications on traffic and the local community. The Committee unanimously agreed to grant planning permission for this application. Decision The Planning Committee moved to grant planning permission subject to conditions stated in the report and to the applicant securing developer contributions. Action Planning Department to inform the applicant. If Councillor Smaill left the meeting Report No. Report Title Presented by: 5.5 24.00598.DPP and 24.00588.LBC- Carrington Mains, Gorebridge Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer presented the report for determination. Page 11 of 208
Page 12
The application involves planning permission and change of use application to turn an existing vacant dilapidated farm building into a cafe, formation of associated car park and drainage at Carrington Mains, Gorebridge. The application site forms part of the Carrington Mains farm complex at the edge of Carrington. The associated farm buildings are B listed, and the farmhouse is C listed and the whole site is in within the Carrington Conservation Area. The building is in disrepair and alterations are proposed to be made in a sympathetic way in terms of materials used and design features. The arrangements are set in section 3 of the report. The building is in poor condition and its conservation is of high importance. If presumption is in favour of the development, it must be clear it is not detrimental to the community or character of the area. Sections 5 and 6 in the report contain the representations and consultation responses. 11 Representators object, 13 are in support and three are neutral. As well as these, there have been 11 additional representations and 1 petition with 33 signatures received since the completion of report. Planning Committee is recommended to grant planning permission subject to conditions specified in the report. The Chair thanked the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer for the report. Elected Members noted that this is quite a contested issue within the local community, and regrettably this means any decision will make some residents upset. The drainage and sewage are the biggest concerns given the risk that sewage could back up on some houses, so it was suggested drainage being brought up to standard should be made a condition if granting planning permission. Other concerns listed by opponents involve the car park. If objectors have issues with the location of the car park, which could be addressed by moving the car park to another location, this should be given consideration. However, many supporters have pointed out this development has the chance of offering socialisation opportunities for the residents of a remote area, so if the applicant and the community work together to find a compromise this may be successful. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer advised that the current proposal to address drainage is to use the main network infrastructure to supply clean and drain foul water, the drainage is under the grass in the neighbouring field. Scottish Water was consulted on the subject and no issues were reported with the proposal. While it is unlikely that granting the application will cause issues with drainage, any local concerns can be passed on to Scottish Water. Elected Members raised the matter of parking and asked whether any other parking sites have been considered. The Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager/ Chief Planning Officer advised the proposed parking area is within the boundary of village, whereas the field opposite is listed as countryside. There is some logic to the current proposal, but it is understood it can also cause disruption. However, given the limited number of parking spaces, and the opening hours being only Thursday to Sunday, any disruption should be Page 12 of 208
Page 13
at an acceptable level. The issue of the lights causing disruption can also be solved by timers. Elected Members noted that many of the concerns have been addressed in the report, or during this discussion, and on balance the application has many benefits, such as providing a community hub, having a positive impact on the local economy and result in the creation of 5 jobs. The application will also contribute to maintaining and bringing new life to a historic building, without damage to the land and increasing biodiversity. Carrington is also in a very popular cycle route, so the development is very likely to be well frequented by cyclists. Councillor Parry moved to grant planning permission subject to conditions, and Councillor McKenzie seconded the motion. Elected Members noted that many smaller communities are now devoid of small businesses, and this application is seen as a welcome change to this trend. Councillor McEwan added his support to the application as this brings a historic building back to life. Councillor Virgo wondered whether it may be worthwhile to make it a condition of the planning permission to find an alternative parking solution that would be acceptable to some of the opponents. The Chair clarified that, as the motion has already had a mover and a seconder, this would need to be moved as an amendment. Councillor Virgo stated he would be happy to support the substantive motion without the amendment. Decision The Planning Committee moved to grant planning permission subject to the conditions stated in the report. Action Planning Department to inform the applicants. 5. Any Other Business No other business was discussed at the meeting 6. Date of next meeting The Meeting concluded at 14.10. The next meeting of the Planning Committe will be held on Tuesday 10 June 2025. Page 13 of 208
Page 14
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.1 MIDLOTHIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 - HOUSING LAND AND SITE SELECTION SHORTLISTING Report By Chief Officer Place 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 This report presents the latest calculations of supply and demand of land for housing. It also sets out a shortlist of potential sites to meet the Local Housing Land Requirement for Midlothian Local Development Plan No.2 (MLDP2). The Committee is asked to indicate any sites that they do not wish taken forward for further consideration, and to agree the finalised shortlist as the basis for progressing the Proposed MLDP2. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 At its meeting of 25 June 2024 Council set an indicative Local Housing Land Requirement (LHLR) of 8,851. This figure was included in the MLDP2 Evidence Report submitted to Scottish Ministers for ‘Gate Check’. On 19 September 2024 the Council received formal notification that the submitted Evidence Report contained sufficient information for the Council to prepare MLDP2, and that the Council can proceed with an LHLR of 8,851 units. 2.2 A Call for Ideas and Opportunities exercise was carried out between 1 July and 1 October 2024 and generated over 160 site suggestions. The Planning Service has identified additional sites for consideration from various sources including Council owned land, sites with existing planning consent for housing, but not yet developed, and sites on the Vacant and Derelict Land Register. A series of member workshops were held in March and April 2025 to discuss the sites being considered. The suggested sites were uploaded to the public website on 12 May 2025 Suggested sites for development | Development plans and policies | Midlothian Council. 2.3 The timetable for MLDP2 contained in the Development Plan Scheme 17 (approved by Committee at its meeting of 29 April 2025) sets the target of publishing the Proposed Plan in November 2025 for consultation. Page 14 of 208
Page 15
2.4 To prepare the Proposed Plan the Council will need to identify the housing sites that will meet the LHLR. Early feedback has been noted from the member workshops and the Planning Service is engaging with Midlothian’s Community Councils. There will be ongoing engagement with elected members during the preparation of the Proposed Plan. A final decision on the allocated sites will not be required until the Proposed Plan is submitted for Council approval. 3 HOUSING SUPPLY POSITION 3.1 A projection of housing supply to 2027, the projected start of the MLDP2 period, is provided in Table 1 and is based on the latest approved Housing Land Audit (HLA 2024). It shows an estimated need for MLDP2 to allocate land for an additional 1,660 units to meet the LHLR. This figure will evolve as the effective housing land supply figure changes as housing units from the existing effective housing land supply get built between now and the adoption of MLDP2. This figure is updated and agreed annually through the Housing Land Audit process. Table 1: Programmed effective supply and the LHLR Effective Housing Land Supply Local Housing Land Requirement Difference between effective supply and LHLR 31.03.2024 (from HLA) 9,658 N/A 31.03.2027 (projected in HLA) 7,191 8,851 -1,660 Source: HLA 2024, which anticipated 2,467 residential units being built between 31 March 2024 and 31 March 2027. 3.2 HLA 2025 is being prepared and will be the subject of a report to a future Committee meeting. It will identify how much land for housing is available from April 2025, state the 2025 effective housing land supply position and project future years effective housing land supply. Early indications from the draft 2025 audit are that the number of completions is approximately 646 in 2024/25, lower than the 755 for 2024/25 programmed in the 2024 HLA. This figure may go up slightly, as some final completions are identified through further checks. There is supporting evidence from the Scottish Government’s ‘New Starts’ data series that house building activity is slowing down in Midlothian (688 starts in 2024 calendar year compared to 777 in 2023). If this trend continues then the difference between effective supply and the LHLR will drop below the stated 1,660 requirement. 3.3 NPF4 requires deliverable land to be allocated to meet the LHLR. Deliverable land is land that is free from constraints or where there is a Page 15 of 208
Page 16
commitment to overcome constraints, and development can be delivered in the period identified for the site within the deliverable housing land pipeline. The effective housing land supply identified in the HLA is free from constraints and available for the construction of housing. 3.4 In addition to meeting the LHLR it is a requirement of NPF4 that the local development plan identify areas that may be suitable for homes beyond the 10-year MLDP2 period. 4 SUGGESTED SITES TO MEET HOUSING DEMAND 4.1 The potential housing supply from the Call for Ideas and Opportunities sites and the sites identified by the Planning Service significantly exceeds the likely requirement for new allocations to meet the LHLR and total approximately 16,500 dwellings. The sites received through the Call for Ideas and Opportunities and the sites identified by the Planning Service have been discussed at the elected member’s workshops held in March and April. From these sites, a shortlist has been prepared which officers consider to be potentially suitable for allocation in MLDP2 to meet the LHLR and warrant further assessment. The shortlist (and associated location plans) is provided in Appendix A. It is important to note that a site which is shortlisted for further assessment is not automatically allocated or put forward in the Proposed Plan – following further assessment the Council will need to select those sites it wishes to take forward to meet its LHLR from the shortlisted sites. 4.2 The ‘SUB’ prefixed sites are generally those submitted in the Call for Ideas and Opportunities. The sites with the ‘ADD’ prefix have been identified by the Planning Service. The other prefixed sites relate to previous allocations from MLDP 2017 and windfall sites with planning permission. The Planning Service has been seeking to contact site owners of non-Council sites, where there has not been a submission, to establish interest in bringing forward these sites in accordance with the timetable of MLDP2. 4.3 A few of the sites on the shortlist are already known and have some planning status as either allocated constrained sites, or as long-term safeguards and additional housing opportunity sites identified in the adopted plan. The emphasis in NPF4 is on allocating deliverable sites, so the Council is considering the situation at such sites to determine whether they can contribute to the housing supply between 2027 and 2037. The constrained sites in the shortlist are either free of a physical constraint or there is a strong case that the constraining factor is close to being overcome. 4.4 NPF4 requires local development plans to have regard to needs beyond 10 years and to indicate the direction of growth beyond the span of MLDP2. Sites on the shortlist, for example the additional sites in the Shawfair area, could be used to meet this requirement. Page 16 of 208
Page 17
4.5 A number of small rural sites were suggested in the Call for Ideas and Opportunities. However, the Planning Service’s early view is that a new rural development policy framework is the most appropriate way to address rural demand, rather than specific small allocations of one or two dwellings. Also, the Scottish Government’s Local Development Planning Guidance states that only sites of four or more units can be used to meet the Local Housing Land Requirement. Two of the sites on the shortlist, ADD15 Whitehill Forge, Rosewell and SUB070 Silverburn are for three dwellings each and should be considered for allocation but can not count towards the LHLR because of their small scale. 5 RECOMMENDATION 5.1 It is recommended that the Committee: (a) notes the latest position regarding effective housing land supply. (b) considers the shortlist of new housing sites and indicates any that they do not wish taken forward for further consideration. (c) agree the shortlist (subject to any deletions requested by the Committee) as the basis for progressing the Proposed Plan. Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Contact Person: Colin Davidson, Planning Officer colin.davidson2@midlothian.gov.uk Background Papers: MLDP2: Outcome of Evidence Report Gate Check, Update on the Call for Ideas Exercise and Next Steps report presented to the Committee at its meeting of 29 October 2024. Appendices: Appendix A: Potential Housing Sites Shortlist (and associated location plans) for MLDP2 Page 17 of 208
Page 18
Appendix A Potential Housing Sites Shortlist Site Name Site Reference Ward & Settlement No. of Units Notes Beeslack ADD025 1 – Penicuik Penicuik 30 Brownfield site, Council owned, area of school buildings only (not playing fields). Belwood Crescent SUB168 (previously ADD001) 1 - Penicuik Penicuik 25 Site identified in MLDP 2017 as having potential for housing but not allocated (AHs3). Following close of formal Call for Ideas period, MoD has confirmed that a larger area of land is surplus to requirements and has indicated interest in bringing forward area with potential for up to 130 houses (some as Service Families Accommodation, others for sale). Mauricewood SUB051 1 – Penicuik Penicuik 200 New site. Rullion Road SUB052a 1 – Penicuik Penicuik 100 New site. Pentland House ADD026 1 – Penicuik Penicuik 16 Brownfield site, Council owned, using unused land and part of Pentland House out of use. Silverburn SUB070 1 – Penicuik Silverburn 3 New site. 51B High Street Bonnyrigg ADD003 2 - Bonnyrigg Bonnyrigg 23 Constrained site in HLA 2024. Will need to explore alternative access options to overcome constraint. Dalkeith Town Centre ADD024 3 - Dalkeith Dalkeith 65 Brownfield site, part Council owned, Dalkeith Town Centre Regeneration project. Easter Langside Drive/Miners Walk ADD020 3 – Dalkeith Dalkeith 20 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017 (h33). Fairfield House ADD017 3 - Dalkeith Dalkeith 15 Brownfield site, Council owned, excludes Listed Building. Thornybank North (Hs5) ADD004 3 - Dalkeith Dalkeith 20 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017. Constrained site in HLA 2024, due to lack of progress on this remainder portion of site (main part taken up by Aldi supermarket). Cauldcoats SUB024 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 220 Safeguarded site identified in MLDP 2017. Page 18 of 208
Page 19
Site Name Site Reference Ward & Settlement No. of Units Notes Cauldcoats South SUB057 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 600 New Site *this is indicated as having potential in the longer term, post MLDP2. Cauldcoats Steading ADD022 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 12 Planning permission granted. Depending on speed of progress may not be available to utilise in period 2027- 37. Newton Farm SUB072 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 70 New Site *this is indicated as having potential in the longer term, post MLDP2. Shawfair (Coal Authority) SUB086 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 150 Brownfield site. Allocated employment site MLDP 2017 (e25) *this is indicated as having potential in the longer term, post MLDP2. Shawfair Additional Site 1 (north of North Danderhall) SUB117 3 - Dalkeith Shawfair 390 New site *this is indicated as having potential in the longer term, post MLDP2. Shawfair Additional Site 2 (north of community woodland). SUB118 3 – Dalkeith Shawfair 330 New Site *this is indicated as having potential in the longer term, post MLDP2. Seafield Moor Road SUB082 4 - Mid West Bilston 500 Safeguarded site identified in MLDP 2017. The 500 units may however drop significantly to approximately 200 depending on the A701 realignment project. Straiton View SUB080 4 - Mid West Loanhead 50 Brownfield site. Part allocated for employment use. Whitehill Forge ADD015 4 – Mid West Rosewell 3 Brownfield site. Planning permission granted. Depending on speed of progress may not be available to utilise in period 2027-37. Eskbank Station East SUB009 5 - Mid East Dalkeith 20 Allocated employment site MLDP 2017 (e11). Proposal for mixed use, including commercial development. Eskbank Station West SUB007 5 - Mid East Dalkeith 50 New site - directly adjacent to Eskbank Station. Bogwood Road ADD018 5 - Mid East Mayfield 50 Brownfield site, Council owned, currently vacant. Mayfield Place ADD019 5 - Mid East Mayfield 40 Brownfield site, Council owned. Page 19 of 208
Page 20
Site Name Site Reference Ward & Settlement No. of Units Notes Old School Crescent SUB002 5 - Mid East Mayfield 60 New site - affordable housing only (Melville Housing Association). Need to carefully consider access arrangements. Fordel ADD010 5 - Mid East Nr Dalkeith 60 Constrained site in HLA 2024. MSC consent submitted in 2021 is pending, but development has commenced through demolition of buildings: drainage issues, complications with ownership and delivery of affordable housing are reasons for constraint. Whippielaw Yard SUB107 5 - Mid East Pathhead 25 New site. David Herkes Way (Hs8 part) ADD021 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 40 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017. Council owned. Engine Road/Aspen Drive ADD012 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 40 Brownfield (derelict) site. Gowkshill Farm SUB069 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 100 New site. Land south of Gowkshill SUB034 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 250 New site. Redheugh West SUB045 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 650 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017 plus safeguarded site in MLDP 2017. Constrained site in HLA 2024, linked to delivery of new bridge, although there has been progress made and there seems good prospect of delivery in MLDP2. Vogrie Road (h40 rem) ADD007 6 - Mid South Gorebridge 12 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017. Constrained site in HLA 2024. Change in ownership of developer, causing remainder of site to remain undeveloped – no physical impediment to restarting work. Blackcot Drive ADD023 6 – Mid South Mayfield 16 Remainder of site allocated in MLDP 2017. Council owned. Scotts Caravans ADD011 6 - Mid South Mayfield 40 New site – brownfield. 25 Newbattle Road ADD006 6 - Mid South Newtongrange 8 Constrained site in HLA 2024. Derelict site. Works commenced on site, but no houses built, does not appear to be any physical site impediment. Bryans Road/Morris Road ADD014 6 - Mid South Newtongrange 10 Brownfield site. Planning permission granted. Page 20 of 208
Page 21
Site Name Site Reference Ward & Settlement No. of Units Notes Main Street SUB122 6 - Mid South Newtongrange 20 Brownfield site, Council owned. St Davids SUB123 6 - Mid South Newtongrange 15 Brownfield site, Council owned. Thornton Farm SUB012 6 - Mid South Rosewell 13 New site. Whitehill House (Grounds) (h70) ADD009 6 - Mid South Rosewell 84 Allocated site in MLDP 2017. Constrained site in HLA 2024. Intermittent delivery of units here has led to site being constrained, although still appears to be active interest from site promoter. Whitehill House (h69) ADD008 6 - Mid South Rosewell 18 Allocated site in MLDP 2017. Constrained site in HLA 2024. Linked to site ADD009 (enabling development). 4457* *The total excludes the 6 dwellings from ADD15 Whitehill Forge and SUB070 Silverburn, see paragraph 4.5 of the report, but the sites are included in the list for assessment as part of the Proposed Plan process. The total could drop to 2917 if the proposed new Shawfair sites are considered as potential longer-term additions, see paragraph 4.4 of the report. Page 21 of 208
Page 22
N Ward 1 - Penicuik Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 22 of 208
Page 23
N Ward 2 - Bonnyrigg Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 23 of 208
Page 24
N Ward 3 - Dalkeith (Map 1 of 2, Shawfair Only) Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 24 of 208
Page 25
N Ward 3 - Dalkeith (Map 2 of 2, Dalkeith Area) Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 25 of 208
Page 26
N Ward 4 - Midlothian West (Map 1 of 2 - Loanhead & Bilston) Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary© Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 26 of 208
Page 27
N Ward 4 - Midlothian West (Map 2 of 2 - Rosewell, Roslin & MSZ) Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 27 of 208
Page 28
N Ward 5 - Midlothian East Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary© Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 28 of 208
Page 29
N Ward 6 - Midlothian South Shortlisted Housing Sites Existing Allocations & Consents Council Ward Boundary Midlothian Boundary © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Page 29 of 208
Page 30
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.2 GREEN BELT REVIEW AND NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT Report By Chief Officer Place 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of the report is to seek approval of the Green Belt Review and Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard Assessment findings and to incorporate them into the preparation of the Midlothian Local Development Plan No.2 (MLDP2) Proposed Plan. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 Land designated as green belt in Midlothian is part of the wider Edinburgh Green Belt. It has been an important part of the development strategy of the city region for over 60 years. The green belt has been successful in ensuring that the towns surrounded by it are separate from one another and from Edinburgh itself and in doing so it positively contributes towards creating a sense of place for settlements and communities, it contributes towards amenity, it enables access to countryside activities and opportunities, and it enhances biodiversity and the environment. It has also helped in avoiding unplanned development in the countryside. To meet strategic housing and economic development requirements, Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 (MLDP 2017) and previous Midlothian local plans made changes to green belt boundaries to accommodate very significant levels of growth. 2.2 In the MLDP2 Evidence Report approved by Council in June 2024, a commitment was made to undertake a review of the green belt following the Evidence Gate Check. The Scottish Government Reporter, in their Gate Check Report, advised that the green belt review for Midlothian should be carried out ahead of the site selection process and preparation of the proposed plan. 2.3 National policy on green belts is set through National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), which replaced the national green belt policy set out in Scottish Planning Policy 21 which was in place in 2008 when the last green belt review was carried out. NPF4 continues support for the use of green belts as a land use planning tool to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably (NPF4 Policy 8). Page 30 of 208
Page 31
2.4 The Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard was introduced and designated through MLDP 2017. It is a vital green space between Dalkeith, Eskbank, Bonnyrigg, Easthouses and Newtongrange, and provides important landscape setting for and distinction between these settlements. The designation created to: • Prevent development in the area, other than for ancillary uses relevant to existing uses and/or development for agriculture, horticulture, forestry, countryside recreation or tourism; • Resist development pressures in the area, to help maintain individual settlement identities and separation in this area; and • Help provide and maintain access to countryside activities on the doorstep of the surrounding expanding communities. 2.5 In the Evidence Report, the Council set out that the safeguard has been successful in its ambition to prevent coalescence and that no changes were proposed. The Scottish Government Reporter, in the Gate Check Report, recommended that the Council put in place a stronger evidence base in support of the safeguard. 3 MLDP2 GREEN BELT REVIEW 3.1 Following the recommendation in the Gate Check Report, a review of the green belt in Midlothian has been undertaken. The review, including maps, is provided in Appendix A. The purpose of the MLDP2 Green Belt Review is to: • determine whether the existing green belt boundaries remain appropriate and accord with NPF4 policy; • identify whether there are areas of the existing green belt that do not contribute to meeting the NPF4 green belt outcomes and should be deleted; and • determine if changes to current green belt boundaries, including inclusion of additional areas, are required. 3.2 The findings of the Green Belt Review, in summary, are: • All areas of the existing green belt meet NPF4 policy outcomes. • Boundaries are mostly appropriate and robust, with some localised changes recommended. • Most areas of green belt include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence. • There is limited to no landscape capacity to accommodate any significant development within the green belt. • Extensions of the green belt are recommended in four locations (Dalhousie Mains/Lothianbridge, between Roslin and Auchendinny, between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell, and adjoining the A702 west of Penicuik. Page 31 of 208
Page 32
4 NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 4.1 Following the recommendation in the Gate Check Report, an assessment of the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard has been undertaken. The Review is provided in Appendix B. The aim of the assessment was to provide a review of the safeguard from a landscape perspective and determine whether: • The safeguard continues to fulfil its original purpose; • Any changes are required to its boundaries (extension and/or reduction); and • Whether the safeguard designation or any amended version should continue in MLDP2. 4.2 The findings of the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard assessment are: • The rural resources within the safeguard remain key to local character and amenity and are increasingly important in avoiding settlement coalescence, maintaining individual community identity and supporting opportunities for countryside access and activities; and • In the context of the climate and nature crises, it is even more essential that the landscape resources and soils within the safeguard be protected. 4.3 The recommendations of the assessment are that: • the safeguard be carried forward in MLDP2, expanding its underpinning purpose to cover its key ecosystem services such as supporting climate and flood resilience, biodiversity, carbon storage and protection of soils; • a 30-metre buffer be applied to areas of ancient woodland within and adjacent to the safeguard to avoid potential adverse effects of any adjoining development on trees, roots and soils, and minimise disturbance of wildlife and woodland habitat; • a 15-metre buffer be applied to all other areas of woodland within the safeguard for the same reasons; • Extend the boundaries of the safeguard at Lothianbridge and north of Newtongrange; and • Introduce a requirement that any proposed new development site adjoining the safeguard incorporate a landscape buffer of at least 15 metre width or arborist-recommended Construction Exclusion Zone, whichever is the greater, at the interface with the safeguard. 5 RECOMMENDATION 5.1 It is recommended that the Committee: (a) approves the findings of the Midlothian Green Belt Review and the integration of the recommendations in the MLDP2 Proposed Plan (which will be subject to separate approval at a future Council meeting). Page 32 of 208
Page 33
(b) approves the findings of the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard Assessment and the integration of the recommendations in the MLDP2 Proposed Plan (which will be subject to separate approval at a future Council meeting). Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Contact Person: Emma Hay emma.hay@midlothian.gov.uk Background Papers: MLDP2: Outcome of Evidence Report Gate Check, Update on the Call for Ideas Exercise and Next Steps report presented to the Committee at its meeting of 29 October 2024. Appendices: Appendix A: MLDP2 Green Belt Review and Plan Appendix B: Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard Review and Plan Page 33 of 208
Page 34
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 1 Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of Green Belt Review ............................................................................. 2 Scope ................................................................................................................. 2 2. Policy Context ..................................................................................................... 3 NPF4 ................................................................................................................... 3 Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 ............................................................ 5 3. Background ......................................................................................................... 6 Monitoring of Green Belt Applications & Land Take .............................................. 7 Edinburgh Green Belt Study 2008 ........................................................................ 7 3. Methodology for MLDP2 Green Belt Review .................................................... 12 Step 1: Defining the Review Area ....................................................................... 12 Step 2: Identify Change within the Green Belt since 2017 .................................. 13 Step 3: Desk Based Review ................................................................................ 14 Step 4: Assess Potential Additions to the Green Belt ......................................... 17 4. Review Findings and Recommendations ........................................................ 18 Recommendations ............................................................................................ 22 Appendix 1: Potential Green Belt Additions Assessment Sheets ........................... 27 Appendix A Page 34 of 208
Page 35
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2 1. Introduction 1. This document sets out the methodology to be used by Midlothian Council for undertaking a review of the parts of the Edinburgh Green Belt that are in Midlothian. The methodology and approach have been developed jointly by a working group of officers from Midlothian, East Lothian and City of Edinburgh Councils. The methodology and criteria are based on the purposes of green belt set out in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). Area based priorities have also been developed and applied to recognise the specific characteristics of Midlothian. 2. The outcome of the Green Belt Review for Midlothian will inform production of Midlothian Local Development Plan 2 (MLDP2). Purpose of Green Belt Review 3. The purpose of the MLDP2 Green Belt Review is to: • determine whether the existing green belt boundaries remain appropriate and accord with NPF4; • identify whether there are areas of the existing Green Belt that do not contribute to meeting the NPF4 green belt outcomes and should be deleted; and • determine if changes to current Green Belt boundaries, including inclusion of additional areas, are required. Scope 4. The methodology used in this Review is an approach and shared criteria for reviewing whether the existing Green Belt boundary remains appropriate, as directed by NPF4 and the LDP Guidance. The starting position of the Review is that the Edinburgh Green Belt continues to be a valid and valuable planning tool in principle. The focus of the Review in on whether the constituent parts help to deliver the three main green belt outcomes set out in NPF4 (see paragraph 6). 5. The Review of the Edinburgh Green Belt in Midlothian has been carried out by officers in the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Service. The whole Green Belt in Midlothian is covered by this Review, along with areas around the following settlements – Dalkeith, Danderhall/Shawfair, Bonnyrigg, Loanhead, Roslin, Bilston and Penicuik. These are the settlements in Midlothian within or adjacent to the current Green Belt. See Figure 3. Page 35 of 208
Page 36
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 3 2.Policy Context NPF4 6. NPF4 Policy 8: Green Belts sets out the Scottish Government’s position on green belts. The intent of Policy 8 is to “encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably”. The policy outcomes of Policy 8 are: • 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; and • nature networks are supported, and land is managed to help tackle climate change. In addition, NPF4 states that: • LDPs should consider using green belts, to support their spatial strategy as a settlement management tool to restrict development around towns and cities. • Green belts will not be necessary for most settlements but may be zoned around settlements where there is a significant danger of unsustainable growth in car- based commuting or suburbanisation of the countryside. • Green belts should be identified or reviewed as part of the preparation of LDPs. Boundary changes may be made to accommodate planned growth, or to extend, or alter the area covered as green belt. Detailed green belt boundaries should be based on evidence and should be clearly identified in plans. 7. Policy 8 states that development proposals within a green belt will only be supported if: i. They are for: - Development associated with agricultural, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland (including community woodlands); - Residential accommodation required and designed for a key worked 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, or retired worker where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available; - Horticulture, including market gardening and directly connected retailing, as well and 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); Page 36 of 208
Page 37
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 4 - 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. Local Development Planning Guidance 8. Scottish Government Local Development Planning Guidance (2023) also sets out the following in relation to green belts: • Evidence is required to inform detailed green belt boundaries, which should be set in Local Development Plans. • LDPs should consider using green belts to support their spatial strategy as a settlement management tool to restrict development around towns and cities. • Boundary changes may be made to accommodate planned growth, or to extend or alter the area covered as green belt. • If the plan area contains an existing green belt, planning authorities would be expected to review whether the existing boundary remains appropriate. • In carrying out a green belt review or study, planning authorities may wish to consider: • identifying any existing settlements, major educational and research uses, major businesses and industrial operations, airports and Ministry of Defence establishments, and any other significant areas of brownfield, vacant and derelict land, within the current greenbelt boundary; • reviewing settlement boundaries, i.e. where development has taken place; • undertaking a landscape character assessment; Page 37 of 208
Page 38
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 5 • identifying clearly identifiable visual boundary markers based on landscape features such as rivers, tree belts, railways or main roads; • considering the green belt’s contribution to NPF4’s policy outcomes. • This type of spatial information would provide evidence to inform any extension or review of precise green belt boundaries, or removal of land from the green belt through the Proposed Plan. Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 9. MLDP 2017 Policy ENV1: Protection of the Green Belt provided the main policy protection for green belt land. It has been superseded by NPF4 Policy 8 (see above). Instances where development in the Green Belt in Midlothian may be acceptable are set out in the Housing Development in the Countryside and Green Belt Supplementary Guidance. Page 38 of 208
Page 39
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 6 3.Background 10. Since its establishment, the Edinburgh Green Belt has influenced the location and scale of long-term development in Midlothian. The Green Belt has encouraged development within urban areas and expansion of settlements beyond the Green Belt. There has, however, been a need in the past to allow for green belt releases to meet strategic housing and economic development requirements placed on Midlothian Council. This has resulted in adjustment to Green Belt boundaries in previous Midlothian local plans and MLDP 2017. The amendments made to the 2008 Green Belt boundary made through MLDP 2017 are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of Green Belt Boundaries between Midlothian Local Plan 2008 and the MLDP 2017 11. MLDP 2017 removed a number of uses which were located in the Green Belt but were considered not appropriate for a green belt location in terms of national policy (non-conforming uses). The areas removed from the Green Belt by MLDP 2017 were a combination of non-conforming and sites allocated for development. The changes made to the Green Belt in MLDP 2017 were intended to ensure that the remaining Green Belt primarily covers the rural and countryside areas near, adjacent to and between towns. Significant releases were made at West Straiton, north of Bilston and on the northern edge of Roslin. Page 39 of 208
Page 40
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 7 12. The Green Belt continues to have an important role in protecting the landscape setting, character and identity of Edinburgh and Midlothian settlements, and preventing coalescence. By protecting the setting and identity of Midlothian settlements, the Green Belt has provided the additional benefit of ensuring that residents have access to the countryside and the outdoor recreation value it provides. Monitoring of Green Belt Applications & Land Take 13. Monitoring information is collected to help understand the scale and trends of development proposals coming forward on green belt land. This information indicates that, although there have been some larger planning applications consented in the green belt, these relate to allocated housing sites. The majority of consented planning applications relate to smaller scale proposals such as householder applications, single dwelling houses, camping pods, renovation of existing and erection of new agricultural buildings. Edinburgh Green Belt Study 2008 14. The last full review of the Edinburgh Green Belt was undertaken in 2008. The purpose of the 2008 study was to undertake a landscape-based review of the Green Belt for the Strategic Development Plan for Edinburgh and South East Scotland within the terms of the now superseded Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 21 Green Belts. 15. In the 2008 Study the following Landscape Character Areas, which covered all of the Green Belt in Midlothian, were reviewed against the policy objectives of SPP21. Figure 2 shows the location of the Landscape Character Areas. Page 40 of 208
Page 41
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 8 Figure 2: Location of Landscape Character Areas 16. The 2008 study comprised two stages. Stage 1 identified those areas of Green Belt that, when assessed against relevant SPP21 policy objectives, best met those objectives and were considered to be of greatest importance. Stage 2 focused on those areas of Green Belt which met SPP21 policy objectives to a lesser degree and explored the potential capacity of those areas to accommodate built development. Table 1 sets out the landscape character areas and whether relevant areas were considered to have Stage 1 or Stage 2 status. Table 1: 2008 Green Belt Review Landscape Character Areas in Midlothian Reference No. Name Stage 42 Pentland Heights Stage 1 43 Broomhill Farmland Stage 2 44 Burdiehouse Farmland Stage 2 46 Danderhall settled farmland Stage 2 47 Craigmillar Farmland Stage 2 76 East Pentland slopes Stage 1 77 Bush Estate Stage 2 78 Glencorse Stage 2 79 Glencorse Golf course Stage 2 80 Damhead Stage 2 81 Roslin farmland Stage 2 82 Upper North Esk Valley Stage 1 Page 41 of 208
Page 42
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 9 83 Edgefield Stage 2 84 Melville North Esk Valley Stage 1 85 Melville Nurseries Stage 2 86 South Melville Stage 2 87 Dalkeith Palace Stage 1 88 Smeaton farmland Stage 2 17. The following criteria were used to assess against the green belt objective “to protect and enhance the character, landscape setting and identity of towns/cities”. • Integrity of landscape character; • Distinctiveness of landscape character; • Landscape condition; • Potential for enhancement of landscape condition; • The role of the landscape in contributing to the setting of Edinburgh/surrounding settlements; and • Robustness and sustainability of existing boundaries in landscape terms. 18. Stage 2 considered the general capacity of the identified Landscape Character Areas to accommodate built development, considering the key findings from Stage 1. The criteria for determining whether an area being assessed under Stage 2 could accommodate built development were: • The impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting; • The impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries; • The relative visibility and prominence of the area, both locally and in the wider landscape; • The relationship between the area and the broader pattern of settlement, open space, access networks and land use; • The potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape; and • The current and potential role of the Forest Habitat Network. Table 2: Summary of Findings of Landscape Capacity for Development (2008 Study) Ref No. Name Summary of Findings 43 Broomhill Farmland The visual prominence and role of this area in providing landscape setting to Edinburgh and the Pentlands results in no landscape capacity for development 44 Burdiehouse Farmland There is limited capacity for residential development on the shallow south east facing slopes above Burdiehouse village, and west of the A701, and also on the north Page 42 of 208
Page 43
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 10 west facing slopes above Burdiehouse Burn, and north of Loanhead 46 Danderhall settled farmland This landscape is largely influenced by the future change which will occur in this area. Parts of the landscape will play a significant role in providing setting and foreground in views to the city from the south or are elevated and development would have significant visual impacts, therefore there is no landscape capacity for development 47 Craigmillar Farmland There is no identified landscape capacity for development. The area has a potentially increasing access and open space role, if existing plans for the areas are finalised and completed. 77 Bush Estate The strong policy structure contains business and research units and residential development would conflict with the existing development pattern. 78 Glencorse This is an intimate rural landscape which comprises one of a series of policy influenced landscapes which surround Penicuik and contributes to the separation between the more developed landscape of Bush Estate and Penicuik, and development within this area would conflict with this role. 79 Glencorse Golf course This landscape provides a continuation of the policy influenced landscapes which surround Penicuik and separation between the settlements of Milton Bridge and Auchendinny 80 Damhead There is limited landscape capacity for development in this landscape in association with Bilston, provided that visual separation between Bilston and Loanhead is maintained. 81 Roslin farmland There is limited landscape capacity for development to the west of Roslin, contained by landform and existing woodland. This is a varied landscape character area, parts of which have an important role in providing setting to Roslin chapel and glen, and in views to the Pentland Hills. 83 Edgefield There is limited capacity to accommodate some development on the eastern edge of Loanhead towards the Wading Burn, and at Page 43 of 208
Page 44
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 11 Melville Mains, although this would conflict with the existing recreational use of the area 85 Melville Nurseries There is limited capacity to accommodate additional business or retail development within this landscape, however residential development would be out of character with this area 86 South Melville There is potential to accommodate development within the southern extent of this area however this would further reduce the physical and perceptual separation between Eskbank and Lasswade. 88 Smeaton farmland There is no landscape capacity for development within this landscape. The corridor between Thornybank and Whitecraig is fragmented by the Dalkeith by- pass and electricity transmission limes and development in this area would further reduce separation between these two areas of settlement, and the more elevated farmed slopes are visually prominent. Page 44 of 208
Page 45
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 12 3. Methodology for MLDP2 Green Belt Review 19. The key purpose of this Green Belt Review is to determine whether the existing (2017) boundary remains appropriate, based on whether there are areas of the Green Belt which no longer contribute to meeting the NPF4 green belt outcomes. It also assesses whether there are areas adjacent to the existing Green Belt which meet green belt outcomes and could therefore be proposed for inclusion. Step 1: Defining the Review Area 20. The whole Green Belt in Midlothian is covered by this review, along with areas around the following settlements – Dalkeith, Danderhall/Shawfair, Bonnyrigg, Loanhead, Roslin, Bilston and Penicuik. These are the settlements in Midlothian within or adjacent to the current Green Belt. Figure 3: Review Area 21. The purpose of assessing each of these areas is to establish the contribution of the land within it to the role and purpose of the Green Belt. This analysis will allow for the identification of those parts of the Green Belt that have an important role in delivering the functions which the green belt is expected to fulfil. It will also indicate areas that may not be so critical in delivering green belt outcomes. Page 45 of 208
Page 46
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 13 22. As explained in NPF4, green belts are a settlement management tool which can be used to restrict development around towns. Given that parts of Midlothian are already within the Edinburgh Green Belt, it is a reasonable step to consider extending the green belt in areas of development pressure if justified. Any extension would need to be assessed against the outcomes of green belt policy (see paragraph 6)and in terms of whether green belt designation is the most appropriate policy tool to address the issues in the particular location. NPF4 requires that green belts be identified or reviewed as part of the preparation of LDPs therefore part of the function of this review is to consider potential extensions. 23. Areas of coalescence pressure were identified Chapter 7 of the MLDP2 Evidence Report (2024). Areas of coalescence pressure which have a relationship with the existing green belt but are not within the existing boundary were incorporated into the Review Area along with additional areas between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell, and along the A702 west of Penicuik. Step 2: Identify Change within the Green Belt since 2017 24. Table 3 summarises the changes in terms of built development since 2017 within the Midlothian part of the Edinburgh Green Belt have been identified. Table 3: Summary of Built Development Changes since 2017 Review Area Landscape Character Area Changes 1.Shawfair- Danderhall Danderhall Settled Farmland Some built development within edge of boundary north and east of Danderhall; permission granted for development west of Newton village and west of Newton Farm. Craigmillar Farmland No change in Midlothian 2. Dalkeith Dalkeith Palace No change Smeaton Farmland No change in Midlothian; S36 BESS consent at edge of boundary in Dalkeith. 3. Dalkeith- Bonnyrigg Melville North Esk Valley No change Melville Nurseries No development of non- conforming uses; permission granted within e32 allocation South Melville No development of non- conforming uses Page 46 of 208
Page 47
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 14 4. Loanhead- Lasswade Burdiehouse Farmland No change in Midlothian Edgefield No development of non- conforming uses Upper North Esk Valley No change 5. Roslin Roslin Farmland No development of non- conforming uses 6. Straiton- Damhead Broomhill Farmland No change in Midlothian Damhead No development of non- conforming uses 7. Penicuik Glencorse No development of non- conforming uses Glencorse Golf Course No change Bush Estate No development of non- conforming uses 8. Pentlands Pentland Heights No change East Pentland Slopes No change Step 3: Desk Based Review Review of Existing Green Belt 25. The existing green belt area has assessed against updated assessment criteria. The Landscape Character Areas used in the 2008 Review were the basis for this. Given that national policy has evolved since the 2008 Review, the assessment criteria have been updated to reflect current policy phrasing in NPF4. 26. The review of existing areas focused on the following questions: • Does retaining the green belt in this location meet the NPF4 criteria? • Does the green belt in this location have appropriate boundaries, include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence, or contain specific land uses? • Is there landscape capacity for development in the area? An example assessment sheet is provided below. Page 47 of 208
Page 48
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 15 Table 2: Example Assessment Sheet for Review of Existing Green Belt Review Area: Landscape Character Area: Notes Does retaining the green belt in this location NPF4 criteria • Direct development to the right locations and prevent unsustainable growth? • Protect and enhance settlement character and identity? • Protect and enhance landscape character? • Protect and enhance natural setting and support Nature Networks • Safeguard land that is being, or has the potential to be, managed to help tackle climate change? Does Area meet NPF4’s green belt policy outcomes? Yes/Mainly/Partly/No In this location, does the green belt… Have appropriate boundaries that can be clearly identified? Include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence? Page 48 of 208
Page 49
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 16 Include any of the following uses: - Existing settlements - Major educational and research uses - Major business and industrial uses - Airports or MoD establishments - Significant areas of brownfield, vacant or derelict land Other considerations (Comments on other possible relevant factors) Is there landscape capacity for development in this area? Impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting, and the broader pattern of development Impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries Relative visibility and prominence of the area in question both locally and in the wider landscape Relationship between the area and open space, access and land use Potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape Should area be identified as green belt? Should changes be made to the green belt the area? Page 49 of 208
Page 50
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 17 Step 4: Assess Potential Additions to the Green Belt 27. The areas of potential extension of the green belt boundary were assessed against the same criteria set out above, and the contribution they could usefully make to the green belt if it were extended in these locations. The four areas assessed for possible inclusion in the green belt are: • Land at Dalhousie Mains/Lothianbridge • Land between Roslin and Auchendinny • Land between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell • Land adjoining A702, west of Penicuik 28. The assessment sheets for the potential additions are provided in Appendix 1. Page 50 of 208
Page 51
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 18 4. Review Findings and Recommendations 29. The findings of the review of existing green belt are summarised below. Table 4: Summary of Findings of Existing Green Belt Area Assessment Name Summary of Findings Broomhill Farmland - Meets all NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Possible changes to boundaries linked to A701 relief road alignment and boundaries of existing allocations Burdiehouse Farmland - Mainly meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Bush Estate - Mainly meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and is adjacent to major educational and research use - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Craigmillar Farmland - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Dalkeith Palace - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - No landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Damhead - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Possible changes to boundaries linked to A701 relief road alignment and boundaries of existing allocations Danderhall settled farmland - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development Page 51 of 208
Page 52
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 19 - Boundaries from 2017 need adjusting around development which has emerged since plan adoption. East Pentland Slopes - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and partly includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - No landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Edgefield - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Potential boundary change around McTaggart Scott planned expansion Glencorse - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Glencorse Golf Course - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - No landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Melville North Esk Valley - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Melville Nurseries - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Pentland Heights - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries - No landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Roslin farmland - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Potential extension south to edge of Auchendinny Smeaton farmland - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries - Limited landscape capacity for development - No boundary changes recommended Page 52 of 208
Page 53
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 20 South Melville - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - No landscape capacity for development - Possible extension south around Dalhousie Mains Upper North Esk Valley - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries - No landscape capacity for development No boundary changes recommended 30. The findings of the green belt additions assessment are summarised in Table 5. The full assessment sheets are provided in Appendix 1. Table 5: Summary of Findings of Green Belt Additions Assessment Name Summary of Findings Land at Dalhousie Mains/ Lothianbridge - The area borders the southern extent of the existing green belt between Bonnyrigg and Eskbank and is wedged in between the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard and recent new/ ongoing housing developments at Dalhousie South. - The landscape character is particularly distinctive due to the location of the Lothianbridge viaduct, a highly visible elevated strong linear feature, which is overlaid over the original parkland, pasture, associated mature parkland trees, and hedgerows surrounding the farmhouse and steading. The wooded riparian corridor of Dalhousie Burn/ River South Esk, stone boundary wall and narrow Carrington Road create a rural and semi-natural setting to the south. - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Recommended area identified as green belt Land between Roslin and Auchendinny - This area is located south of Roslin and the Gowkley Moss roundabout, between the A701 and Roslin Glen. It comprises agricultural land east of the A701, the former Oatslie landfill site and surrounding woodland belts and a small number of scattered rural dwellings and the farm steading of Oatslie Farm, and fields and woodland at the edge of the North Esk river valley. - This area shares many of the characteristics of the North Esk SLA with which it shares its southern boundary, where it adjoints the steep wooded Page 53 of 208
Page 54
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 21 Name Summary of Findings northern banks of the River North Esk. This boundary is also the edge of the Roslin Glen Country Park Local Biodiversity Site, highlighting the importance of this area for biodiversity; with the greenbelt extension providing a nature network connection between this and between the Bush Estate and Glencorse Burn LBS and onwards to the Pentland Hills to the north-west. - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Recommended area identified as green belt Land between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell - This area is located north-east of Rosewell, and south of Bonnyrigg, running from Polton Road West on the boundary with the North Esk SLA, including farmland around Midfield House and Gorton Loan cottage, and then covering land between the B6392 and the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA to the south-west. The southern edge of the proposed extension is defined by woodland designated as semi-natural ancient woodland at Chesters Bog Wood, Galladean Plantation and Young Bog Wood, with the south-easter edge defined by woodland along the Dalhousie Burn riparian corridor and the edge of the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA. - The landscape character of the area shares much of the character of the adjacent Special Landscape Areas; the North Esk SLA to the north-west and the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA to the south-west. The land is characterised by medium scale established arable farmland, tree lined boundaries with roads and the former railway corridor of the Penicuik to Dalkeith Walkway, mature trees at Midfield House (TPO 3 of 1978), native and semi natural ancient woodland at Galladean Plantation and Young Bog Wood, and native riparian woodland along the Dalhousie Burn corridor (a tributary of the South Esk). The landscape character area provides relief and contrast from residential land and sites under development at Hopefield and Dalhousie Chesters, to the north of the B6392 which forms an extension to the edge of Bonnyrigg. - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes Page 54 of 208
Page 55
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 22 Name Summary of Findings - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Recommended area identified as green belt Land adjoining the A702, west of Penicuik - This area is located west of Penicuik, between the A702 near Lawhead Hill and new/ emerging housing development on the north-western settlement edge of Penicuik. It comprises agricultural land east of the A702, and is bound by significant woodland belts, with a limited number of rural dwellings located on its edge along the A702 and at the junction with Mauricewood Road. The area borders the southern extent of the existing green belt at near Mauricewood Road and eastern extent of the Pentland Hills Regional Park. - The northern boundary of the proposed extension lies adjacent to the Pentland Hills Regional Park and SLA and is widely visible both from the many visually sensitive elevated viewpoints within the Regional Park, and when travelling along the A702 at the foot of the Pentland Hill slopes. From these locations views of recent development land around Mauricewood are generally screened by significant mature, native semi-natural ancient woodlands, however land proposed in this greenbelt extension is poorly screened by comparison, as is the limited amount of earlier residential development at Mauricewood Steadings. - Meets NPF4 policy outcomes - Has appropriate boundaries and includes land important to avoiding settlement coalescence - Limited landscape capacity for development - Recommended area identified as green belt Recommendations 31. The following recommendations are made relating to the Midlothian green belt: Recommendation 1: Retain the Green Belt as a spatial management tool, with boundary adjustments where required. Recommendation 2: Make minor adjustments to the green belt boundary at Straiton (around Ec3 and new Aldi supermarket) and Bilston (to remove Hs16 Safeguard Capacity) Page 55 of 208
Page 56
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 23 Recommendation 3: Adjust green belt boundaries around Danderhall and Shawfair to reflect planning permissions which have been granted. Recommendation 4: Adjust green belt boundaries to east of Loanhead to accommodate growth of McTaggart Scott (boundary to be confirmed). Recommendation 5: Extend green belt to include land at Dalhousie Mains/Lothianbridge. Page 56 of 208
Page 57
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 24 Recommendation 6: Extend green belt to include land between Roslin and Auchendinny. Page 57 of 208
Page 58
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 25 Recommendation 7: Extend green belt to include land between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell. Page 58 of 208
Page 59
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 26 Recommendation 8: Extend green belt to include land adjoining the A702, west of Penicuik. Page 59 of 208
Page 60
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 27 Appendix 1: Potential Green Belt Additions Assessment Sheets Potential Green Belt Addition: Land at Dalhousie Mains / Lothianbridge Description This area is located east of Bonnyrigg, within a broad triangle of land between the A7 and the B6392. It comprises part of the historic Newbattle Viaduct and vegetation covered embankments of the Borders Railway line, as well as agricultural (grazing) land surrounding Dalhousie Mains farmhouse and steading. The area borders the southern extent of the existing green belt between Bonnyrigg and Eskbank (LCA 86 South Melville) and is wedged in between the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard and recent new/ ongoing housing developments on the Bonnyrigg settlement edge at Dalhousie South (Hs11). The proposed greenbelt extension area contains and forms the setting for a number of listed buildings and structures, including part of the listed Lothianbridge, Newbattle Viaduct, the B listed Dalhousie Mains, Farmhouse and Steading (including gatepiers and boundary walls), and C listed farm cottages. The landscape character is particularly distinctive due to the location of the Lothianbridge viaduct, a highly visible elevated strong linear feature, which is overlaid over the original parkland, pasture, associated mature parkland trees, and hedgerows surrounding the farmhouse and steading. The wooded riparian corridor of Dalhousie Burn/ River South Esk, stone boundary wall and narrow Carrington Road create a rural and semi-natural setting to the south. The Local Biodiversity Site of Newbattle Woods LBS lies to the east of the A7, with the River South Esk-Dalhousie to Lothian Bridge LBS, and the Dalhousie Burn LBS located immediately to the south. Page 60 of 208
Page 61
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 28 Does extending the green belt in this location Notes NPF4 criteria Direct development to the right locations and prevent unsustainable growth? Yes, this area is important in directing development towards more suitable locations that do not result in settlement coalescence and loss of rural character Protect and enhance settlement character and identity? Yes, this area is of importance locally to the setting of several listed buildings and within the wider historic context of Newbattle Abbey Estate and railway viaduct. Protect and enhance landscape character? Yes, it would safeguard an area of distinct landscape character with significant landscape features including native woodland, historic parkland with Page 61 of 208
Page 62
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 29 mature trees, stone walls and hedgerows Protect and enhance natural setting and/or support Nature Networks The area comprises an important green corridor that contributes to nature networks, linking to the Dalhousie Burn/ River South Esk Corridor and local biodiversity sites. Safeguarding and enhancement of this function is important in order to address the nature crisis. Safeguard land that is being, or has the potential to be, managed to help tackle climate change? Potential, particularly as surrounded on two sides by urban development and with the A7 and railway running through it. The proposed greenbelt extension is located in close proximity to the Dalhousie Burn and River South Esk riparian corridor, so its allocation would have importance in reducing flood risk and development pressure on rivers corridors and could offer potential for tree and woodland canopy increases which would have climate and nature benefits. Does proposed additional area meet NPF4’s green belt policy outcomes? Yes In this location, does the proposed additional green belt area Have appropriate boundaries with clearly identifiable visual boundary markers? Yes, some reinforcement may be beneficial Include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence? Yes, in an area of high coalescence pressure Include any of the following uses: • Existing settlements • Major educational and research uses • Major business and industrial uses • Airports or MoD establishments No Page 62 of 208
Page 63
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 30 • Significant areas of brownfield, vacant or derelict land Other considerations Recent review of the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard recommends extension of NSGS designation across this area Is there landscape capacity for development in this area? Impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting, and the broader pattern of development Development in this area would have a significant impact on local landscape character, historic landscape features and the setting of listed buildings Impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries Recent and ongoing development has seen significant settlement expansion in adjoining areas. Development in this area would potentially be detrimental to the setting of existing listed buildings and have an adverse impact on existing boundary features incl. walls, hedgerows and mature trees. Relative visibility and prominence of the area in question both locally and in the wider landscape Partial visibility into the area from the A7 and Carrington Road and from the Borders Rail line on the railway viaduct. Railway embankment and local landform locally restrict views into the area. Relationship between the area and open space, access and land use Other Path 4-46 passes through this area. Native woodland and parkland with mature trees is important in terms of greenspace and green network connectivity. Some open space is being created under pylons to south-west as part of adjacent residential development on the Page 63 of 208
Page 64
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 31 south-west boundary, on what was formerly arable Potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape Existing woodland, mature trees and hedgerows would provide localised screening and containment but would likely be adversely affected by development Recommend area be identified as green belt? Yes Page 64 of 208
Page 65
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 32 Potential Green Belt Addition: Land between Roslin and Auchendinny Description This area is located south of Roslin and the Gowkley Moss roundabout, between the A701 and Roslin Glen. It comprises agricultural land east of the A701, the former Oatslie landfill site and surrounding woodland belts and a small number of scattered rural dwellings and the farm steading of Oatslie Farm, and fields and woodland at the edge of the North Esk river valley. The proposed extension area borders the southern extent of the existing green belt at Roslin (LCA 81 Roslin Farmland) and eastern extent of the green belt at the Bush Estate (LCA 77) and Glencorse golf course (LCA 79). The south-western extent of the area adjoins the new housing development currently under construction at Auchendinny (Hs20). The south-eastern edge of this proposed extension follows the western boundary of the North Esk SLA. This area shares many of the characteristics of the North Esk SLA with which it shares its southern boundary, where it adjoints the steep wooded northern banks of the River North Esk. This boundary is also the edge of the Roslin Glen Country Park Local Biodiversity Site, highlighting the importance of this area for biodiversity; with the greenbelt extension providing a nature network connection between this and between the Bush Estate and Glencorse Burn LBS and onwards to the Pentland Hills to the north-west. Page 65 of 208
Page 66
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 33 Does extending the green belt in this location Notes NPF4 criteria Direct development to the right locations and prevent unsustainable growth? Yes, this area is important in directing development towards more suitable locations that do not result in settlement coalescence and loss of rural character Protect and enhance settlement character and identity? Yes, the area is of importance locally to the rural setting of both Roslin and Auchendinny Protect and enhance landscape character? Yes, it would safeguard an area of rural landscape character with locally significant landscape features including woodland belts, hedgerows, boundary trees and agricultural land (Class 3.1) Page 66 of 208
Page 67
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 34 Protect and enhance natural setting and/or support Nature Networks The area makes an important contribution to nature networks and supports habitat connectivity between surrounding LBS sites incl. the Bush Estate, Roslin Glen and Roslin Moat. Safeguarding and enhancement of this function is vital to address the nature crisis. Safeguard land that is being, or has the potential to be, managed to help tackle climate change? Potentially, particularly as it comprises Prime Agricultural Land and a former landfill site. Protection from development will also address climate related flood risk along the River North Esk and provides opportunities for expanding tree and woodland canopy cover. Does proposed additional area meet NPF4’s green belt policy outcomes? Yes In this location, does the proposed additional green belt area Have appropriate boundaries with clearly identifiable visual boundary markers? Yes, mostly comprising roads and boundary vegetation. Some reinforcement may be beneficial Include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence? Yes, in an area of high coalescence pressure Include any of the following uses: • Existing settlements • Major educational and research uses • Major business and industrial uses • Airports or MoD establishments • Significant areas of brownfield, vacant or derelict land Former landfill site Other considerations Is there landscape capacity for development in this area? Impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting, and the broader pattern of development Development in this area would result in coalescence have a significant impact on local Page 67 of 208
Page 68
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 35 landscape character, local biodiversity and nature network connections. Impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries Recent and ongoing development has seen significant settlement expansion in both Roslin and Auchendinny. This has resulted in loss of boundary vegetation and pressures on remaining woodland Relative visibility and prominence of the area in question both locally and in the wider landscape The area is prominently visible from the surrounding road network, including the A701, B7003 Penicuik Road and Oatslie Road Relationship between the area and open space, access and land use The area comprises Prime Agricultural Land and adjoining roads are used by walkers and cyclists: The North Esk Cycle Loop extends south and east of the area, along Oatslie Road and is intended to connect with emerging path links within the Auchendinny housing site Potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape Existing woodland, mature trees and hedgerows provide localised screening and containment but would likely be adversely affected by development Recommend area to be identified as green belt? Yes Page 68 of 208
Page 69
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 36 Potential Green Belt Addition: Land between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell Description This area is located north-east of Rosewell, and south of Bonnyrigg, running from Polton Road West on the boundary with the North Esk SLA, including farmland around Midfield House and Gorton Loan cottage, and then covering land between the B6392 and the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA to the south-west. The southern edge of the proposed extension is defined by woodland designated as semi-natural ancient woodland at Chesters Bog Wood, Galladean Plantation and Young Bog Wood, with the south-easter edge defined by woodland along the Dalhousie Burn riparian corridor and the edge of the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA. The landscape character of the area shares much of the character of the adjacent Special Landscape Areas; the North Esk SLA to the north-west and the South Esk and Carrington Farmland SLA to the south-west. The land is characterised by medium scale established arable farmland, tree lined boundaries with roads and the former railway corridor of the Penicuik to Dalkeith Walkway, mature trees at Midfield House (TPO 3 of 1978), native and semi natural ancient woodland at Galladean Plantation and Young Bog Wood, and native riparian woodland along the Dalhousie Burn corridor (a tributary of the South Esk). The landscape character area provides relief and contrast from residential land and sites under development at Hopefield and Dalhousie Chesters, to the north of the B6392 which forms an extension to the edge of Bonnyrigg. Page 69 of 208
Page 70
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 37 Page 70 of 208
Page 71
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 38 Does extending the green belt in this location Notes NPF4 criteria Direct development to the right locations and prevent unsustainable growth? Yes, this area is important in directing development towards more suitable locations that do not result in settlement coalescence between Rosewell and Bonnyrigg and loss of rural character Protect and enhance settlement character and identity? Yes, the proposed extension protects the settlement character of Rosewell and Bonnyrigg, which at the narrowest point are now less than 300metres away from each other Protect and enhance landscape character? Yes, it would safeguard an area of rural landscape character in close proximity to areas of extensive recent urban expansion at Bonnyrigg and the northern edge of Rosewell. Protect and enhance natural setting and/or support Nature Networks The proposed greenbelt would protect and provide opportunities to enhance existing nature network connections between the existing wooded riparian corridors of the North Esk to the north and the Dalhousie Burn and South Esk corridors to the south and east, and protect and enhance the setting of the Penicuik to Dalkeith Walkway which is highly valued for its rural and semi natural setting, its biodiversity and amenity value, for those walking, cycling, wheeling and riding. Page 71 of 208
Page 72
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 39 Safeguard land that is being, or has the potential to be, managed to help tackle climate change? The proximity of this land to watercourses means that the protection of this land from development will be important to manage impacts of climate change such as flood risk. The land also has capacity to increase tree and woodland canopy cover. Does proposed additional area meet NPF4’s green belt policy outcomes? Yes In this location, does the proposed additional green belt area Have appropriate boundaries with clearly identifiable visual boundary markers? Yes. The boundaries are defined in the north by a 30m offset from existing woodland mapped as semi natural ancient woodland at Midfield House, with other boundaries comprised by mapped core paths, mostly comprising roads and boundary vegetation. Some reinforcement may be beneficial Include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence? Yes, the land included would prevent coalescence between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell which have distinctive local identities. Rosewell retains the identity of a rural village whilst Bonnyrigg now has a more suburban character. The allocation would also provide opportunities to strengthen boundaries through structure planting along key road and walkway and core path corridors. Include any of the following uses: • Existing settlements • Major educational and research uses • Major business and industrial uses • Airports or MoD establishments No with the exception of the access road to Dalhousie Quarry (see below) Page 72 of 208
Page 73
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 40 • Significant areas of brownfield, vacant or derelict land Other considerations Continued access to the Dalhousie Quarry to the south of the proposed greenbelt area would be required via the existing access road; which passes through proposed area, from the B6392 to the quarry to the south, via Galladean Plantation. Is there landscape capacity for development in this area? Impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting, and the broader pattern of development Development in this area would result in coalescence between Bonnyrigg and Rosewell and would have a significant impact on local landscape character, local biodiversity and nature network connections. Impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries The creation of this additional area of greenbelt extension would create a strong boundary at the A6094 and B6392 restricting development from crossing the road boundary and encroaching further south. Relative visibility and prominence of the area in question both locally and in the wider landscape The proposed areas are open to views from the B6392 and A6064 road corridor, with some views from the Penicuik Dalkeith Walkway. The area is also visible from the northern edge of Rosewell Relationship between the area and open space, access and land use The Penicuik Dalkeith Walkway (National Cycle Network route 196)is a popular key green network connection across the proposed greenspace extension, linking into a network of core paths and local access Page 73 of 208
Page 74
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 41 routes and tracks providing traffic free routes locally and longer distance. These routes are popular and well used. Potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape The land offers the potential to create stronger structural landscape framework around Bonnyrigg and Rosewell, creating a clear distinction between them and enhancing their unique identities, whilst also enhancing and protect native and semi natural ancient woodland and the protected trees, with opportunities for increasing canopy cover. Recommend area to be identified as green belt? Yes Page 74 of 208
Page 75
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 42 Potential Green Belt Addition: Land adjoining the A702, west of Penicuik Description This area is located west of Penicuik, between the A702 near Lawhead Hill and new/ emerging housing development on the north-western settlement edge of Penicuik (part of allocation h58). It comprises agricultural land east of the A702, and is bound by significant woodland belts, with a limited number of rural dwellings located on its edge along the A702 and at the junction with Mauricewood Road. The area borders the southern extent of the existing green belt at near Mauricewood Road (LCA 78 Glencorse) and eastern extent of the Pentland Hills Regional Park. The eastern extent of the area adjoins the emerging housing developments at Carnethy Heights and Belwood Oaks. The northern boundary of the proposed extension lies adjacent to the Pentland Hills Regional Park and SLA and is widely visible both from the many visually sensitive elevated viewpoints within the Regional Park, and when travelling along the A702 at the foot of the Pentland Hill slopes. From these locations views of recent development land around Mauricewood are generally screened by significant mature, native semi- natural ancient woodlands (including TPO 3 of 2000), however land proposed in this greenbelt extension is poorly screened by comparison, as is the limited amount of earlier residential development at Mauricewood Steadings, which lies to the south of the B listed stone built Martyrs Cross House at the junction between Mauricewood Road and the A702. Page 75 of 208
Page 76
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 43 Does extending the green belt in this location Notes NPF4 criteria Direct development to the right locations and prevent unsustainable growth? Yes, this area is important in directing development towards more suitable locations that do not result in loss of rural character Protect and enhance settlement character and identity? Yes, the area is of importance locally to the rural setting of both Penicuik and the Pentland Hills SLA and Regional Park Protect and enhance landscape character? Yes, it would safeguard an area of rural landscape character with locally significant landscape features including woodland belts, mature boundary trees and agricultural land Protect and enhance natural setting and/or support Nature Networks? The area makes an important contribution to nature networks Page 76 of 208
Page 77
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 44 and supports habitat connectivity between surrounding ancient and native woodland. Safeguarding and enhancement of this function is important in addressing the nature crisis. Safeguard land that is being, or has the potential to be, managed to help tackle climate change? Potentially, particularly as it comprises agricultural land and significant areas of woodland, and Does proposed additional area meet NPF4’s green belt policy outcomes? Yes In this location, does the proposed additional green belt area Have appropriate boundaries with clearly identifiable visual boundary markers? Are the current green belt boundaries appropriate and robust for the long term with identifiable visual boundary markers? Yes, mostly comprising roads and woodland belts Include land important to avoiding settlement coalescence? Yes, in an area of significant change to the settlement edge with increasing proximity to the Pentland Hills Regional Park Include any of the following uses: • Existing settlements • Major educational and research uses • Major business and industrial uses • Airports or MoD establishments • Significant areas of brownfield, vacant or derelict land No Other considerations Setting of Pentland Hills, Historic Battlefield at Rullion Green and nearby SAMs Is there landscape capacity for development in this area? Impact of development on the local and wider landscape character and setting, and the broader pattern of development Development in this area would have a significant impact on local landscape character and the wider rural setting of the Pentland Hills Page 77 of 208
Page 78
MLDP2 Green Belt Review 2025 45 Impact of development on existing settlement form and boundaries Recent and ongoing development has seen significant settlement expansion in adjoining areas. This has resulted in loss of boundary vegetation and pressures on remaining woodland Relative visibility and prominence of the area in question both locally and in the wider landscape The area is prominently visible from the A702, Lowrie’s Den Road and parts of the path network within the Pentland Hills Regional Park Relationship between the area and open space, access and land use The area is notably visible from eastern parts of the Pentland Hills that are well used for outdoor access and recreation. The adjoining woodland belts have a screening function in views towards existing development in Penicuik, whilst maintaining the rural foreground of views towards more distant horizons Potential role of existing or additional landscape features in integrating development within the local and wider landscape Existing woodland belts would provide localised screening and containment but would likely be adversely affected by development Recommend area to be identified as green belt? Yes Page 78 of 208
Page 79
N © Crown copyright and database right (2025). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence Number AC0000811376. Midlothian Boundary Proposed LDP2 Green Belt Extensions Existing Green Belt (LDP Policy ENV1) Existing Green Belt Boundary Changes - Proposed Alteration Existing Green Belt Boundary Changes - Proposed Removal Page 79 of 208
Page 80
1 NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 Introduc�on ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Purpose of the Newbatle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard............................................................. 2 NSGS Assessment: Approach ............................................................................................................. 3 Landscape Characteris�cs and Value ................................................................................................ 3 Conclusions and Recommenda�ons .................................................................................................. 8 APPENDIX 1: Newbatle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard: Landscape Assessment ...................... 10 Appendix B Page 80 of 208
Page 81
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 2 Introduction 1. The Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard (NSGS) is a key part of the overall Midlothian Green Network and was first designated through the adoption of MLDP 2017, in November 2017. 2. The aim of the NSGS is to give long-term protection to areas of countryside between the South Esk communities of Dalkeith, Eskbank, Bonnyrigg, Easthouses and Newtongrange, which were under pressure from development at the time of its creation. 3. The next Local Development Plan for Midlothian (MLDP2) is currently being prepared. Once adopted, this will shape the development and land use in the council area for 10 years from 2027-2037. 4. It is within this context that this assessment of the NSGS was undertaken. The aim of this assessment was to provide a review from a landscape perspective and determine whether: • The NSGS continues to fulfil its original purpose; • Any changes are required to its boundaries – i.e. extensions and/or reductions; and • Whether the NSGS designation or any amended version should continue in MLDP2. Purpose of the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard 5. The purpose of the NSGS is set out in MLDP 2017 section 5.1.12, namely to: • Give long-term protection to areas of countryside which remain as a 'green lung' between the South Esk communities of Dalkeith, Eskbank, Bonnyrigg, Easthouses and Newtongrange; and • Resist development pressures in this area, to help maintain individual community identities and provide for countryside activities on the doorstep of these expanding communities. 6. MLDP 2017 states that current land uses will be maintained in the short to medium term but, in the longer term, the intention is to seek a means of creating a new Country Park for the benefit of all Midlothian's residents and visitors as part of the Midlothian Green Network. 7. Protection for the strategic greenspace safeguard designation is set out in MLDP 2017 Policy ENV 3 Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard: “Development will not be permitted within the safeguarded Newbattle Strategic Greenspace, as delineated on the Proposals Map, with the exception of ancillary development relevant to existing uses; and/ or other development for the furtherance of agriculture (including farm- related diversification), horticulture, forestry, countryside recreation or tourism. Any proposals should accord with Policy RD1.” [Note: Policy RD1 is Development in the Countryside]. Page 81 of 208
Page 82
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 3 NSGS Assessment: Approach 8. The primary aim of this assessment was to review the current condition of the NSGS and the extent to which its original purpose (see paragraph 5) remains valid. 9. The first main step in achieving this was to establish key landscape characteristics that are central to the Safeguard, and identify designations that highlight features of particular landscape, habitat and cultural heritage value within it (Section 4 of this report). This was informed by a combination of desk study and an initial site visit (see Landscape Assessment record sheet enclosed at the end of this report). 10. The second step involved examining where development has occurred, is emerging or has the potential to result in future pressure on the remaining countryside (‘green lung’) within the Safeguard. In doing so, consideration was given to sites proposed as part of the recent ‘Call for Sites’ for MLDP2 (these are not in the public domain and are therefore not formally identified here). 11. Site visits were undertaken in November and December 2024 to inform this part of the assessment and identify areas/ features within the NSGS that make a particularly strong contribution to its original purpose and where there are potential vulnerabilities. 12. The findings are presented in the final section of this report. Landscape Characteristics and Value 13. The NSGS covers land lying either side of the River South Esk, covering a strategic area of high landscape amenity and biodiversity value within the wider green-blue network. The wider green-blue network is referred to as the Midlothian Green Network in MLDP 2017. 14. The current NSGS covers an area of 284 hectares which falls within the Lowland River Valleys-Lothians Landscape Character Area (SNH 2019). Land within the Safeguard comprises the valley of the River South Esk and Dalhousie Burn, large areas of woodland in its central core, especially on the banks and slopes of the River South Esk (including semi- natural ancient woodland such as Lord Ancrum’s Wood), agricultural land in the form of arable fields with associated hedgerows and hedgerow trees, and recreational open space including Waterfall Park and Newbattle Golf Course in the north. 15. The Safeguard contributes to the character and setting of adjoining areas of settlement and plays an important role in maintaining local identity – particularly where significant growth and development is taking place (as is currently the case between Easthouses/ Newtongrange, and at Dalhousie South). Page 82 of 208
Page 83
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 4 Key Landscape Characteristics 16. The Safeguard area possesses many of the features that are described as distinctive to the Lowland Valleys-Lothians landscape character area, and site visits carried out for this assessment confirmed that these characteristics still accurately describe the predominant landscape character of the Safeguard: • Meandering rivers and tributary streams flowing northward from the hills. • Predominantly incised river valleys, enclosed and often narrow, though with landform ranging from sections of broader floodplain to narrow gorges. • Well-wooded with extensive deciduous riparian woodland, and mature mixed policy woodlands associated with the numerous estates. • Scrub and pasture within open areas of valley sides, giving way to arable land with shelterbelts on upper slopes and fringes. • Large number of significant historic buildings, including vernacular cottages, 18th and 18th Century farmsteads, churches (often with highly visible spires), industrial architecture, castles and towerhouses. Large country houses, often with extensive designed landscapes. • Remnants of the coal mining industry are evident around the North and South Esk, where rolling farmland, settlement, transport infrastructure, light industry and business uses, also illustrate the diversity of land uses. • Views are generally contained by enclosed topography and dense woodland, opening out on the farmed and settled upper slopes which give longer distance views to the Pentland Hills to the west. Many valleys are rural and tranquil, whilst quiet and secluded locations occur within all the valleys. (extract: SNH Landscape Character Assessment LCT270 Lowland River Valleys- Lothians) Page 83 of 208
Page 84
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 5 Newbattle Abbey GDL 17. The majority of the land within the NSGS is an integral part of Newbattle Abbey Garden and Designed Landscape (Ref GDL00295; Historic Environment Scotland), which is recorded as being of “outstanding” historical, architectural and archaeological interest and as having some artistic, horticultural, scenic and nature conservation interest. 18. The designed landscape is described as follows in the HES site summary: ‘This multi-period landscape was an early monastic site developed as a country house at the Reformation, set within a formal landscape from the mid-16th century. This formed the basis of an 18th century landscape park, extended further in the 19th century, and developed with formal gardens, an extensive circuit of picturesque walks and rides.’ (extract: Summary GDL00295 Newbattle Abbey NEWBATTLE ABBEY (GDL00295)) 19. The Category A Listed Newbattle Abbey itself and grounds (now comprising Newbattle Abbey College, grounds and light industrial units) are wrapped around by the NSGS but are not included within it, yet the landscape character of the Safeguard is in many places similar to, and in keeping with these core parts of the GDL, and shares many of the landscape features described in the GDL statement, which states that “The designed and estate landscape is a major influence on the rural landscape and its settlement character.” 20. Key features of the Designed Landscape that are characteristic within the NSGS include: • Gently undulating parkland with some surviving mature parkland trees; • Mid 18th century predominantly broadleaf woodland plantings delineating the original parkland and field boundaries; • Established network of paths and picturesque walks along the wooded banks of the South Esk and its tributaries; • Localised, long-distance views across undulating farmland, connecting to the Pentland Hills; • Notable historic and listed buildings and structures including The Old Sun Inn (B listed), Newbattle Abbey Policies, Newbattle Road (B listed), The King’s Gate (B listed), Dalhousie Mains Farmhouse and Steading (B Listed); • The safeguard also includes the historic Lothianbridge viaduct (B listed), re-opened in 2015 as part of the Borders Rail Line, which forms a significant and characteristic architectural feature overlaid onto the original GDL landscape. Relevant Designations 21. The boundaries of the NSGS largely coincides with the Newbattle Conservation Area (northern part of the Safeguard) and the northern part of the Dalhousie and Cockpen Conservation Area (southern extent of the safeguard). 22. The Safeguard incorporates two individual Tree Preservation Orders including TPO 1 of 2004, which covers a large area of woodland along the course of the Dalhousie Burn. 23. The high biodiversity value of the Safeguard is highlighted by the presence of three Local Biodiversity Sites (LBS): Dalhousie Burn LBS, Newbattle Woods LBS and River South Esk – Dalhousie Bridge to Lothian Bridge LBS. These sites support numerous protected species and diverse habitat, including: • Watercourses; • Ancient and long-established woodlands; • Wooded valley with scrub; • Diverse woodland flora; Page 84 of 208
Page 85
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 6 • Unimproved neutral grassland; • Mixed plantation; and • Semi-natural broadleaved woodland. 24. The riparian and woodland habitats within the LBS areas are a core landscape characteristic of the NSGS as a whole and support strategic green-blue network connections along the course of the River South Esk. 25. An extensive path network provides access throughout the NSGS; extending along the River South Esk, through woodlands and along settlements via a number of Core Paths, Other paths and Quiet road links. Existing Strengths, Pressures and Vulnerabilities 26. The following section highlights features that make a particularly strong contribution to the NSGS and its original purpose, based on observations from site visits and desk study. A full landscape assessment record sheet is provided in Appendix 1. This section goes on to describe the impact that recent and ongoing development is having on some of these features, and where there are vulnerabilities given current and emerging/ perceived pressures on the Safeguard. Strengths of the Safeguard 27. The extent and interplay of (ancient) woodlands, river valleys, open fields, hedgerows and mature trees within the NSGS are invaluable as parts of the wider green-blue network across Midlothian and combine to create a locally distinct setting that contributes to the identity of the surrounding communities. In doing so, it clearly fulfils its original purpose. 28. The watercourses and woodlands (much of it native and/ or ancient semi natural) in particular, support diverse habitat for wildlife and are accessible via an extensive and well- used local path network. The woodlands frequently frame views across open fields and remaining parklands (some now in use as part of golf course) within the Safeguard and provide a strong backdrop to the adjoining settlements. 29. The agricultural fields in the Safeguard (mostly of medium scale) tell the story of historic cultivation on drier lands above the river valleys and also form important elements in terms of landscape structure and character; and occasionally allow more distant, picturesque views across the wider area and towards more distant horizons (such as those outlined by the Pentland Hills, as seen from the Safeguard on the edge of Newtongrange). 30. Finally, numerous hedgerows and mature boundary and parkland trees make a strong contribution in terms of local landscape character and are valuable features both in terms of supporting biodiversity and as habitat for wildlife. Settlement Expansion 31. Recent and ongoing development of allocated sites has taken place in the period since the NSGS was put in place in 2017. Notable areas of change include: • Housing development Newmills Road, Dalkeith, adjacent to the northern boundary of the Safeguard; • Housing development at Cockpen, Newtongrange (Kingsfield Drive); Page 85 of 208
Page 86
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 7 • Housing development and educational campus adjoining the eastern boundary of the Safeguard (west of Morris Road, Newtongrange/ Easthouses Road, former Newbattle Community High School site); and • Major housing development at Dalhousie South, adjoining the western boundary of the Safeguard (east of B6392, Bonnyrigg). 32. The extent and relative density of development immediately adjacent to the NSGS, in comparison to the retained open rural land within, clearly demonstrate that the Safeguard was both necessary and has been effective. 33. Whilst in some instances new development has sought to limit its influence on landscape character and resources within the NSGS by providing a landscape buffer between new built features and the Safeguard (such as at Burn Grange Park, which has located the SuDs basin and open space immediately adjacent), there are already cases where development and related infrastructure (e.g. tarmac access roads, pathways, lighting and parking) occur immediately adjacent to the boundary of the Safeguard – resulting in adverse effects on landscape features and habitat, and causing localised disturbance to wildlife. 34. Lack of offset from mature trees and woodland within the Safeguard has led to excessive overshadowing/ overhanging of properties (garden ground in particular) in a number of places; resulting in pressure for tree removals (as has been observed at the woodland edge of Queen Margaret’s Gate and Kippielaw Road). 35. In some areas it is also evident that recent development activities and increased human activity have had an adverse impact: for example, evidence of vandalism and arson within ancient woodland at Lord Ancrum’s wood; built form and lighting impacting on the setting of the core path and Safeguard west of Morris Road; and other activities around Lothianbridge including tree felling, earthworks, dumping and burning of material. Pressures for Change/ Future Growth 36. A number of proposed development sites have come forward following the ‘Call for Ideas and Opportunities’ for MLDP2. These may or may not be allocated in the forthcoming LDP. However, they signal further pressure for development at the boundaries of the NSGS, and notably on agricultural land within it – with potentially significant implications for the landscape character and resources in these areas. This further highlights the importance of the Safeguard and its role in resisting development where existing settlement boundaries are potentially less robust. 37. In many instances the Safeguard follows a strong and clear boundary (often sharing boundaries with the Newbattle GDL and the two local Conservation Areas), and comprising features such as woodlands, hedgerows and/ or boundary trees. However, there are other areas where its boundaries are less clearly defined and where there is little buffer between the settlement boundary and the adjoining rural land in the Safeguard (such as at Galadale Crescent and Gardiner Place, Newtongrange where parts of the settlement edge are marked only by garden walls and fencing abutting agricultural fields). It is in these locations, that pressure for future growth is most likely to occur. 38. Rationalisations in farming and land use practices are also contributing to pressure for change within the Safeguard; for example where smaller parcels of land may no longer be viable or profitable for farming, and where farm buildings have become disused. Page 86 of 208
Page 87
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 8 Conclusions and Recommendations 39. This assessment found that within the context of surrounding settlement expansion, the Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard has proven to be both necessary and effective in safeguarding the areas of countryside at its heart. Fulfilling the Safeguard’s original purpose 40. The rural resources within the Safeguard remain key to local character and amenity and, in terms of the original purpose of the NSGS, are increasingly important in: • Avoiding settlement coalescence; • Maintaining individual community identity; and • Supporting opportunities for countryside access and activities for the expanding communities surrounding the Safeguard. Expanding the Purpose underpinning the Safeguard 41. Against the policy background of NPF4 and the ongoing climate and nature crises, it is even more essential that the landscape resources and soils within the Safeguard should be protected. It is therefore advised that the NSGS is carried forward in MLDP2, expanding its underpinning purpose to cover key ecosystem services including those that support: • Climate and flood resilience; • Biodiversity and habitat for wildlife, promoting opportunities to enhance connectivity with surrounding Green Blue and nature networks; • Carbon storage, through the perpetuation and expansion of tree and woodland canopy; • The protection of soils as a valuable resource and carbon sink (notably farmland and forest soils); and • Cultural aspects that contribute to a distinct sense of place, such as landscape character, historic landscape patterns and setting, and identity of designed landscapes. Strengthening the Safeguard 42. To further strengthen the NSGS and protect the landscape character and resources within it, the following should be considered: Recommendation 1: A 30m buffer should be applied to areas of ancient woodland within and adjacent to the Safeguard, to avoid potential adverse effects of any adjoining development on trees, roots and soils; and minimise disturbance of wildlife and woodland habitat. Recommendation 2: A 15m buffer should be applied to all other areas of woodland within the Safeguard, to avoid potential adverse effects of any adjoining development on trees, roots and soils; and minimise disturbance of wildlife and woodland habitat. Recommendation 3: Extend the boundaries of the Safeguard at Lothianbridge, to include the eastern banks of the River South Esk, the grounds of Craigesk House and Esk House, land between the Lothianbridge Caravan Park and the river, and land between the Lothianbridge viaduct and the A7, to include the LBS and to safeguard the landscape setting of the river, viaduct and listed and historic buildings. Page 87 of 208
Page 88
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 9 Recommendation 4: Extend the boundaries of the Safeguard north of Newtongrange to follow the boundaries of the designed landscape around Newtongrange Star Football Ground and Social Club, covering the entire area of woodland within Lady Lothian’s Plantation. Recommendation 5: Any proposed new development site adjoining the NSGS should incorporate a landscape buffer of min. 15m width (or arborist-recommended Construction Exclusion Zone, whichever is the greater) at the interface with the Safeguard. Page 88 of 208
Page 89
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 10 APPENDIX 1: Newbattle Strategic Greenspace Safeguard: Landscape Assessment Assessor(s): EM, BM Date: 04.12.2024 Landscape Character Landform/ topography (steeply sloping, convex, concave, flat, irregular, distinctive or featureless) Generally gently sloping, occasionally more steep towards the course of the River South Esk (e.g at Catholes Wood) and along course of the Dalhousie Burn. Scale and enclosure (small/ large scale, managed/ unmanaged field boundaries, hedgerows, stone walls) Medium to small scale rural fields and parklands, frequently bound by woodlands, hedgerows (both managed and unmanaged) and boundary trees, localised stone walls. Land use and landcover (pasture, arable fields, pastoral fields, brownfield) Woodland, farmland (mostly arable, some grazing fields), golf course, public park. Main human influences (roads, built form, overhead lines) A number of key routes pass through and along the Safeguard, including the B703 (northern part of the Safeguard), A7 and Borders railway line (central), and the B704 (southern extent). Built features limited to historic and rural properties, and residential development at Newbattle Abbey Crescent. Farming and recreational activity (Newbattle Golf Club and Waterfall Park). Landscape features on site: woodland, shelter belts, trees, hedgerows, plantation forest (form, pattern, locally characteristic species, age/ condition, TPO Potential TEMPO) Significant areas of ancient, semi-natural and native woodland are present along the South Esk valley and associated watercourses and frame remaining parkland. Numerous hedgerows and mature boundary/ parkland trees mark farmland boundaries. Existing green network features within the local setting (woodlands, shelter belts, river valleys) Wooded river/ burn valleys, shelterbelts and hedgerows adjoining the Safeguard support green network connectivity to the wider surrounding landscape. Path network links (core paths, local routes) A number of Core Paths and Other Paths extend along the watercourses and through woodland within the Safeguard: Core Paths 4-44, 4-48, 4-47 and 8-1 along the River South Esk, Core Path 4-39 through Benbught Wood, Core Path 4-50 through woodland between Newbattle and Eskbank, Core Path 5-12 at Campbell Park; Other path 4-42 Lord Ancrum’s Wood and Waterfall Park, and Other path 4-40 at Dalhousie Mains. Potential for tree loss on the site (e.g. loss of individual trees, woodland, shelter belts or commercial forestry to accommodate access, built features or underground services) Indirect tree loss due to pressure on woodland and individual trees within the Safeguard as a result of adjoining development. Page 89 of 208
Page 90
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 11 Relevant designations (Check Uniform for constraints, e.g. Special Landscape Area, Designed Landscape, Conservation Area, Local Biodiversity Site, Ancient Woodland) Newbattle Abbey Garden and Designed Landscape, Newbattle Conservation Area, Dalhousie & Cockpen Conservation Area. Three Local Biodiversity Sites (LBS) associated with watercourses and areas of ancient woodland: Dalhousie Burn LBS, Newbattle Woods LBS and River South Esk – Dalhousie Bridge to Lothian Bridge LBS. Known development proposals (Check Uniform for Preapp or other submissions) Housing development on surrounding allocated sites (currently ongoing). Views and Visibility Landmarks and key views (panoramic views, distinct skyline features) Frequent views across parkland and open fields, framed by woodland. Occasional views to distant horizons outlined by Pentland Hills and Mayfield ridge. Intervisibility (views from/ to area; open/ exposed, contained/ enclosed) Woodland within the Safeguard frequently limits intervisibility between the settlements surrounding it; avoiding coalescence and maintaining local identity. Notable screening elements (e.g. existing forestry, woodland, shelter belts nearby) Woodland and unmanaged hedgerows frequently contain views of the wider landscape. Townscape Context Existing settlement nearby (type, character) Settlement within the Safeguard comprises groups of historic dwellings aligned to the local roads and river, and scattered rural properties – with the exception of Newbattle Abbey Cresent (70’s residential). Expanding settlement surrounding the Safeguard at Dalkeith (Wester Kippielaw), Bonnyrigg (Dalhousie South), Easthouses and Newtongrange (Morris Road) is relatively dense and mostly comprises modern 2-storey properties with localised 3-storey flatted blocks. Existing interface with surroundings (natural or man-made boundaries, approaches) The existing interface with settlement along the Safeguard boundary is bound by woodland in numerous places; frequently forming the backdrop to or focus of adjoining housing. In some areas the interface is marked by hedgerows and/ or boundary trees. Lack of landscape interface in other areas with boundaries marked by fencing, walls (e.g. Newtongrange). Distinctive features that contribute to a sense of place (rivers, hills, fields etc important to setting) Historic Newbattle Abbey and its gardens/ designed landscape (extensive woodland policies, mature trees, parkland, boundary walls and gateways). Wooded valleys of the River South Esk, Dalhousie Burn and other tributaries. Open fields (adjoining Newtongrange) and parkland (golf course) framed by woodland. Page 90 of 208
Page 91
NEWBATTLE STRATEGIC GREENSPACE SAFEGUARD ASSESSMENT 2024 12 Other proposed developments nearby (potential for cumulative impact, check Uniform) Allocated sites adjoining the safeguard are currently under development at Dalhousie South and between Newtongrange/ Easthouses. More development sites proposed following MLDP2 Call for Sites – these may or may not be allocated. SUMMARY FINDINGS Landscape Sensitivity High Medium Low Visual Sensitivity High Medium Low Capacity to Accommodate Development High Medium Low NSGS suitable for retention within LDP2 on landscape grounds? Reason The Safeguard clearly fulfils its original purpose in terms of protecting greenspace between the growing settlements surrounding it, and plays an important role in maintaining local identity and supporting formal and informal opportunities for outdoor access and recreation. The extent of ancient and native woodland along the various watercourses within the Safeguard and presence of several LBS sites further highlights the importance of the NSGS as part of the wider Green Blue Network across Midlothian in terms of supporting biodiversity and habitat for wildlife, boosting climate and flood resilience and carbon storage. YES Page 91 of 208
Page 92
Page 92 of 208
Page 93
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.3 PLANNING GUIDANCE: MIDLOTHIAN PARKING STANDARDS Report By Chief Officer Place 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek agreement to the adoption of new Parking Standards as Planning Guidance (a copy of which is attached to this report as Appendix A). The new Parking Standards would replace the existing standards approved by Cabinet at its meeting in March 2015 and are required in response to National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) which seeks to reduce the dependency on car travel/parking and promote active travel and the use of public transport. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 At its meeting of 7 November 2017 the Council adopted the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 (MLDP). The MLDP included a commitment to prepare Supplementary Guidance and Planning Guidance on a number of topic areas (Section 7.2, pages 81 and 82 of the MLDP). In addition to those topic areas set out in the MLDP the Council has the scope to adopt additional guidance to provide further detail and interpretation of the policies and strategy set out in its development plan and/or in response to other corporate placemaking ambitions. One of the topic areas that needs further clarification is the parking standards expected to be provided in new development. 2.2 Planning authorities may issue non-statutory Planning Guidance without going through the formal statutory procedures for Supplementary Guidance, which include undertaking public consultation. Unlike Supplementary Guidance, Planning Guidance does not form part of the development plan but the Council’s adoption of it will give it weight in planning decisions and help towards securing external funding. 3 PARKING STANDARDS 3.1 The new Midlothian Parking Standards document sets out the level of cycle parking, accessible spaces provision, electric vehicle charging and car parking requirements for new development in Midlothian. Parking provision requirements are set out for a variety of different development uses and different geographical areas - i) Town Centres; Page 93 of 208
Page 94
ii) Strategic Development Areas (as defined in MLDP); and iii) Other/Rural areas. The table Midlothian Council Parking Standards, in section 3 of the Parking Standards document sets out the parking requirement for each of the geographical areas. 3.2 The proposed Parking Standards are attached to this report as Appendix A and have been influenced by the Scottish Government’s goal of reducing private car use. Therefore, as opposed to the Council’s current parking standards which set out minimum parking standards to be met in a development, these new proposed parking standards set out a maximum number of parking spaces to be provided in a new development. A comparison of the 2015 Parking Standards and the Proposed 2025 Parking Standards is attached to this report as Appendix C. 3.3 A consequence of the proposed new parking standards is that provision of car parking will be reduced across new developments, including in new residential developments. The parking standard will apply across a whole development; it will therefore be incumbent on those developing proposals to accommodate the parking standards within the design of the whole development. 3.4 Tables 1, 2A and 2B of this report provide further information on the parking provisions in residential developments - the contents of Tables 1, 2A and 2B are taken from the proposed Parking Standards. 3.5 For housing, additional visitor space parking will be permitted up to 5% of the maximum provision for Town Centre and Strategic Development Areas and up to 10% for Other/Rural areas. It will be for the developer to propose how the total number of spaces, including the visitor spaces, are distributed and allocated across the development and for the Council as planning authority to assess the suitability of the location, design and setting of the parking. As an example, for a Town Centre or Strategic Development Area location, if 50 parking spaces were allowed for a development, an extra three spaces (rounded up from the 5% allowance of 2.5 spaces) could be added for visitors. 3.6 Additionally through the proposed new Parking Standards, 10% of visitor communal parking spaces should have electric vehicle charging points. Page 94 of 208
Page 95
Table 1: Parking Provision Maximum Standards for Housing in the New Parking Standards Town Centres Strategic Development Areas* Other / Rural Areas Maximum Parking Space Provision for Development 1 space per home/ unit 1.5 spaces per home/ unit 2 spaces per home/ unit Maximum Visitor parking space provision Maximum additional 5% of spaces allowed in the development Maximum additional 5% of spaces allowed in the development Maximum additional 10% of spaces allowed in the development *Shawfair, settlements in the A7/A68 Borders Rail Corridor and settlements in the A701 Corridor as defined in MLDP Table 2A: Location of Town Centre and Strategic Development Areas Town Centres and Strategic Development Areas Area Settlements Designated Town Centres Bonnyrigg, Dalkeith, Gorebridge, Loanhead, Mayfield, Newtongrange, Penicuik, Shawfair. Within the Strategic Development Areas identified in Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) (MLDP 2017) Bilston, Bonnyrigg, Dalkeith, Easthouses, Eskbank, Danderhall, Gorebridge, Lasswade, Loanhead, Mayfield, Newbattle, Newtongrange, Penicuik, Poltonhall, Roslin, Rosewell, Shawfair, Straiton. Borders Rail corridor Settlements with Borders Rail station: Shawfair, Eskbank, Newtongrange, Gorebridge. Table 2B: Location of Other Area / Rural Areas Other Areas / Rural Areas Area Settlements Outwith the Strategic Development Areas identified in Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) Auchendinny, Borthwick, Carrington, Cousland, Crichton, Dewartown, Edgehead, Ford, Howgate, Leadburn, Pathhead, Newlandrig, North Middleton, Silverburn, Temple. Page 95 of 208
Page 96
4 PUBLIC CONSULTATION 4.1 A targeted consultation was undertaken on a draft version of the proposed new Parking Standards between 28 November 2024 and 24 January 2025. The consultation was sent to Midlothian Community Councils, Homes for Scotland (the umbrella organisation that represents house builders in Scotland) and internal sections of Midlothian Council. Internal sections of the Council had been engaged in drafting the version that was the subject of the targeted consultation. 4.2 Appendix B attached to this report contains a summary of the response from Homes for Scotland, the only external (to the Council) response received during the consultation, together with a proposed response to the points made. Where a change to the document is shown as proposed, that change has been incorporated into the proposed Parking Standards document in Appendix A. 5 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5.1 All Scottish public bodies and a few private companies operating in a 'public character' (e.g. utility companies) within Scotland are required to assess, consult and monitor the likely impacts of their plans, programmes and strategies on the environment. This is known as a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) process. 5.2 The Council is of the view that no detrimental environmental effects are likely because of the guidance, thereby exempting the Planning Guidance from any requirement for a SEA. However, the adoption of the Planning Guidance cannot take place until; a SEA determination has taken place; and, 14 days have lapsed from advertising the SEA decision in a local paper and copying it to the Consultation Authorities. If the Committee is minded to adopt the new Parking Standards the Council should under the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 screen the Planning Guidance with the Consultation Authorities - SEPA, NatureScot and Historic Environment Scotland, then reach a determination (no SEA is required) and advertise that conclusion for 14 days. 6 RECOMMENDATION 6.1 It is recommended that the Committee: (a) Note the content of this report and agree to the adoption of the new Parking Standards Planning Guidance (subject to the SEA process as per recommendation 2); (b) Instruct the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager to undertake the required screening and notification/advertisement advising that the Parking Standards Planning Guidance will not have a significant environmental impact triggering the need for a formal Strategic Environmental Assessment; and Page 96 of 208
Page 97
(c) Instruct the Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager to publish the new Parking Standards on the Council’s website. Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Contact Person: Keith Luke, Planning Policy Officer keith.luke@midlothian.gov.uk Background Papers: None Appendices Appendix A: Proposed Midlothian Parking Standards Appendix B: External consultation responses received on the draft version of the Proposed Midlothian Parking Standards Appendix C: Comparison between 2015 Parking Standards and Proposed 2025 Parking Standards Page 97 of 208
Page 98
Midlothian Council Parking Standards Planning Guidance 2025 Appendix A Page 98 of 208
Page 99
Page 99 of 208
Page 100
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 i | C o n t e n t s Document image credits: Midlothian Council Planning Scottish Government Transport Scotland Microsoft Contents Page 1 Introduction 1 2 Parking Design 3 Cycle 4 Accessible / Disabled 7 Electric Vehicle Charging 9 Car 11 3 Parking Standards 15 Midlothian Parking Standards by Use Class 20 Page 100 of 208
Page 101
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 1 | P a g e 1.Introduction The correct design and level of parking provision, both on street and off street, are an essential component of any new development in Midlothian. Midlothian Council is responsible for setting relevant parking standards, specific to the Midlothian area, which consider urban and rural environments, road safety and sustainability. The standards must also be in accordance with national, regional, and local policy and guidelines. This document ‘Midlothian Council Parking Standards’ sets out the Council’s requirements in respect to cycle, accessible/ disabled, electric vehicle charging, and car parking. This document replaces the Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2014. These new standards set ambitious targets, as compared to previous standards to address the climate crisis. National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) (2023) The adopted National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) sets out the national spatial strategy for Scotland to 2045, regional spatial priorities and policies on the development and use of land. NPF4 emphasises climate change mitigation, sustainability, quality of place, local living, and active travel. The global climate emergency means that we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. We also need to respond to the nature crisis. Decisions about our built and natural environment are an essential part of this. The aim of NPF4 is for Scotland’s places to be net zero, nature- positive places, with neighbourhoods that are healthier, affordable, and vibrant places to live. NPF4 sets out requirements that Local Development Plans need to comply with across 33 policy areas, including sustainable transport, biodiversity, energy, infrastructure, green spaces, town centres, economic development, local living, housing, and water management. NPF4 (2023) and the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) form the ‘development plan’ for the Midlothian Council area. Key NPF4 policies regarding transport and parking include those noted below: • Policy 13 – Sustainable transport • Policy 14 – Design, quality, and place • Policy 15 – Local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods • Policy 23 – Health and safety • Policy 28 – Retail Page 101 of 208
Page 102
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 2 | P a g e The Midlothian Council Parking Standards document comprises the following sections: 2.Parking Design Summary of key parking design requirements, outlined per mode of transport: • Cycle • Accessible/Disabled • Electric Vehicle Charging • Car 3.Parking Standards Midlothian Council Parking Standards, outlined per class of development in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Scotland Order 1997 (as amended) – extant at time of writing: • 1A Shops and financial, professional, and other services • 3 Food and drink • 4 Business • 5 General industrial • 6 Storage or distribution • 7 Hotels and hostels • 8 Residential institutions • 9 Houses • 10 Non-residential institutions • 11 Assembly and leisure Note: Planning Officer(s) will advise on any non-class related development. Page 102 of 208
Page 103
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 3 | P a g e 2.Parking Design This section outlines the parking design requirements for each mode of transportation. Design – Cycle Parking Design – Accessible / Disabled Parking Design – Electric Vehicle Charging Design – Car Parking Parking shall be an integral part of street design. The designers of new development are expected to demonstrate careful consideration of car parking and its relationship with other elements, such as street design, landscaping, and pedestrian connections. A Green Travel Plan will be required for 10 or more houses and other development proposals of similar scale. They shall be submitted as part of the planning application and can be an effective tool to lower car demand in new development, and therefore car parking. In terms of quantity of new spaces, regard is to be had to the standards set in this document. All parking shall be designed to comply with Midlothian Council Parking Standards (2025) and the policy and guidance set out in this document. Proposals which are in excess of the maximum thresholds will only be supported in cases where they are appropriately justified. Page 103 of 208
Page 104
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 4 | P a g e Design – Cycle Parking Convenient and secure cycle parking is critical to increasing use of cycles. As noted in NPF4 (Policy 13 – Sustainable Transport), designers and development proposals shall aim to ensure that access to safe, secure, and convenient cycle parking is more conveniently located than access to car parking. Cycling by Design (2021) Cycling by Design provides guidance for permanent cycling infrastructure design on all roads, streets, and paths in Scotland. Cycle parking shall meet or exceed the standards set out in Cycling by Design (section 6.2) relating to: • user requirements • demand and capacity requirements • design • cycle parking in car parks If Cycling by Design (2021) is updated, then the updated version of the guidance should be followed. Page 104 of 208
Page 105
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 5 | P a g e User requirements The basic user requirements set out in Cycling by Design are noted below and apply to all types of cycle parking. Accessible Convenient, visible, and prominently located near entrances, at other trip end destinations and throughout the network to encourage the maximum number of users. Provision for ‘non- standard’ cycle vehicles shall also be made. Attractive Sympathetic to the wider environment to enhance its appearance, appropriate to the surrounding area and complementary to surrounding street furniture. Coherent Sits within the context of a cycle route network connecting main origins and destinations, including public transport nodes. Cycle parking with no or poor connecting routes may suppress demand. Durable A robust design, constructed with appropriate materials and fixings, that will minimise the whole life cost of cycle parking provision and deter thieves. Easy to use Adequate space in the parking area to facilitate easy manoeuvring without catching other cycles as well as adequate provision of locking points to accommodate different types of cycle. Safe Located in areas that are naturally overlooked by the occupants of buildings or pedestrians, lit (essential for personal security when parking at night), secure and vandal proof, ideally with suitable CCTV or other security arrangement. Suitable Fit for purpose, i.e., appropriate type of facility and number of spaces that serve the needs of the users and the local land use. Well managed and maintained Efficient to use, clean and free from damaged or abandoned cycles. Demand and capacity requirements Designers shall comply with the minimum number of cycle parking spaces for all new developments and when retrofitting parking to existing streets. The standards and level of provision for cycle parking are set out in section 3 (Parking Standards) of this document. Design – general considerations As outlined in Cycling by Design, the following types of cycle parking shall be considered: • Sheffield stands and M-profile stands • Two-tier stands • Cycle hangars • Wall loops • Cycle stores • Horizontal cycle lockers Page 105 of 208
Page 106
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 6 | P a g e Cycle parking shall comply with the specific layout requirements set out in Cycling by Design (section 2.8). Cycle parking in car parks As outlined in Cycling by Design, it is imperative that cycle parking in car parks has safe, direct, attractive, and comfortable cycle routes leading straight to the cycle parking area, placed conveniently at the entrance to the building or office with direct access to these cycle routes. This shall be integral to the design of new car park layouts. As noted in Cycling by Design (section 6.2), design requirements for cycle parking in car parks are: ‘Cycle parking in car parks should be well signed, with signs provided conforming to TSRGD and Traffic Signs Manual, likely to comprise the combination of TSRGD Diagram 968 and TSRGD Diagram 968.1 to denote a ‘parking place for pedal cycles’. ‘Signage may be put in place that clearly denotes cycle parking allocated for non-standard cycles, for example - Reserved for cargo and non-standard cycles. Priority to disabled cyclists.’ Design Review Cycling by Design sets out a ‘Design Review’ process in section 2.8. Cycling by Design (page 42) ‘It is recommended that designers of new developments use the Design Review process that is set out in Section 2.8 to inform and support the planning and Road Construction Consent (RCC) applications for the development. This will allow the planning and RCC applications to be informed by key decisions from this Design Review. Any failure to meet the requirements set by Cycling by Design will be identified in the Design Review for the development, and should be taken into account by the planning authority when determining planning permission. Such failures may also affect any funding being sought that relies on Cycling by Design compliance.’ The Design Review process shall be followed as it will show how the ‘highest level of service’ has been met – referencing Cycling by Design trip end facilities, and if it has not been met, an explanation of why. The Design Review shall be submitted along with planning applications for new housing development. A Design Review will be required for proposals for 10 or more houses or other development proposals of similar scale. A Design Review template is set out in Cycling by Design (Appendix A). Page 106 of 208
Page 107
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 7 | P a g e Design – Accessible/Disabled Parking As noted in Scottish Government’s ‘Designing Streets’ (2010) (Street Layout), it is recommended that parking bays for disabled people are designed so that drivers and passengers, either of whom may be disabled, can get in and out of the car easily. They shall allow wheelchair users to gain access from the side and the rear. The bays shall be large enough to protect people from moving traffic when they cannot get in or out of their car on the footway side. Dropped kerbs shall be conveniently sited to enable drivers who use wheelchairs to gain easy access to footways. Transport Scotland’s ‘Roads for All’ Guidance (2013) (section 4.5.8) provides design details for off-street and on-street parking bays. Spaces shall be clearly marked as per the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions with the specified accompanying sign. Whilst private spaces are not required to be enforceable, it is recommended that they are marked with these statutory markings to enable a Traffic Regulation Order to be made at any time thereafter. Developers building car parks that will allow access to the public shall consider whether a Traffic Regulation Order to enforce the spaces is desirable. Visitors and residents parking areas need to have space for disabled provision built into the space allocated. All council owned car parks will require disabled persons parking places to be enforceable. Multiple disabled parking bays shall be provided. Cognisance shall be taken of the location of disabled parking bays when installing traffic calming or dropped kerbs. Specifically in relation to retail developments the addition of extra wide spaces (for people who may have short term mobility problems, broken limbs, or expectant mothers), and parent and child spaces shall be considered. Page 107 of 208
Page 108
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 8 | P a g e Dimensions The standard dimensions for a single disabled parking space shall be: Parking space Metres Length 5.0 metres (minimum) 5.5 metres (maximum) +1.2 metres wide perimeter zone Width 2.6 metres (minimum) +1.2 metres wide perimeter zone Distance from disabled parking bays to points of access shall be: Distance Metres Distance to disabled parking bays from main point of access/ disabled point of access Bays to be 45 metres or less from these access points. Path gradients shall be: Paths Gradient Path gradients from disabled parking bays to property entrance Shall be level to 1:20, or 1:12 maximum gradient. 5.0m (min) 1.2m 2.6m (min) 1.2m wide marked access zone between designated parking spaces Preferred access route to avoid travel behind parked cars 1.2m Carriageway Page 108 of 208
Page 109
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 9 | P a g e Design – Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging EV Charging points Where parking is required, developers shall include details of proposed EV charging points with the planning application. For accessibility, convenience, safety and security, EV charging spaces shall be in signposted hubs, near to building access points. Details of the proposed infrastructure and charging network will be required as part of an application for planning permission and shall be provided with the transport submission. Covered vehicle parking with solar panels above could be used to charge EVs. Types of EV chargers The type of EV charging point depends on the length of time the vehicle is being parked, as outlined in summary below. EV Charger Types Output (kW) Typical Time to Fully Recharge Battery Electric Vehicle Standard / slow (AC) Up to 7kW 6 to 12 hours Fast (AC) 7kW to 22kW 2 to 5 hours Rapid (DC) 43kW to 100kW 20 to 60 minutes Ultra-rapid (DC) 100kW to 350kW 15 to 30 minutes Active provision is the provision of fully wired and connected, ready to use, EV charging points at parking spaces. Passive provision requires the necessary underlying infrastructure to enable installation and activation of a charge point at a future date. EV charging spaces need to be clearly distinguished from parking spaces, as they cannot be occupied by any vehicle which isn't actively charging, and there are limits on the duration of stay for rapid chargers. EV charging points should be located outwith any surfaces used as an access route and should not present an obstruction to pedestrians, cyclists or vehicles. Page 109 of 208
Page 110
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 10 | P a g e Dimensions EV charging points/ parking spaces shall be in accordance the PAS 1899:2022 and large enough to meet accessibility standards for all. The standard dimensions for EV spaces shall be: Parking space Metres Length 5.0 metres (minimum) 5.5 metres (maximum) +1.2 metres wide perimeter zone Width 2.6 metres (minimum) +1.2 metres wide perimeter zone A minimum space of 1.2 metres shall be provided in front of the points of access to all EV charge point components. Further information and guidance Further information and guidance regarding electric vehicle charging infrastructure is available from the following resources, and any relevant subsequent replacement documents. Organisation Note BEAMA British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers’ Association British Standards Institution (BSI) / OZEV PAS 1899:2022 Electric Vehicles Accessible charging – specification ChargePlace Scotland Electric vehicle charging points Energy Saving Trust EV accessible charging summary OZEV Office for Zero Emission Vehicles REA-UK VSEA The Association for Renewable Energy and Clean Technology / UK Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Association Scottish Government Building (Scotland) Regs (2004) Domestic Technical Handbook (Jan 2025), including section 7.2. Scottish Government Building (Scotland) Regs (2004) Non-Domestic Technical Handbook (Jan 2025), including section 7.2. ZapMap Electric vehicle charging points 5.0m (min) 1.2m 2.6m (min) 1.2m wide marked access zone between designated parking spaces 1.2m 1.2m Page 110 of 208
Page 111
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 11 | P a g e Design – Car Parking Transport Scotland’s ‘Roads for All’ Guidance (2013) (section 4.5.8) and Scottish Government’s ‘Designing Streets’ (2010) provide design details for on-street and off-street parking bays, as noted below. Parking design shall be integral to the overall street design. Whilst designing parking on-street as an aid to traffic calming can be advantageous, care must be taken to foresee where parking overflow may occur and where this may cause road safety or aesthetic problems. On-street parking can also risk causing congestion and issues for buses. ‘Designing Streets’ outlines the importance of considering a design-led approach to the provision of car parking space that is well integrated with a high-quality public realm. A design-led and contextual strategy for car parking can often lessen the impact on the built environment. Parking provision shall service all occupants and visitors to a site and not just part of a site. The relationship between a property and their parking space is important and they shall relate well to each other. Designing Streets – streets for people examples More dominant pedestrian area. Low kerbs. Common material for footway and carriageway. Reduction in vehicle parking impact. Reduced carriageway width. More informal street composition. Sensitive soft landscaping. increasingly cooperative increasingly shared decreasingly segregated Page 111 of 208
Page 112
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 12 | P a g e On-street parking It is recommended that, in most circumstances, at least some parking demand in residential and mixed-use areas is met with well-designed on-street parking. On-street parking in residential streets can help to reduce traffic speeds and can be counted towards the overall provision required in new developments, both for residents and visitors. The formalisation of on-street parking bays is encouraged to create a stronger distinction between active carriageway and parking space. These bays should be protected with vegetation and build-out. Trees, planting, or street furniture can be used to discourage indiscriminate parking in an attractive way. Visitor parking shall not be allowed to spoil areas of landscaping secured within development sites. Informal undesigned on-street parking can be a poor development outcome, where it deteriorates road safety and has a significant detrimental visual impact, which is not acceptable. Developers must avoid this through good design. Consideration can be given to visitor parking forming part of traffic calming in residential developments where it is part of an overall design approach. This approach can include visitor bays extending partially into the carriageway which may result in the reduction of vehicles speeds. This approach should not undermine safety. Off-street parking Off-street parking will be required in many developments, whether on the house plot, in rear courtyards or in underground structures. On-plot parking shall be designed so that the front garden is not overly dominated by the parking space. Off-street parking includes off-street courtyards and rear courtyards, and the key principles are that they: • are not car parks but places which have parking in them. • shall be passively overlooked by adjoining houses or by buildings. • entered from the parking area. • shall normally include, at most, 10 parking spaces. If there are more spaces, the courtyard layout shall be broken up. Page 112 of 208
Page 113
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 13 | P a g e Parking Space Dimensions – Perpendicular Arrangement The standard dimensions for a car parking space (perpendicular arrangement) shall be as a minimum: Parking space Metres Length 5.0 metres Width 2.6 metres Parking Space Dimensions – Parallel Arrangement The standard dimensions for a car parking space (parallel arrangement) shall be as a minimum: Parking space Metres Length 6.0 metres Width 2.0 metres A minimum of 2, and a maximum of 5 parallel parking spaces, should be located together. Boundaries and landscape Where parking spaces are bounded by a wall or fence, an additional 300mm shall be added to facilitate door opening. Spaces that are bounded on both sides shall be 3.0 metres wide. 1m hardstanding (1m strip) required at back of parking bays adjacent to landscape areas. These areas of hardstanding / step-off areas are refuge when users access / egress their vehicle. 5.0m 2.6m Footway 2.0m 6.0m Footway Page 113 of 208
Page 114
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 14 | P a g e Driveways Driveway dimensions shall comply with Building Standards regulations and accessibility requirements. Driveway Metres Length Driveways should be minimum of 6m in length with the first 2m in hard material to prevent deleterious material (e.g. loose chippings being carried onto the road). Width Where a driveway forms part of an accessible route to a single dwelling, it shall be at least 3.3m wide to allow a 900mm wide pedestrian route past a parked car. Fire access requirements will increase minimum access width where the length of an accessible route is in excess of 45m. There shall be an accessible route to the common entrance of a building containing flats. Footway Carriageway 3.3m minimum width 900mm wide access 6m (minimum) Garage or Vehicle Park Space Single Dwelling Page 114 of 208
Page 115
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 15 | P a g e 3. Parking Standards This section sets the parking provision requirements for all new developments. The Midlothian Council Parking Standards are set out in pages 15-21 and arranged by type of development (use class) / mode of transportation. In line with the national policy and guidance, including National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) (2023), National Transport Strategy 2 (NTS2) (2020) and the Sustainable Travel Hierarchy, the Midlothian Parking Standards encourage a shift from the private car to more sustainable modes of travel. Midlothian Council will require evidence to support a reduction in parking standards. If developers can demonstrate that the attributes of the site (either existing or proposed) are such that people do not rely as much on their cars, then Midlothian Council can consider a lower provision. Parking Provision The Midlothian Parking Standards set MINIMUM requirements for: • Cycling parking • Accessible / disabled parking • Electric vehicle (EV) parking and charging The Midlothian Parking Standards set MAXIMUM limits for: • Car parking Page 115 of 208
Page 116
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 16 | P a g e Cycle Parking The Standards aim to ensure that adequate cycle parking is available to encourage cycle use now and in the future. As noted in Cycling by Design (2021), designers shall comply with the minimum number of cycle parking spaces for all new developments and when retrofitting parking to existing streets. In all new development, assessment, and improvement of all sustainable modes of transport will be undertaken as part of the Traffic Assessment. Most new developments will also require a Travel Plan. Accessible/Disabled Parking The Standards aim to ensure that the minimum accessible parking requirement is achieved for all developments to meet the needs of people with disabilities. A proportion of all car parking areas must be accessible for people with mobility impairments, including wheelchair users (whether driver or passenger). Accessible parking spaces shall be created as part of the overall car parking provision and not in addition to it. Electric Vehicle (EV) Parking and Charging The Standards aim to ensure that a range of electric vehicle (EV) charging spaces and parking spaces are provided at new developments. The type of EV charger provided will depend on the type of development/ facilities and the likely requirements and duration of stay of service users, for example, staff and visitors. EV charging spaces shall be counted as part of the overall car parking provision and not in addition to it. EV charging specification must comply with the most current technical standards, including the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 and technical handbooks. Car Parking As outlined in National Planning Framework 4 (2023) (Policy 13 –Sustainable Transport), development proposals will be supported, which are ambitious in terms of low/no car parking, particularly in urban locations that are well-served by sustainable transport modes and where they do not create barriers to access by disabled people. Walking, cycling and public transport use can be encouraged by limiting accessible car parking. A balance must be struck by this, and road safety concerns caused by migration of overflow parking into surrounding areas. EV Page 116 of 208
Page 117
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 17 | P a g e Midlothian Council Area The Parking Standards reflect the diversity of the Midlothian area, which consists of small urban centres and rural areas. Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) – Midlothian Strategy for Development Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) outlines the strategy for development, which includes Strategic Development Areas and the Borders Rail corridor. Page 117 of 208
Page 118
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 18 | P a g e Car Parking – Locations To reflect the diversity of the Midlothian area, the maximum car parking provision is divided into two locations, which have different parking requirements. These areas are noted below and are reflected in the Midlothian Parking Standards. Location 1 Town Centres and Strategic Development Areas Area Settlements Designated Town Centres Bonnyrigg, Dalkeith, Gorebridge, Loanhead, Mayfield, Newtongrange, Penicuik, Shawfair. Within the Strategic Development Areas identified in Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) (MLDP 2017) Bilston, Bonnyrigg, Dalkeith, Easthouses, Eskbank, Danderhall, Gorebridge, Lasswade, Loanhead, Mayfield, Newbattle, Newtongrange, Penicuik, Poltonhall, Roslin, Rosewell, Shawfair, Straiton. Borders Rail corridor Settlements with Borders Rail station: Shawfair, Eskbank, Newtongrange, Gorebridge. Location 2 Other Areas / Rural Areas Area Settlements Outwith the Strategic Development Areas identified in Midlothian Local Development Plan (2017) Auchendinny, Borthwick, Carrington, Cousland, Crichton, Dewartown, Edgehead, Ford, Howgate, Leadburn, Pathhead, Newlandrig, North Middleton, Silverburn, Temple. Scottish Maximum Standards referred to in the tables below are set by Scottish Goverenment. In the tables below, the following abbreviations are used: FTE – Full-Time Equivalent GFA – Gross Floor Area PFA – Public Floor Area Page 118 of 208
Page 119
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 19 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 1A Shops and financial, professional, and other services Retail (food) above 1,000 sqm GFA 1 per 250 sqm GFA 1 per 500 sqm GFA 1 space plus 8% of total capacity 1 in 10 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff) • 50kW+ DC rapid charge (visitors) Charging for fleets shall be considered. Scottish Maximum Standards 1 per 14 sqm GFA Retail (non-food) above 1,000 sqm GFA Scottish Maximum Standards 1 per 20 sqm GFA Retail (food and non-food) above 500 sqm GFA 1 per 40 sqm GFA 1 per 40 sqm GFA Retail (food and non-food) under 500 sqm GFA 1 per 50 sqm GFA 1 per 25 sqm GFA Financial, profesional and other services 1 per 50 sqm GFA 1 per 25 sqm GFA Sui Generis Motor trade: display area 1 per 7 staff on merit 1 per 50 sqm GFA Motor trade: spares 1 per 25 sqm GFA Motor trade: service/repairs none 1 per 2 bays Motor trade: staff 1 per 4 staff 1 per 2 staff Page 119 of 208
Page 120
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 20 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 3 Food and drink Food or drink on premises (e.g. restaurants, cafés) 1 per 75 sqm GFA 1 space plus 8% of total capacity. 1 in 10 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff) • 50kW+ DC rapid charge (visitors) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 14 sqm PFA 1 per 11 sqm PFA Sui Generis Hot food takeway Pubs, bars Page 120 of 208
Page 121
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 21 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 4 Business Office, research and development, industrial process 1 per 150 sqm GFA 1 per 1,000 sqm GFA 1 space plus 6% of total capacity. 1 in 10 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff) • 50kW+ DC rapid charge (visitors) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 50-100 sqm GFA 1 per 40-50 sqm GFA Page 121 of 208
Page 122
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 22 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 5 General industrial General industrial (e.g. heavy industry, vehicle repair) 1 per 150 sqm GFA 1 per 1,000 sqm GFA 1 space plus 6% of total capacity. 1 in 10 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 100-200 sqm GFA 1 per 50-100 sqm GFA Page 122 of 208
Page 123
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 23 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 6 Storage or distribution Storage or distribution centre 1 per 150 sqm GFA 1 per 1,000 sqm GFA 1 space plus 6% of total capacity. 1 in 10 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 300-500 sqm GFA 1 per 200-300 sqm GFA Page 123 of 208
Page 124
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 24 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Visitors secure under cover When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 7 Hotels and hostels Hotels and hostels 1 per 10 bedrooms 1 space plus 8% of total capacity. 1 in 6 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff / visitors) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 2 bedrooms 1 per 1 bedroom Sui Generis Student accommodation 1 per 1 bed 1 per 10 students 1 per 5 students Page 124 of 208
Page 125
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 25 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Visitors secure under cover When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 8 Residential institutions Residential accommodation and care 1 per 15 beds 1 space plus 12% of total capacity. 1 in 6 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charger type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output for long stay (e.g. staff/ residents) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 5 beds 1 per 4 beds Hospital or nursing home 1 per 10 students 1 per 5 students Residential school, college or training centre 1 per 5 students Page 125 of 208
Page 126
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 26 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Require garage and access. Otherwise cycle store required. When 10 or more dwellings are proposed (where parking is communal) Adhere to Building Regulations. Location 1a Town Centres Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 9 Houses Housing 1 room: 1 per unit 2-3 rooms: 2 per unit 4+ rooms: 3 per unit (habitable rooms only) 8% of total capacity. Off-street/ driveways/ on-street/ courtyards 1 EV charge point per unit (min 7kW). Passive provision for units with garage. Visitor 10% provision in communal parking areas. Off-street/ on-street/ courtyards combined Location 1a 1.0 per unit Location 1b 1.5 per unit Visitor Locations 1a/1b Additional spaces will not exceed 1 in 20 units. Off-street/ on-street/ courtyards combined Location 2 2.0 per unit Visitor Location 2 Additional spaces will not exceed 1 in 10 units. Sui generis Residential flats Page 126 of 208
Page 127
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 27 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Pupils/Staff secure under cover Visitors outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 10 Non-residential institutions Primary schools and nurseries 1 per 9 pupils /students 1 space plus 8% of total capacity. 1 in 6 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charge type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output long stay • 50kW+ DC rapid charge (visitors) for combined facility Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 2 staff FTE Secondary schools 1 per 2 staff FTE Colleges, higher and further education 1 per 2 staff FTE Libraries 2 per 100 sqm PFA 1 per 2 staff + 1 per 33 sqm PFA Community centres and church halls 1 per 67 sqm PFA 1 per 20 sqm PFA Page 127 of 208
Page 128
Midlothian Council Parking Standards 2025 28 | P a g e Use Class Use Midlothian Council Parking Standards MINIMUM Parking Spaces MAXIMUM Parking Spaces Cycle Accessible EV Charging Car Employees secure under cover Customers outside entrance When 5 or more car park spaces are proposed. When 10 or more car park spaces are proposed. Location 1 Town Centres / Strategic Development Areas Location 2 Other / Rural Areas 11 Assembly and leisure Cinemas 1 per 50 seats 1 space plus 8% of total capacity. 1 in 6 standard spaces shall provide an EV charging point. Charge type required: • 7-22kW AC lower output long stay (e.g. staff) • 50kW+ DC rapid charge (visitors) Charging for fleets shall be considered. 1 per 10 seats 1 per 6 seats Leisure centre/ gym 1 per 20 sqm 1 per 100 sqm 1 per 60 sqm Swimming 1 per 10 sqm pool area 1 per 25 sqm 1 per 15 sqm Sui Generis Theatres 1 per 50 seats 1 per 10 seats 1 per 6 seats Stadia 1 per 200 seats 1 per 150 seats 1 per 30 seats Conference facilities (above 1,000 sqm GFA) on merit 1 per 5 seats 1 per 5 seats Golf courses 2 per hole Gold ranges 1 per bay or assessed on merit Page 128 of 208
Page 129
Midlothian Council Parking Standards Page 129 of 208
Page 130
1 External Consultation Responses Received on the Draft Midlothian Parking Standards External Consultation Comments (Targeted consultation undertaken 29 Nov 2024 – 24 Jan 2025). Only external consultee to submit comments was Homes for Scotland. Section of Draft Document Comment Source Comment Summary Midlothian Council Proposed Response / Action Chapter 2 – Parking Design Design – Cycle Parking Page 4 Homes for Scotland Cycle storage – flats / housing. Considers there is a lack of clarity in terms of storage for cycles in respect of flats or housing and that only an open statement on this is provided in the document. No Change to Document The document seeks to follow the principles of NPF4 policy 13b and policy 13b (v). This is from where the statement is taken. These are matters that need to be considered in the design of a development. “NPF4 policy 13b) 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: ... (v) Supply safe, secure, and convenient cycle parking to meet the needs of users and which is more conveniently located than car parking.” Design – Accessible / Disabled Parking Page 7 Homes for Scotland Best practice. States examples are required in the document, particularly with regard to disabled parking and EV parking. Change Document Images / diagrams have been included. Design – Car Parking Page 9 Homes for Scotland Visitor parking / traffic calming. Considers visitor parking could form part of traffic calming in residential developments. Consider extending visitor bays partially into the Change Document Text updated to include reference to traffic calming / visitor bays. Appendix B Page 130 of 208
Page 131
2 Section of Draft Document Comment Source Comment Summary Midlothian Council Proposed Response / Action carriageway, forcing vehicles to slow - if the space is in use, should be considered. Design – Car Parking Page 10 Homes for Scotland Longer / wider parking spaces. Questions what percentage of larger spaces (6-6.2m x 2.75- 3m) should be allowed for. Asks if controls be put in place to ensure the longer/wider spaces are used by larger cars. Change Document Reference to larger spaces removed from the document. Chapter 3 – Parking Standards Electric Vehicle Parking and Charging Page 12 Homes for Scotland Technical Advice Note EV Charging Points. Requests EV specifications referred to as being in the separate Parking Standards technical advice note document, are made available for review prior to implementation of the new Parking Standards. Change Document No separate Technical Advice Note EV Charging Points document will be produced. Instead links to current guidance will be provided. This is proposed to help avoid referring to information in another document that would become dated overtime. Table – Use Class Order section 9: Houses Page 22 Homes for Scotland Cycle Parking. State more clarity is needed on the cycle parking breakdown for housing. The Draft Parking Standards document consulted upon clarifies the required numbers of spaces to be provided. Considers, however, clarity is needed regarding how the numbers are to be broken down in terms of type of cycles to be located in cycle stores for flats. No Change to Document Type of cycles currently not set out in the draft Parking Standards and that is not considered necessary. Table – Use Class Order Homes for Scotland EV Parking – Visitor Parking. States clarification on whether visitor EV parking is Change Document Page 131 of 208
Page 132
3 Section of Draft Document Comment Source Comment Summary Midlothian Council Proposed Response / Action section 9: Houses Page 22 required, and, if so, what percentage is required. Table updated to require 10% communal parking spaces to have EV charging facilities. Table – Use Class Order section 9: Houses Page 22 Homes for Scotland Visitor Parking. Considers there is a lack of information regarding visitor parking for housing and residential flats. States this requires to be clarified and that the maximum parking spaces is unclear for housing, as it is unclear whether these figures incorporate visitor parking. Change Document The table has been updated to clarify visitor parking requirements. Page 132 of 208
Page 133
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 1 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centres Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Use Class 1A – Shops / Sui Generis – Motor Trade Retail – Food and Non-Food (above 1000sqm gross floor area) Maximum spaces Food: 1 per 14sqm GFA Non-Food: 1 per 20sqm GFA Maximum spaces Food: 1 per 14sqm gross floor area (GFA) Non-Food: 1 per 20sqm gross floor area (GFA) Retail – Food and Non-Food (under 1000sqm gross floor area) Minimum spaces 1 per 20-25sqm Maximum spaces 1 per 40-50sqm GFA Maximum space 1 per 25-40sqm GFA Financial, Professional and Other Services - Maximum spaces 1 per 50sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 25sqm GFA Motor Trade (display and spares) Minimum spaces 3-4 per 100sqm Maximum spaces 1 per 25-50sqm GFA Use Class 3 – Food (restaurants, cafes) / Sui Generis – Hot Food Takeway, Pubs and Bars Minimum spaces 12 per 100sqm public floor area (PFA) Maximum spaces 1 per 14sqm public floor area (PFA) Maximum spaces 1 per 11sqm public floor area (PFA) Appendix C Page 133 of 208
Page 134
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 2 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centres Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Use Class 7 – Hotels and Hostels / Sui Generis – Student Accommodation Hotels Minimum spaces 1 per 1 bedroom 0.1 per 1 staff Maximum spaces 1 per 2 bedrooms Maximum spaces 1 per 1 bedroom Student Accommodation Minimum spaces 0.2 per 1 bedroom 1 per 1 staff Maximum spaces 1 per 10 students Maximum spaces 1 per 5 students Use Class 8 – Residential Institutions Residential accommodation and care Minimum spaces Residents: 0.75 per bed Staff: 0.33 per staff Maximum spaces 1 per 5 beds Maximum spaces 1 per 4 beds Hospital or nursing home Minimum spaces Residents: 0.75 per bed Staff: 0.33 per staff Maximum spaces 1 per 5 beds Maximum spaces 1 per 4 beds Page 134 of 208
Page 135
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 3 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centres Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Residential school, college, or training centre - Maximum spaces 1 space per 10 students Maximum spaces 1 space per 5 students Use Class 9 – Housing / Sui Generis – Residential Flats Minimum spaces Residents: 1-2 per unit Visitors: 0.5 per unit Maximum spaces Residents: 1 per unit Visitors: 1 per 20 units Maximum spaces Residents: 1.5 per unit Visitors: 1 per 20 units Maximum spaces Residents: 2 per unit Visitors: 1 per 10 units Use Class 10 – Non-Residential Institutions Nurseries, Primary Schools, and Secondary Schools Minimum spaces Staff: 1 per 1 staff Maximum spaces Staff: 1 per 2 staff full time equivalent (FTE) Colleges, higher and further education Minimum spaces Staff: 0.5 per 1 staff Student: 0.07 per 1 student Maximum spaces Staff: 1 per 2 staff full time equivalent (FTE) Libraries Minimum spaces Visitors: 3 per 100sqm Staff: 0.5 per 1 staff Maximum spaces Visitors: 1 per 33sqm public floor area (PFA) Staff: 1 per 2 staff Page 135 of 208
Page 136
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 4 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centres Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Community Centres and Church Halls Minimum spaces 8 per 100sqm Maximum spaces 1 per 20sqm public floor area (PFA) Use Class 11 – Assembly and Leisure Cinemas and Theatres Minimum spaces 0.2 per seat Maximum spaces 1 per 10 seats Maximum spaces 1 per 6 seats Leisure Centre / Gym Maximum spaces 1 per 22sqm gross floor area Maximum spaces 1 per 100sqm Maximum spaces 1 per 60sqm Swimming Minimum spaces Visitors: 1 per 10sqm Staff: 0.1 per staff Maximum spaces 1 per 25sqm Maximum spaces 1 per 15sqm Stadia (above 1,500 seats) Maximum spaces 1 per 15 seats Maximum spaces 1 per 150 seats Maximum spaces 1 per 30 seats Conference Facilities (above 1,000 sqm gross floor area) Minimum spaces 1 per 5 seats Maximum spaces 1 per 5 seats Page 136 of 208
Page 137
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 5 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centres Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Golf Courses Minimum spaces 2.5 per hole Maximum spaces 2 per hole Golf Ranges Minimum spaces 1 per bay Staff: 0.85 per staff Maximum spaces 1 per bay or assessed on merit Page 137 of 208
Page 138
Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 and Parking Standards 2025 Level of Provision (Car Parking) – Comparison Summary 6 | P a g e Midlothian Parking Standards 2015 Midlothian Parking Standards 2025 Midlothian – Town Centres Midlothian – Public Transport Corridors Midlothian – Rural Areas Midlothian – Location 1a Town Centre Midlothian – Location 1b Strategic Development Areas Midlothian – Location 2 Other / Rural Areas Use Class 4 – Business (office, research and development, industrial process) Min 1 per 100sqm GFA Max 1 per 50sqm GFA Min 1 per 50sqm GFA Max 1 per 40sqm GFA Min 1 per 40sqm GFA Max 1 per 25sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 50-100sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 50-100sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 40-50sqm GFA Use Class 5 – General Industrial Min 1 per 115sqm GFA Max 1 per 70sqm GFA Min 1 per 100sqm GFA Max 1 per 60sqm GFA Min 1 per 60sqm GFA Max 1 per 35sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 100-200sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 100-200sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 50-100sqm GFA Use Class 6 – Storage or Distribution Min 1 per 325sqm GFA Max 1 per 215sqm GFA Min 1 per 270sqm GFA Max 1 per 200sqm GFA Min 1 per 160sqm GFA Max 1 per 125sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 300-500sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 300-500sqm GFA Maximum spaces 1 per 200-300sqm GFA Note: GFA – Gross Floor Area Page 138 of 208
Page 139
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.4 SCOTTISH MINISTERS’ DECISION TO GRANT CONSENT UNDER SECTION 36 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 AND DEEMED PLANNING PERMISSION UNDER SECTION 57(2) OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF AN ELECTRICITY GENERATING STATION KNOWN AS SALTERS BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, COMPRISING OF A BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM ON LAND LOCATED OFF SALTERS ROAD, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE A68 AND APPROXIMATELY 200M SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SMEATON SUBSTATION, DALKEITH Report by Chief Officer Place 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of the Scottish Ministers’ decision to grant consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 for the construction and operation of an electricity generating station, specifically a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with a capacity of 200MW. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 Proposals to build, operate or modify onshore electricity generating stations with a capacity exceeding 50 megawatts require consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. In Scotland, the Scottish Ministers are responsible for assessing Section 36 applications and this function is carried out by the Scottish Government’s Energy Consents Unit (ECU). If the Scottish Ministers grant consent under Section 36, this engages Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended). Subsection 2 of Section 57 provides that Scottish ministers may give a direction for planning permission to be deemed to be granted, subject to such conditions (if any) as may be specified in the direction. 2.2 The Scottish Government’s Chief Planner confirmed, in a letter published on 27 August 2020, that the Scottish Government considered battery installation storage schemes should be treated as a generating station. Consequently, such schemes require Section 36 consent. Page 139 of 208
Page 140
2.3 An application for Section 36 consent and deemed planning permission for a BESS at an allocated economic land supply site at Salter’s Road, Dalkeith was submitted to the ECU on 21 August 2024. The planning authority was a statutory consultee on the application and a report on the consultation process (reference 24/00537/S36) was considered by the Committee at its 9 December 2024 meeting. The planning authority’s comments on the proposal were sent to the ECU on 21 January 2025. 2.4 The Scottish Ministers issued their determination letter on 12 May 2025. The Ministers granted consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The Section 36 consent is subject to five conditions and the deemed planning permission is subject to 19 conditions. The discharging of any pre- development conditions relating to the Section 36 consent is the responsibility of the ECU. Pre-development conditions relating to the deemed planning permission must be discharged by the planning authority. A copy of the determination letter, including the conditions, is attached to this report as Appendix A. 3 THE DECISION 3.1 Having considered the application submission, the responses from consultees and third parties, and Scottish Government policies, Scottish Ministers consider that the determining issues are the balance between the impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding area and its benefits, and the extent to which the proposed development is supported by Scottish Government policy. Impacts and benefits of the proposed development 3.2 The Ministers are satisfied that landscape and visual impacts, impacts on traffic, impacts from noise, coal mining legacy issues, decommissioning, and pollution prevention can all be mitigated via the use of conditions. The determination letter does not make any comment on fire risk or the safety of the schools campus. 3.3 In considering the benefits of the proposed development, the Ministers reached the following conclusions: “The benefits of the proposed development are energy storage and provision of services needed to ensure a secure electricity system, with economic benefits. The move to a net zero electricity system needs the delivery of a greater amount of electricity generation from renewable energy, including from sources such as wind and solar which are variable and non- dispatchable. Energy storage such as the proposed development provides will be vital in that context to help maintain the balance between supply and demand, to ensuring security of supply, and to reducing the curtailment of renewable generators Page 140 of 208
Page 141
under grid constraints which would otherwise result in a loss of valuable renewable generation. Secure and stable energy supply is a fundamental need of a prosperous economy. As well as the potential economic benefit to local and national businesses during construction, the proposed development would provide further benefit to the economy through its contribution to underpinning energy security and flexibility.” The Scottish Government Policy Context Scottish Energy Strategy: The future of energy in Scotland (“the Energy Strategy”) Draft Scottish Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan 2023 3.4 The Ministers have considered the proposal in the context of the Scottish Energy Strategy: The future of energy in Scotland (the Energy Strategy) and the Draft Scottish Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan 2023. The Ministers have reached the following conclusions: 3.5 “The proposed development, through provision of energy storage, adds flexibility and resilience necessary to maintain secure and reliable supplies of energy to all our homes and businesses as our energy transition takes place. Scottish Ministers conclude that the proposed development is supported by the Energy Strategy.” 3.6 “The Draft Scottish Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan 2023 signals that strong support from the Scottish Government for battery storage remains.” Climate Change Plan 3.7 The Ministers have considered the proposal in the context of the Climate Change Plan. The Ministers have reached the following conclusions: 3.8 “The Climate Change Plan sets out the Scottish Government’s pathway to achieve the commitment to end Scotland’s contribution to climate change by 2045. Scotland’s renewable electricity generation has grown rapidly over the last twenty years, and a large contribution to achieving the commitment set out in the plan will be made by the increased decarbonisation of our electricity system.” 3.9 “The Climate Change Plan notes that in further decarbonising our electricity system, we also need to address the substantial challenges of maintaining security of supply and a resilient electricity system. It adds that operating a zero-carbon electricity system will mean finding new ways to provide a range of technical services and qualities currently provided by fossil fuel and nuclear generation. Battery storage is one technology which helps achieve these goals. Scottish Ministers Page 141 of 208
Page 142
therefore conclude that the proposed development is supported by the Climate Change Plan.” National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) 3.10 The Ministers have considered the proposal in the context of National Planning Framework 4. The Ministers have reached the following conclusions: 3.11 “NPF4 should be read as a whole, and the weight given to the policies therein decided on a case-by-case basis. The greatest weight in consideration of the proposed development on the context of NPF4 is afforded to Energy policy. The policy establishes an intent to encourage, promote and facilitate all forms of renewable energy development onshore and offshore. This description includes energy generation, storage, and new and replacement transmission and distribution infrastructure. Battery storage development such as the proposed development is supported.” 3.12 “The energy policy sets out the matters that are to be addressed in the design and mitigation of a development. Scottish Ministers consider that the design of the project, and proposed mitigation either embedded or to be achieved by planning conditions, satisfactorily address its impacts as have been addressed in this decision, and as are relevant to the proposed development. In considering these impacts, significant weight is to be placed on the contribution of the proposed development to renewable energy generation targets and on greenhouse gas emissions reduction ambitions. The proposed development will store and supply a considerable amount of electricity per year, and act as an enabling technology for harnessing more electricity generated from renewable sources in Scotland.” 3.13 “…battery energy storage makes an indirect but significant contribution to renewable energy generation targets and greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, by effectively increasing the productivity of renewable generators elsewhere on the grid. This is a significant factor weighing in favour of the proposed development. The Application also finds support from NPF4 in that it demonstrates the proposed development will provide direct and indirect local and regional economic benefits, and the biodiversity benefits of additional planting. The Scottish Ministers conclude that the proposed development is supported by NPF4 when read as a whole.” Conclusions 3.14 In reaching their decision the Scottish Ministers reached the following conclusions: 3.15 “Scottish Ministers have considered the planning authority’s comments on support for the proposed development subject to suitable planning controls and have taken all material considerations into account. Page 142 of 208
Page 143
Scottish Ministers consider the proposed development will support the resilience of the electricity network through the electricity it generates and the additional technical services it can provide to the electricity system operator. It will contribute to sustainable development, providing for greater and more efficient use of renewable energy generation in the electricity system, and in this regard, it will contribute to greenhouse gas emissions reduction ambitions.” 3.16 “The Scottish Ministers in making their determination on the Application, have balanced all relevant considerations, decided what weight is to be given to each and reached a view as to where the balance of benefit lies. On balance, it is considered that the impacts of the proposed development are acceptable in the context of its benefits, and that the Development is supported by relevant planning and energy policies.” The Scottish Ministers’ Determination 3.17 The Scottish Ministers have granted consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 for the development comprising the construction and operation of an electricity generating station and ancillary development known as Salters Battery Energy Storage System. The principal components of the development are: • BESS units and associated power conversion units within 4 compounds; • Upgraded access onto Salters Road (A6094); • 4 x Grid transformers set on bunds; • Grid operator’s switchyard/substation; • Grid operator’s building; • Applicant’s control building (or modular containers) with auxiliary 11kV transformer and separate back-up supply kiosk; • 2 harmonic filter units; • 4 fire water tanks; • Up to 3m high palisade fencing around compounds and up to 2.5m post and wire perimeter fence; • CCTV cameras with motion activated lighting; • Platform of stone construction, with concrete on concrete footings. • Concrete bunds (for transformers); • On-site attenuation pond and filter drains; • Temporary works compound; • Perimeter access track; and • Landscape planting and habitat enhancement. Consent is granted for a period of 40 years from the date of final commissioning. Page 143 of 208
Page 144
4 RECOMMENDATION 4.1 It is recommended that the Committee notes the Scottish Ministers’ decision to grant consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 for the construction and operation of an electricity generating station comprising a battery energy storage system on land located off Salters Road, immediately south of the A68 and approximately 200M south of the existing Smeaton substation, Dalkeith . Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Contact Person: Graeme King graeme.king@midlothian.gov.uk Page 144 of 208
Page 145
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 Application Site (24/00537/S36) e14 - Salter's Park Ec2 - Salter's Park Extension Greenbelt Midlothian Council Licence No. AC0000811376 (2024) Section 36 consultation for formation of Battery Energy Storage System facility with ancillary buildings and associated works. Salter's Park Extension (Site Ec2), Salter's Road Dalkeith. File No. 24/00537/S36 Scale 1:6000Page 145 of 208
Page 146
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 1 Energy and Climate Change Directorate Onshore Electricity Policy, Strategic Co-ordination & Consents Division E: EconsentsAdmin@gov.scot Daniel Ferrier Buccleuch Estates Limited by email By email only to: Daniel Ferrier dferrier@buccleuch.com 12 May 2025 Dear Daniel Ferrier, APPLICATION FOR CONSENT UNDER SECTION 36 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 AND DEEMED PLANNING PERMISSION UNDER SECTION 57(2) OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF AN ELECTRICITY GENERATING STATION KNOWN AS SALTERS BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, COMPRISING OF A BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM ON LAND LOCATED OFF SALTERS ROAD, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE A68 AND APPROXIMATELY 200M SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SMEATON SUBSTATION, DALKEITH WITHIN THE PLANNING AUTHORITY OF MIDLOTHIAN COUNCIL Application 1. I refer to an application (“the Application”) made on 21 August 2024 under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 (“the Electricity Act”) by RPS Ireland Limited on behalf of Salters Battery Storage Limited (“the Company”), a company incorporated under the Companies Act with company number SC809915, and having its registered office at Buccleuch, Weatherhouse, Bowhill, Selkirk, TD7 5ES. The application is for consent to construct and operate an electricity generating station known as ‘Salters Battery Energy Storage System’ comprising a battery electricity storage facility and associated infrastructure (“the proposed development”) with a capacity of approximately 200 megawatts (MW) on land approximately 200m South of the existing Smeaton Substation, Dalkeith, Midlothian. 2. This letter contains the Scottish Ministers’ decision to grant section 36 consent for the Salters Battery Energy Storage System development as more particularly described at Annex 1. Planning Permission 3. In terms of section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Scottish Ministers may, on granting consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act for the construction and operation of a generating station, direct that planning permission is deemed to be granted in respect of that generating station and any ancillary development. Appendix A Page 146 of 208
Page 147
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 2 4. This letter contains the Scottish Ministers’ direction that planning permission is deemed to be granted. Background 5. The Site, which measures approximately 12.1 hectares (ha), is located on farmland west of Dalkeith Country Park which is partially within the greenbelt. The Site would be accessed via existing access which opens onto the A6094. The site is in the planning authority area of Midlothian Council (“the Planning Authority”). 6. The Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) will provide approximately 200 MW of storage capacity comprising of battery-based electricity storage containers, associated power control infrastructure and ancillary development such as accesses and fencing. 7. The Company requested a screening opinion on the proposed generating station on 31 October 2023. The Scottish Ministers’ screening opinion was issued to the Company on 23 May 2024 advising that the proposed battery energy storage system does not comprise Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) development, and that the application submitted for the proposed development would not require to be accompanied by an EIA Report. The Proposed Development 8. The proposed development comprises: • BESS units and associated power conversion units within 4 compounds; • Upgraded access onto Salters Road (A6094); • 4 x Grid transformers set on bunds; • Grid operator’s switchyard/substation; • Grid operator’s building; • Applicant’s control building (or modular containers) with auxiliary 11kV transformer and separate back-up supply kiosk; • 2 harmonic filter units; • 4 fire water tanks; • Up to 3m high palisade fencing around compounds and up to 2.5m post and wire perimeter fence; • CCTV cameras with motion activated lighting; • Platform of stone construction, with concrete on concrete footings. • Concrete bunds (for transformers); • On-site attenuation pond and filter drains; • Temporary works compound; • Perimeter access track; and • Landscape planting and habitat enhancement. 9. The proposed development is intended to provide electricity for export to the grid from batteries which will store energy from electricity previously imported from the grid. This type of energy storage harnesses electricity generation that might otherwise be curtailed due to grid constraints and exports it back to the grid at times where there are no constraints. Page 147 of 208
Page 148
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 3 Consultation 10. The Scottish Ministers expect developers to carry out engagement with communities as would be required for a similar development under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and make this point in the good practice guidance for developers which they have published. Scottish Ministers note that the Company only held one pre-application consultation event, which falls short of the practice set out in the Scottish Government Energy Consent Unit’s Best Practice Guidance. While there may not be a statutory requirement for pre- application consultation for an application made under section 36 of the Electricity Act, Scottish Ministers wish to register their disappointment at the lack of regard for good practice and local community engagement by the Company. 11. Under paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 8 to the Electricity Act, and the Electricity (Application for Consent) Regulations 1990 (“the Consents Regulations”) made under the Electricity Act, the relevant planning authority is required to be notified in respect of a section 36 consent application and notice of the Application was served on the Planning Authority. Notifications were also sent to NatureScot (the operating name of Scottish Natural Heritage), the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and Historic Environment Scotland (HES). A range of other relevant organisations were also notified and consulted. In accordance with the Consents Regulations, a notice of the proposed development was advertised in the local and national press and the opportunity given for those wishing to make representations to do so. Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 12. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (“the Habitats Regulations”) require the Scottish Ministers to consider whether the proposed Development would be likely to have a significant effect on a European site, as defined in the Habitats Regulations. Consideration is also given to whether the proposed Development is directly connected with or necessary to the management of the European site. 13. NatureScot have advised that in relation to European sites, it is unlikely that the proposed Development will have a significant effect on any qualifying interests, either directly or indirectly. An appropriate assessment is therefore not required. Consultation responses 14. There is one outstanding objection from consultees. The consultation responses received are summarised below. 15. Midlothian Council, the Planning Authority, does not object to the proposed Development, as it accords with the local development plan (which consists of NPF4 and the MLDP 2017). A number of conditions have been suggested covering coal mining legacy and contaminated land investigations, protection and replacement where necessary of trees, hedges and shrubs, landscaping, external finishing, flood risk, drainage, the production of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), and to mitigate impacts on visual and environmental amenity. The Planning Authority also requested that any consent granted should account for concerns raised by members at Council Executive on 13 August 2024 in relation to fire safety, disposal of batteries/decommissioning and Pollution. 16. Historic Environment Scotland (HES) does not object. The proposed Development would be near the designated garden and designed landscape (GDL) of Dalkeith House (Palace). The designed landscape is the setting for a number of category A listed buildings Page 148 of 208
Page 149
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 4 including Dalkeith House, Stables, and Coach block. Given the scale of the proposed Development and its proximity to the GDL, HES think the views to and from the designed landscape are unlikely to be adversely impacted by the proposed Development and they have no issues with the proposed works. 17. NatureScot does not object. They note that the Ecological Impact Assessment (ECIA) report submitted with the application states that there is one statutory designated site within 2km of the site (Dalkeith Oakwood Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). They agree that there is no connection between this proposal and the site. NatureScot further advise that the Firth of Forth Special Protection Area (SPA) is less than 5km from the site and some of its designated features have a foraging range of over 5km. This means that there could be connectivity between this SPA and the development site. However, since the ECIA shows little to no evidence of SPA birds using the site, their advice is that it is unlikely that the proposal will have a significant effect on any qualifying interests either directly or indirectly. An appropriate assessment is therefore not required. NatureScot also provide standard advice on Protected Species and Biodiversity. 18. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) does not object. They had no site- specific comments but provided general advice on flood risk. SEPA also provided advice for the Company as follows: “Details of regulatory requirements and good practice advice, for example in relation to private drainage, can be found on the regulations section of our website: https://www.sepa.org.uk/regulations/water/”. 19. BT does not object. The proposed Development should not cause interference to BT’s current and presently planned radio network. 20. Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) does not object. The proposed Development falls outside the MOD safeguarded areas and does not affect other defence interests. 21. Edinburgh Airport does not object. The proposed Development does not conflict with safeguarding criteria. 22. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) does not object. HSE highlighted that there is a major accident hazard pipeline within the red line site boundary - 7974_2232 Whitehill Farm / Musselburgh (L05) - operated by Scotland Gas Networks Ltd. They advised that Scottish Ministers may wish to contact the pipeline operator to see if they have any comments. They also confirmed that the HSE Land Use Planning Team does not require to be consulted. 23. The Nuclear Safety Directorate does not object and had no comment as the proposed Development does not lie in a consultation zone around a GB nuclear site. 24. NATS Safeguarding does not object. The proposed Development does not conflict with safeguarding criteria. 25. Scottish Gas Networks (SGN) objected to the proposed Development due to the presence of a High-Pressure Gas Transmission Pipeline within the vicinity of the proposed development. They confirmed that the pipeline in question is classified as a Major Accident Hazard Pipeline in terms of the Pipelines Safety Regulations 1996. Following further discussions, the applicant provided a technical note to SGN to address the issues raised. SGN has since stated that their objection to the application is removed, providing that a planning condition is included to ensure the risks to the pipeline are properly assessed and mitigated. Page 149 of 208
Page 150
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 5 26. Scottish Water does not object. Scottish Water confirmed no drinking water protected areas within the proposed Development area. Standard advice was also provided. 27. The Coal Authority does not object. Within the site of the proposed development there are recorded surface and shallow sub-surface coal mining features which may pose a potential risk to surface stability and public safety. The Coal Authority requests that relevant conditions are imposed on any consent granted so that the risks posed by coal mining features are properly investigated, and remediated, as necessary. 28. The Coal Authority also asked for the following to be noted: Ground investigations - Under the Coal Industry Act 1994 any intrusive activities, including initial site investigation boreholes, and/or any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings/coal mine entries for ground stability purposes require the prior written permission of The Coal Authority, since such activities can have serious public health and safety implications. Failure to obtain permission to enter or disturb our property may result in the potential for court action. In the event that you are proposing to undertake such work in the Forest of Dean local authority area our permission may not be required; it is recommended that you check with us prior to commencing any works. Application forms for Coal Authority permission and further guidance can be obtained from The Coal Authority’s website at:www.gov.uk/get-a-permit-to-deal-with- a-coal-mine-on-your-property What is a permit and how to get one? - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Coal mining permit terms and conditions - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Shallow coal seams - In areas where shallow coal seams are present caution should be taken when carrying out any on site burning or heat focused activities. 29. Dalkeith and District Community Council does object. They raise the following concerns: • The use of Lithium-ion batteries and the potential fire risks associated with this battery type. Added concern that the proposed Development is adjacent to Dalkeith School Campus; • The proposed Development is on the site of a former colliery and the potential for underground fire risk, should the coal seams catch fire. • Adequacy of the screening proposed. 30. No responses to the consultation were received from JRC, RSPB Scotland, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, Scottish Power Energy Networks (SPEN), ScotWays, Scottish Wildlife Trust, Transport Scotland; Visit Scotland, and Whitecraig Community Council. Representations 31. 9 representations were received from members of the public objecting to the proposed Development. The points raised within these objections were: • The proximity of the development to the community and schools. • The potential impact of the development on medical equipment. • The risk of fire arising from the development. • The level and manner of local stakeholder engagement. • The presence of a Scottish Gas Networks (SGN) High-Pressure Gas Pipeline within the site boundary. • The increased likelihood of antisocial and nuisance behaviour. Page 150 of 208
Page 151
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 6 • Landscape and visual impact. • There are alternative sites for BESS developments. • It would be good to have the opinion of the electric network operator of where they consider a BESS should be fitted. • A public right of way on NCR1 should remain throughout the construction period. • Impacts on the environment and displacement of wildlife. • There should be public or community benefits from the proposed Development Regulatory Requirements 32. With regard to paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 8 to the Electricity Act and regulation 8 of the Consents Regulations, if a planning authority makes an objection within the timescale given by regulation 8 (1) and that objection is not withdrawn, the Scottish Ministers must cause a Public Inquiry to be held unless the Scottish Ministers propose to accede to the application subject to such modifications or conditions as will give effect to the objection of the planning authority. Following the consultation in this instance, the Planning Authority has no objection to the consent of the proposed development subject to the planning conditions it recommends, therefore a Public Inquiry is not a statutory requirement. 33. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 8 provides that where the Scottish Ministers are not, by virtue of paragraph 2(2), to cause a Public Inquiry to be held, but objections or copies of objections have been sent to the Scottish Ministers, the Scottish Ministers must consider those objections together with all other material considerations with a view to determining whether a Public Inquiry should be held with respect to the application and, if they think it appropriate to do so, they must cause a Public Inquiry to be held. 34. The Scottish Ministers have considered the consultee responses and representations of objection, and having taken all material considerations into account, decided that a Public Inquiry is not required. 35. The Scottish Ministers are content that there is sufficient information to be able to make an informed decision on the Application and that they can weigh all the conflicting issues without holding a Public Inquiry. 36. Scottish Ministers have had regard to the matters set out in Schedule 9 of the Electricity Act in respect of the desirability of preserving the natural beauty of the countryside, of conserving flora, fauna and geological and physiological features of special interest and of protecting sites, buildings and objects of architectural, historic, or archaeological interest. Scottish Ministers have avoided, as far as possible, causing injury to fisheries or to the stock of fish in any waters in the consideration and determination of this application. 37. In accordance with section 36(5A) of the Act, before granting any section 36 consent Scottish Ministers are also required to: • obtain SEPA advice on matters relating to the protection of the water environment; and • have regard to the purposes of Part 1 of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003. 38. SEPA’s advice has been obtained and considered as required by section 36(5A) with due regard given to the purposes of Part 1 of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003. SEPA has no objection to the proposed development. Any discharge of Page 151 of 208
Page 152
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 7 water run-off from a construction site to the water environment must be authorised by SEPA and advice on best practice guidance and regulatory requirements is provided on SEPA’s website. 39. Scottish Ministers have had regard to the above factors from Schedule 9 of the Electricity Act and have considered the Application, responses from consultees and representations from third parties and find that the effects of the proposed development on these environmental factors are minimal. Mitigation measures are proposed to further reduce these potential effects. 40. All consultation and publicity requirements required by Schedule 8 to the Electricity Act and by the Consents Regulations have been undertaken. The proposed development was screened in accordance with the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 (“the EIA regulations”), and Scottish Ministers’ opinion was that the proposed development did not require an Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out. The Local Development Plan 41. The Planning Authority considered the key pieces of local planning policy to be National Planning Framework 4 (“NPF4”) and the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 (“MLDP”). 42. The Planning Authority did not identify any principal impacts associated with the proposed Development. The Planning Authority have determined that the proposed development accords with NPF4 overall as well as the relevant provisions of the MLDP. 43. Most of the proposed development is on vacant land which has been allocated as economic land supply within the MDLP. The proposal is a suitable form of development and is an acceptable location for a battery energy storage system. They have recommended conditions to be attached to the deemed planning permission relating to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the development. 44. The Scottish Ministers have imposed the conditions requested by the Planning Authority where these are considered to meet the tests of Scottish Government Circular 4/1998 (‘the circular’). These can be found in Annex 2 – Part 2. Determining issues 45. Grid scale battery energy storage facilitates a significant contribution to renewable energy generation targets and greenhouse gas emissions reduction ambitions, by alleviating grid constraints, avoiding curtailment and increasing the productivity of renewable generators elsewhere on the grid. This is a significant factor weighing in favour of the proposed development. 46. The proposed development is a battery energy storage system and other associated ancillary electrical infrastructure. The electrical export capacity of the proposed development will be approximately 200 MW. The proposed development would be operational for a period of 40 years. 47. Having considered the Application, responses from consultees and third parties and Scottish Government policies, Scottish Ministers consider that the determining issues are the balance between the impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding area and its Page 152 of 208
Page 153
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 8 benefits, and the extent to which the proposed development is supported by Scottish Government policy. Impacts and benefits of the proposed development 48. The Planning Authority did not highlight any significant impacts but recognised that the proposed development would result in limited landscape and visual impacts and impacts on traffic and noise. There is also potential for coal mining legacy in the area to be affected. Scottish Ministers agree to include the conditions the Planning Authority advises are necessary to mitigate these impacts. Conditions have also been included in relation to decommissioning and pollution prevention to address concerns raised by the Planning Authority in relation to potential impacts. 49. The benefits of the proposed development are energy storage and provision of services needed to ensure a secure electricity system, with economic benefits. The move to a net zero electricity system needs the delivery of a greater amount of electricity generation from renewable energy, including from sources such as wind and solar which are variable and non- dispatchable. Energy storage such as the proposed development provides will be vital in that context to help maintain the balance between supply and demand, to ensuring security of supply, and to reducing the curtailment of renewable generators under grid constraints which would otherwise result in a loss of valuable renewable generation. Secure and stable energy supply is a fundamental need of a prosperous economy. As well as the potential economic benefit to local and national businesses during construction, the proposed development would provide further benefit to the economy through its contribution to underpinning energy security and flexibility. The Scottish Government Policy Context Scottish Energy Strategy: The future of energy in Scotland (“the Energy Strategy”) Draft Scottish Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan 2023 50. Scottish Ministers have considered the role the proposed development can play in relation to the generation of electricity from low carbon energy storage, with its capacity of approximately 200 MW from battery energy storage. The Energy Strategy states that “Scotland should have the capacity, the connections, the flexibility and resilience necessary to maintain secure and reliable supplies of energy to all of our homes and businesses as our energy transition takes place.” It adds that “Scotland needs a balanced and secure electricity supply. That means a system and a range of technologies which provide sufficient generation and interconnection to meet demand. It means an electricity network which is resilient and sufficiently secure against any fluctuations or interruptions to supply.” 51. The generation of electricity from batteries is not in itself a renewable source of energy; Scottish Ministers do however regard the proposed development as essential infrastructure. The proposed development, through provision of energy storage, adds flexibility and resilience necessary to maintain secure and reliable supplies of energy to all our homes and businesses as our energy transition takes place. Scottish Ministers conclude that the proposed development is supported by the Energy Strategy. 52. The Draft Scottish Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan 2023 signals that strong support from the Scottish Government for battery storage remains. Page 153 of 208
Page 154
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 9 Climate Change Plan 53. The Climate Change Plan sets out the Scottish Government’s pathway to achieve the commitment to end Scotland’s contribution to climate change by 2045. Scotland’s renewable electricity generation has grown rapidly over the last twenty years, and a large contribution to achieving the commitment set out in the plan will be made by the increased decarbonisation of our electricity system. 54. The Climate Change Plan notes that in further decarbonising our electricity system, we also need to address the substantial challenges of maintaining security of supply and a resilient electricity system. It adds that operating a zero-carbon electricity system will mean finding new ways to provide a range of technical services and qualities currently provided by fossil fuel and nuclear generation. Battery storage is one technology which helps achieve these goals. Scottish Ministers therefore conclude that the proposed development is supported by the Climate Change Plan. National Planning Framework 4 55. National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) sets out Scottish Ministers’ policies and proposals for the development and use of land. It plays a key role in supporting the delivery of Scotland’s national outcomes and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Part 1 of NPF4 sets out a Spatial Strategy for Scotland to 2045 and identifies developments of national importance to help deliver that strategy. The need for Strategic Renewable Electricity Generation and Transmission Infrastructure, of which this development is an example, is established therein. 56. Part 2 sets out National Planning Policy. NPF4 should be read as a whole, and the weight given to the policies therein decided on a case-by-case basis. The greatest weight in consideration of the proposed development on the context of NPF4 is afforded to Energy policy. The policy establishes an intent to encourage, promote and facilitate all forms of renewable energy development onshore and offshore. This description includes energy generation, storage, and new and replacement transmission and distribution infrastructure. Battery storage development such as the proposed development is supported. 57. The energy policy sets out the matters that are to be addressed in the design and mitigation of a development. Scottish Ministers consider that the design of the project, and proposed mitigation either embedded or to be achieved by planning conditions, satisfactorily address its impacts as have been addressed in this decision, and as are relevant to the proposed development. In considering these impacts, significant weight is to be placed on the contribution of the proposed development to renewable energy generation targets and on greenhouse gas emissions reduction ambitions. The proposed development will store and supply a considerable amount of electricity per year, and act as an enabling technology for harnessing more electricity generated from renewable sources in Scotland. 58. In its role balancing supply and demand across the electricity system, the electricity system operator must keep the system within defined operating limits. Traditionally, these services were often provided by thermal generators such as gas-fired power stations. As we transition to a net zero energy system and reduce our dependence on fossil fuel generation, renewables and other low-carbon technologies, including energy storage, will need to provide all the services needed to ensure a secure electricity system. Grid scale battery energy storage provides a means to store the electricity generated from the wind, solar etc at times when electricity generation outstrips demand or when the capacity of a constrained electricity grid is Page 154 of 208
Page 155
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 10 insufficient to supply the generated electricity to consumers. On this basis battery energy storage makes an indirect but significant contribution to renewable energy generation targets and greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, by effectively increasing the productivity of renewable generators elsewhere on the grid. This is a significant factor weighing in favour of the proposed development. The Application also finds support from NPF4 in that it demonstrates the proposed development will provide direct and indirect local and regional economic benefits, and the biodiversity benefits of additional planting. The Scottish Ministers conclude that the proposed development is supported by NPF4 when read as a whole. 59. Scottish Ministers note the comments of the Planning Authority in relation to decommissioning and consider the decommissioning and site restoration at the end of the proposed development’s life should be controlled by planning condition and have included condition 9 in this respect. Scottish Ministers have also introduced a requirement for a financial bond to ensure sufficient funds are available to decommission and restore the site. Scottish Ministers consider that, if the proposed development becomes redundant before the end of the full operational period which it is allowed, the requirement for decommissioning and site restoration should come into effect at the time the proposed development is found to be redundant. 60. Scotland’s energy policies and planning policies are material considerations in determining applications. NPF4 and the Energy Strategy make it clear that low carbon technology deployment and energy storage remain priorities of the Scottish Government. This is a matter which should be afforded significant weight in favour of the proposed development. 61. Scottish Ministers acknowledge that the proposed development would result in some noise, traffic, and landscape and visual impacts. These impacts are considered acceptable in the context of the benefits that the proposed development will bring in terms of net economic benefit, contributing energy storage, while protecting the natural environment. Conclusions 62. Scottish Ministers have considered the Planning Authority’s comments on support for the proposed development subject to suitable planning controls and have taken all material considerations into account. Scottish Ministers consider the proposed development will support the resilience of the electricity network through the electricity it generates and the additional technical services it can provide to the electricity system operator. It will contribute to sustainable development, providing for greater and more efficient use of renewable energy generation in the electricity system, and in this regard, it will contribute to greenhouse gas emissions reduction ambitions. 63. The Scottish Ministers in making their determination on the Application, have balanced all relevant considerations, decided what weight is to be given to each and reached a view as to where the balance of benefit lies. On balance, it is considered that the impacts of the proposed development are acceptable in the context of its benefits, and that the Development is supported by relevant planning and energy policies. The Scottish Ministers’ Determination 64. Subject to the conditions set out in Part 1 of Annex 2, the Scottish Ministers grant consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act for the construction and operation of the electricity generating station comprising a battery energy storage system, known as Salters Page 155 of 208
Page 156
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 11 Battery Energy Storage System , located within the Planning Authority area of Midlothian Council (as more particularly described in Annex 1). 65. The consent hereby granted will last for a period of 40 years from the Date of Final Commissioning. 66. Subject to the conditions set out in Part 2 of Annex 2, the Scottish Ministers direct that planning permission is deemed to be granted under section 57(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in respect of the development described in Annex 1. 67. Copies of this letter have been sent to the public bodies consulted on the application. This letter has also been published on the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit website at https://www.energyconsents.scot. 68. The Scottish Ministers’ decision is final, subject to the right of any aggrieved person to apply to the Court of Session for judicial review. Judicial review is the mechanism by which the Court of Session supervises the exercise of administrative functions, including how the Scottish Ministers exercise their statutory function to determine Applications for consent. The rules relating to the judicial review process can be found on the website of the Scottish Courts: chapter-58-judicial-review.pdf (scotcourts.gov.uk). 69. Your local Citizens’ Advice Bureau or your solicitor will be able to advise you about the applicable procedures. Yours faithfully pp Paul Smith Mark Christie A member of the staff of the Scottish Government Page 156 of 208
Page 157
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 12 ANNEX 1 DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The Development comprises the construction and operation of an electricity generating station and ancillary development known as Salters Battery Energy Storage System The principal components of the development are: • BESS units and associated power conversion units within 4 compounds; • Upgraded access onto Salters Road (A6094); • 4 x Grid transformers set on bunds; • Grid operator’s switchyard/substation; • Grid operator’s building; • Applicant’s control building (or modular containers) with auxiliary 11kV transformer and separate back-up supply kiosk; • 2 harmonic filter units; • 4 fire water tanks; • Up to 3m high palisade fencing around compounds and up to 2.5m post and wire perimeter fence; • CCTV cameras with motion activated lighting; • Platform of stone construction, with concrete on concrete footings. • Concrete bunds (for transformers); • On-site attenuation pond and filter drains; • Temporary works compound; • Perimeter access track; and • Landscape planting and habitat enhancement. All as more particularly described in the Application. Page 157 of 208
Page 158
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 13 ANNEX 2 CONDITIONS Part 1 – Conditions attached to the Section 36 Consent 1. Commencement of Development (1) The Commencement of Development shall be no later than five years from the date of this consent, or such other period as the Scottish Ministers may direct in writing. Written confirmation of the intended date of Commencement of Development shall be provided to the Scottish Ministers and the Planning Authority no later than one calendar month before that date. Reason: To ensure that the development is commenced within a reasonable period. 2. Notifications (1) Written confirmation of the Date of Final Commissioning shall be provided to the Planning Authority and Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month after that date. Reason: To allow the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers to calculate the date of expiry of the consent. 3. Assignation (1) The Company must not assign the consent without the prior written authorisation of the Scottish Ministers. The Scottish Ministers may authorise the assignation, with or without conditions or refuse the assignation. (2) In the event that the assignation is authorised, the Company shall notify the Planning Authority and Scottish Ministers in writing of principal named contact at the assignee and contact details within fourteen days of the consent being assigned. (3) The consent shall not be capable of being assigned, alienated or transferred otherwise than in accordance with this condition. Reason: To safeguard the obligations of the consent if transferred to another company. 4. Serious Incident Reporting (1) In the event of any breach of health and safety or environmental obligations relating to the Development causing harm to the environment (including harm to humans) during the period of this consent, written notification of the nature and timing of the incident shall be submitted to the Scottish Ministers within twenty-four hours of the incident occurring, including confirmation of remedial measures taken and/or to be taken to rectify the breach. Reason: To keep Scottish Ministers informed of any serious incidents which occur, and Page 158 of 208
Page 159
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 14 which may be in the public interest. 5. Design and Operation of Storage Technology (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until details of the storage technology and final site layout to be implemented, including final details of access and water supply for emergency services, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Scottish Ministers in consultation with the Planning Authority. The storage technology details and infrastructure, including the battery storage units to be deployed, shall be consistent with the Application. (2) Thereafter, the Development shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Scottish Ministers in consultation with the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of protecting the environment. Page 159 of 208
Page 160
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 15 Part 2 – Conditions attached to Deemed Planning Permission 6. Implementation in accordance with Approved Layout and requirements of this consent (1) Except as otherwise required by the terms of this consent and deemed planning permission the Development shall be undertaken in accordance with the Application, the planning drawings and all documentation lodged by the Company or its appointed agents on behalf of the Company in support of the Application. For avoidance of doubt this includes any recommended or proposed measure to avoid, minimise or offset any identified potential impact of the Development which is committed to or recommended in the Application and its constituent assessments. Reason: To ensure that the Development is carried out in accordance with the approved details. 7. Site Layout (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development until a finalised detailed site layout has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: Indicative site layout only has been provided. 8. Commencement of development (1) The development must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this consent. (2) Written confirmation of the intended date of Commencement of Development shall be provided to the Planning Authority and the Scottish Ministers no later than one calendar month before that date. Reason: To comply with section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and to ensure that the permission is implemented within a reasonable period and to allow the Planning Authority to monitor compliance with obligations attached to this planning permission as appropriate. 9. Site Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare (1) The Development will disconnect from the grid and cease to import or export electricity no later than the date falling forty years from the date of Final Commissioning. The total period for decommissioning and restoration of the Site in accordance with this condition shall not exceed forty-two years from the Date of Final Commissioning without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. (2) There shall be no Commencement of Development until a decommissioning, restoration and aftercare strategy has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The strategy shall include measures for the decommissioning of the Development, restoration and aftercare of the site and will include, without limitation, proposals for the removal of the above ground elements of the Development, confirmation of the status of subterranean elements of the Development (retention, removal, or other Page 160 of 208
Page 161
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 16 such proposal), the treatment of ground surfaces, the management and timing of the works and environmental management provisions. (3) No later than 3 years prior to decommissioning of the Development or the expiration of the consent (whichever is the earlier) a detailed Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare Plan, based upon the principles of the approved Decommissioning Strategy, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. The detailed Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare Plan, will provide updated and detailed proposals for the removal of the Development, the treatment of ground surfaces, the management and timing of the works and environment management provisions which (unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority) shall include: a. a site waste management plan (dealing with all aspects of waste produced during the decommissioning, restoration and aftercare phases); to include the items listed in the CEMP site waste plan. b. details of the formation of the construction compound, welfare facilities, any areas of hardstanding, turning areas, internal access tracks, car parking, material stockpiles, oil storage, lighting columns, and any construction compound boundary fencing; c. a dust management plan; d. details of measures to be taken to prevent loose or deleterious material being deposited on the local road network including wheel cleaning and lorry sheeting facilities, and measures to clean the site entrances and the adjacent local road network; e. a pollution prevention and control method statement, including arrangements for the storage and management of oil and fuel on the site; f. soil restoration; g. a surface water and groundwater management and treatment plan, including details of the separation of clean and dirty water drains, and location of settlement lagoons for silt laden water; h. sewage disposal and treatment; i. temporary site illumination; j. the construction of any temporary access into the site and the creation and maintenance of associated visibility splays; k. details of any watercourse crossings; l. a species protection plan based on surveys for protected species (including birds) carried out no longer than 18 months prior to submission of the plan; m. traffic management plan; n. timetable for decommissioning and restoration, which period shall not exceed two years unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. o. The Development shall be decommissioned, the Site restored, and aftercare thereafter undertaken in accordance with the approved detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing in advance with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the Development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. Page 161 of 208
Page 162
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 17 10. Removal of redundant equipment (1) The Company shall supply to the Planning Authority an annual written report confirming that the battery energy storage facility is importing from and exporting electricity to the grid. If the battery storage facility fails to import from or export electricity to the grid for a continuous period of 12 months, then unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the Company shall no later than one year after the last day of this 12-month period submit the site Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare Plan to the Planning Authority for approval and implement it in accordance with condition 9 (3) items “a” to “o”. Reason: To ensure that if the Development or part thereof becomes redundant the equipment is removed from the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 11. Planning Monitoring Officer (“PMO”) (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until the Planning Authority has approved in writing the terms of appointment by the Company of an independent and suitably qualified environmental consultant to assist the Planning Authority in monitoring compliance with the terms of the deemed planning permission and conditions attached to this consent, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. (2) No works shall commence on site until the approved environmental consultant’s appointment has been confirmed in writing by the Company and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. (3) The terms of appointment shall: a. Impose a duty to monitor compliance with the terms of the deemed planning permission and conditions attached to this consent; b. Require the PMO to submit a monthly report to the Planning Authority summarising works undertaken on site; c. Require the PMO to report to the Company and the Planning Authority any incidences of noncompliance with the terms of the terms of the deemed planning permission and conditions attached to this consent at the earliest practical opportunity; and d. Monitor any remedial work undertaken due to noncompliance with point c to ensure work undertaken to required standard and in accordance with consent. (4) The PMO shall be appointed on the approved terms throughout the period from Commencement of Development to completion of post construction restoration works, unless otherwise agreed by the Planning Authority. The PMO shall be given access to the site at all reasonable times, and to digital and written records as necessary to fulfil their duties. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with the consent. 12. Materials Used (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development until the details of the materials to be used as finishing materials on all buildings, boundary treatments including gates, structures and all hardstanding surface finishes have been submitted to, and approved Page 162 of 208
Page 163
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 18 in writing by, the Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details that are approved. Reason: In the interests of visual and environmental amenity. 13. Construction and Environmental Management Plan (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (“CEMP”) outlining site specific details of all onsite construction works, post-construction reinstatement, drainage, and mitigation, together with details of their timetabling, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. (2) The CEMP shall include (but shall not be limited to): a. A site investigation and ground monitoring plan detailing all preliminary site investigation and ground investigation works, in compliance with BS 59300:2015 or successor guidance; b. a site waste management plan to include: i. Waste expected to be produced and how materials will be reused, recycled or reclaimed; ii. Steps to minimise waste and maximise the use of recyclates; iii. Management of waste on site and leaving the site; and iv. Relevant evidence of waste carrier/waste transfer. c. details of contingency planning in the event of accidental release of materials which could cause harm to the environment; d. details of the formation of the construction compound, welfare facilities, any areas of hardstanding, turning areas, internal access tracks, car parking, material stockpiles, oil storage, lighting columns, and any compound boundary fencing; e. All construction vehicles leaving the site shall do so in a manner that does not cause the deposition of mud or other deleterious material on surrounding roads. Such steps shall include the cleaning of the wheels and undercarriage of each vehicle where necessary and the provision of road sweeping equipment; f. a dust management plan; g. a soil management plan; h. details of measures to be taken to prevent loose or deleterious material being deposited on the local road; i. a pollution prevention and control method statement, including arrangements for the storage and management of oil and fuel on the site; j. sewage disposal and treatment; k. temporary site illumination; l. the method of construction (insofar as constructed on site) and erection of BESS, HV transformers, CCTV columns; m. details of watercourse crossings; n. post-construction restoration/ reinstatement of the working areas not required during the operation of the Development, construction compound, storage areas, laydown areas, access tracks, other construction areas. Details should include all seed mixes to be used for the reinstatement of vegetation; Page 163 of 208
Page 164
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 19 o. a description of the proposed activities, structures or tracks within the laydown area and details of its restoration including a timetable. p. Note there shall be no burning of any material on the site. q. Where piling or other significant vibration sources are likely during construction that may be perceptible in other premises, measures shall be implemented to monitor the degree of vibration created and to demonstrate best practice. These shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority prior to works starting on site. r. A drainage management strategy, demonstrating how all surface and waste water arising during and after construction is to be managed and prevented from impacting on the water environment and to mitigate flood risk; s. Measures to ensure safe operation of National Cycle Network Route 1. (3) The development shall be implemented thereafter in accordance with the approved CEMP unless otherwise approved in advance in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that all construction operations are carried out in a manner that minimises their impact on road safety, amenity and the environment. 14. Financial Guarantee (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until a bond or other form of financial guarantee in terms which secures the cost of performance of all decommissioning, restoration and aftercare obligations referred to in condition 9 has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. (2) The value of the financial guarantee shall be agreed between the Company and the Planning Authority or, failing agreement, determined (on application by either party) by a suitably qualified independent professional as being sufficient to meet the costs of all decommissioning, restoration and aftercare obligations referred to in condition 9. (3) The financial guarantee shall be maintained in favour of the Planning Authority until the completion of all decommissioning, restoration and aftercare obligations referred to in condition 9. (4) The value of the financial guarantee shall be reviewed by agreement between the Company and the Planning Authority or, failing agreement, determined (on application by either party) by a suitably qualified independent professional not less than every five years, and at the time of the approval of the detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan approved under condition 9. The value of the financial guarantee shall be increased or decreased to take account of any variation in costs of compliance with decommissioning, restoration and aftercare obligations referred to in condition 9 and best practice prevailing at the time of each review. Reason: To ensure that there are sufficient funds to secure performance of the decommissioning, restoration and aftercare conditions attached to this deemed planning permission in the event of default by the Company. 15. Coal mining activity (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development until: Page 164 of 208
Page 165
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 20 a. A scheme of intrusive site investigations for coal mining legacy issues has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. b. The scheme of intrusive site investigations as approved has been implemented. c. A report of the findings of the intrusive site investigations has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. d. A scheme of remedial works for coal mining legacy issues has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. (2) Thereafter, any approved remedial measures shall be implemented. Following completion of the remediation measures, a verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out shall be prepared. The development shall not be occupied until the verification report has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: The coal mining legacy potentially poses a risk to the proposed development and that intrusive site investigations works should be undertaken prior to the development in order to establish any coal mining legacy issues on the site. 16. Construction Hours (1) No construction work associated with the Development shall take place on the Site on any Sunday or Bank Holiday. On any other day there shall be no construction work except between the following hours: Monday to Friday: 07:00 to 19:00, Saturday: 08:00 to 13:00. Unless such work: a. does not cause the existing ambient background noise levels to be exceeded at any of the noise sensitive receptors identified in the application; or b. is associated with essential maintenance / testing; or c. is associated with an emergency; or, d. is approved in advance in writing by the Planning Authority. (2) No HGV movements associated with construction of the Development (excluding abnormal loads) shall enter or leave the Site on any Sunday or Bank Holiday, or on any other day except between the following hours: Monday to Friday: 07:00 to 19:00, Saturday: 08:00 to 13:00. Unless such movement: a. is associated with an emergency; or b. is approved in advance in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of local amenity. 17. Construction traffic management (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland to ensure that general construction traffic can be transported along the trunk road network safely and efficiently. The CTMP shall contain details on routing and timing of deliveries to site, site operatives parking area, and traffic management required to allow off site operations (such as public utility installation, pedestrian access etc). Page 165 of 208
Page 166
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 21 (2) The CTMP shall include (but shall not be limited to) details on the following: a. Estimate of traffic vehicle movements; b. Proposed construction traffic routes and key traffic management; c. Proposed delivery route; d. Safety measures in regard to pedestrians and cyclists during construction; e. Detailed site access design and details of any required traffic management measures, including visibility splays; and f. Information on wheel-washing facilities; g. Measures to ensure that site deliveries avoid school arrival and departure times; and h. Confirmation that vehicles will not use the B6414. (3) Thereafter, the Development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved CTMP, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland. Reason: To minimise interference and maintain the safety and free flow of traffic on the Trunk Road as a result of the traffic moving to and from the Site. 18. Noise (1) All fixed plant, machinery and equipment, associated with the development herby approved, shall be such that the combined operational noise level complies with Noise Rating (NR) 30 daytime (07:00 to 23:00 hrs) or NR 25 night-time (23:00 to 07:00 hrs) within any noise sensitive property, based on appropriate noise measurements, the methodology and approach to which shall be agreed with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure noise impact of fixed plant, machinery and equipment is kept within acceptable levels. 19. Contaminated Land Site Investigation (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless and until a scheme to deal with any contamination of the site and/or previous mineral workings has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The scheme shall contain details of the proposals to deal with any contamination and/or previous mineral workings and include: a. the nature, extent and types of contamination and/or previous mineral workings on the site; b. 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; c. measures to deal with contamination and/or previous mineral workings encountered during construction work; and d. the condition of the site on completion of the specified decontamination measures. (2) On completion of the decontamination/remediation works referred to in Condition (1) above and prior to any building on the site being occupied, a validation report or reports shall be Page 166 of 208
Page 167
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 22 submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. No building on the site shall be occupied unless or until the Planning Authority have approved the required validation. Reason: To identify any contamination present on site and ensure appropriate remediation is carried out. 20. Biodiversity Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (1) Prior to the Commencement of Development, a Biodiversity, Landscape and Ecological Management Plan which sets out measures for the establishment and long-term management and monitoring of newly created and retained habitats to maximise benefits for biodiversity shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The Biodiversity, Landscape and Ecological Management Plan shall include a programme for the implementation of the agreed measures. The approved Biodiversity, Landscape and Ecological Management Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the protection of habitats and species. 21. Invasive Non-native Species Survey (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development until an invasive and non-native species survey and, if required, a remediation plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details as approved. Reason: To enable full consideration to be given to those details, in the interests of visual and environmental amenity. 22. Archaeology (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless an archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The WSI shall provide details of how the recording and recovery of archaeological resources found within the Site shall be undertaken, and how any updates, if required, to the Written Scheme of Investigation will be provided throughout the implementation of the programme of archaeological works. The WSI shall also detail how any requirement for reporting, post-excavation analysis, archive deposition, publication of results, and the delivery of public benefit (including how this will be recorded and reported) will be undertaken. (2) A programme of archaeological works must be carried out in accordance with the approved WSI, and any addendums to it, as agreed under part (1). (3) Should the archaeological works carried out under part (2) reveal the need for post excavation analysis, the development hereby approved shall not be occupied or brought into use unless a post-excavation research design (PERD) for the analysis, publication and dissemination of results, including additional public engagement, and archive Page 167 of 208
Page 168
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 23 deposition has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The PERD shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved details Reason: To ensure the protection or recording of archaeological features on the site 23. Scottish Gas Networks Pipeline (1) No electrical infrastructure shall be installed on site until the Company has undertaken an assessment and modelling as required has been undertaken to determine any AC or DC interference levels on the Scotland Gas Networks’ adjacent pipeline from steady state and fault conditions of the electrical infrastructure associated with the proposed development, taking into consideration the nearby SGN pipeline and associated equipment. This includes: • Any steady state AC or DC Interference • Fault Condition Interference in accordance with the limits in BS EN50122-1:2022 • If levels of AC or DC interference are not within safe and reliable operational limits, appropriate mitigation will be design and implemented (as described by SGN/PM/ECP/2, BS EN ISO 18086:2020 and BS EN 50162:2004) (2) The results of this modelling (and any mitigation necessary to meet safe and reliable operational limits) will be submitted for the prior written approval of the Planning Authority, following consultation with Scotland Gas Networks’, before any work commences on site. Reason: To ensure a mechanism is in place to assess and mitigate the effects of inducing unacceptable levels of electrical alternating currents and voltage upon other utilities in the event they arise. 24. Ground Levels (1) There shall be no Commencement of Development unless a site plan and section drawing(s) and associated specification detailing the existing and proposed ground levels within the site have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the approved details shall be implemented in full. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. Page 168 of 208
Page 169
Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU www.gov.scot 24 DEFINITIONS “Application” Means the application submitted by the Company on 21 August 2024 and its supporting documents, including any documentation submitted thereafter by the Company or its appointed agents to the Scottish Ministers, up until the date of this letter. “The Company” Means Salters Battery Storage Limited, incorporated under the Companies Act with company number SC809915 having its registered office at Buccleuch, Weatherhouse, Bowhill, Selkirk, United Kingdom, TD7 5ES or such other person who from time to time may lawfully have the benefit of this consent. “Commencement of Development” Means the implementation of the consent and deemed planning permission by carrying out a material operation within the meaning of section 27 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 . “Date of Final Commissioning” Means the earlier of (i) the date on which the Development first exports electricity to the national grid on a commercial basis; or (ii) the date falling 18 months from the date of Commencement of Development. “the Development” Means the development described in Annex 1. (For the avoidance of doubt, this includes the ancillary development described in Annex 1.) “Planning Authority” Means Midlothian Council. “Approved Layout” Means the layout described by the plans included in the application reproduced in Annex 3 as “Landscape Mitigation Plan (Container Layout)” as may be amended by condition 5. “Site” Means the area of land enclosing the Development on the Landscape Mitigation Plan (Container Layout) reproduced in Annex 3 “Storage Technology” Means the electricity storage technology type that is used by the Development, for example Lithium-ion. Page 169 of 208
Page 170
AUX BACK UP SUPPLY SPT BUILDING APPLICANTS BUILDING CONTAINER CONTAINER HARMONIC FILTER HARMONIC FILTER TX TX TX TX FIRE W ATER TANK FIRE W ATER TANK FIRE W ATER TANK FIRE W ATER TANK CAR PARKING Legend Existing vegetation outside of site boundary. Existing hedgerows to be retained Existing vegetation to be retained (within Site Boundary) and protected in accordance with BS5837 Proposed habitat area - scrub and scattered tree planting comprised of locally appropriate native species, including evergreen species. Proposed attenuation pond with a mix of marginal, submerged and floating aquatic plants Indicative location of underground Gas Pipeline (5m buffer indicated ) Soft Landscape Elements - habitat retention, enhancement and creation Proposed mounding (1.5m height) Proposed habitat area - wildflower grassland seeding areas. Proposed habitat area - grassland seeding areas, maintained as short sward grassland NOTES check amendments rev date 1. Verifying Dimensions. The contractor shall verify dimensions against such other drawings or site conditions as pertain to this part of the work. 2. Existing Services. Any information concerning the location of existing services indicated on this drawing is intended for general guidance only. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to determine and verify the exact horizontal and vertical alignment of all cables, pipes, etc. (both underground and overhead) before work commences. T +44 (0) 28 90 667914 F +44 (0) 28 90 668286 W www.rpsgroup.com/ireland E ireland@ rpsgroup.com Elmwood House 74 Boucher Road Belfast BT12 6RZ Drawing Number Project Number Sheet Size Client Revision Drawing Scale Project Title Status Approved By Drawn By Checked By Date Salters Battery Storage Limited Salters BESS (Container Layout) Landscape Mitigation Plan NI2828 A1 1:1250 2828.5.02 SA Planning E - - 20/01/2024 SA Updated Layout A Mar.'24 SA Updated Layout B April'24 SA Updated Layout C April'24 SA Updated Layout D May '24 SA Updated Red Line E July '24 Annex 3 Page 170 of 208
Page 171
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.5 EXPRESS ADVERTISEMENT CONSENT APPEAL DECISION WITH REGARD TO APPLICATION 24/00581/ADV FOR THE ERECTION OF AN ILLUMINATED FLAGPOLE AT LIDL, 7 ST KENTIGERN WAY, PENICUIK. Report by Chief Officer Place 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of an express advertisement appeal decision regarding an application for the erection of an illuminated flagpole at Lidl, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik, EH26 8NB. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 The proposal sought permission for an illuminated sign on a flagpole in the northwest corner of the Lidl supermarket car park, close to the roundabout on the A701/St Kentigern Way. The proposed sign was to be located approximately 5.98 metres above ground and be a polycarbonate sign on a galvanised steel frame, bearing the “Lidl” logo in blue and yellow. 2.2 Express advert application, 24/00581/ADV was refused for the following reasons: 1. The proposed illuminated signage is not in keeping with the character or appearance of the Conservation Area and will result in an adverse visual impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 2. The proposed illumination sign is open to public views and is an out-of-character addition which will material detract from the existing character and amenity of the area. 2.3 The decision notice was issued on 10 December 2024, and the applicant submitted an appeal on 28 February 2025. A Scottish Government Reporter was appointed to determine the appeal and following a site visit, the appeal was refused on 12 May 2025. A copy of the appeal decision is attached to this report as Appendix A. Page 171 of 208
Page 172
3 THE DECISION 3.1 In considering the appeal, the Reporter outlined the following: “The location of the advert as proposed would be within the boundaries of Penicuik Conservation Area, which was reviewed in 2008. As the 1984 regulations indicate, regard must be given to the Conservation Area in considering amenity impact, and in addition, Section 64(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 require for special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, in so far as this relates to amenity. In general terms, amenity is basically “pleasantness of place”. 3.2 In considering the impact of the proposal on the Conservation Area, the Reporter reached the following conclusions: The Council’s Conservation Area Management Plan of 2018 describes Penicuik town centre as follows: • “The original planned layout of the 18th century town still exists to this day in road and street pattern. The town was established around the main toll route running from the south and the Borders to Edinburgh via Croft Street, High Street and John Street. The route (now the A701) has been realigned at various points and now runs via Bridge Street and a bypass of the southern part of John Street. (Note – this bypass includes St Kentigern Way and High Street). The original core of the town was the Square, originally late 18th century, but subsequently developed with Victorian buildings. The High Street forms an informal roughly rectangular space again comprising of several smaller two storey older 18th Century buildings together with larger Victorian structures often three storeys in height. This juxtaposition of scale and architectural form creates an interesting town centre with a variety of buildings of historic importance and special interest.” “The application building is located with Penicuik town centre. The streets of the more traditional town centre pattern lie to the north and west, so that the appeal site is on the eastern edge of the commercial area of the centre.” “St Kentigern Way is a comparatively modern road, and the roundabout gives access to the car parks of both the Lidl store on the east and another supermarket car park on the west of the road, so that there are open car parks on both sides. The proposed location of the flagpole sign would be located in open ground, rather than adjacent to any buildings.” “One of the key characteristics and points of interest of much of the Penicuik Conservation Area lies in the continued existence of the Page 172 of 208
Page 173
various traditional buildings of quality, most of which are modest in scale, largely two storeys in height, with a few buildings with a third storey.” “The management of change in the town centre has preserved this traditional feel and modest scale in more modern development in and around the centre, including the two supermarkets around the roundabout.” In the Reporter’s judgement “a person visiting Penicuik and using St Kentigern Way and the High Street will continue to receive an impression of Penicuik as a traditional market town with a pleasing and harmonious built environment, where the streets have a preponderance of two and three storey buildings. In terms of their height, design materials and massing, the two supermarkets and the nearby modern buildings on St Kentigern Way, including the appellant’s building, are not strikingly different in scale from the rest of the town centre. I would not consider them to be separate or isolated. They are experienced as part of a modern extension to the centre, with modern buildings which are utilitarian in design, but which are largely in keeping in scale and in appearance with the older built environment.” 3.3 In considering the impact on visual amenity on the town centre, the Reporter reached the following conclusions: “A new illuminated sign on a galvanised pole, nearly 6 metres high, located close to the road edge but in an open car park, will be striking and prominent, and discordance, both in the proposed roadside location, and in the context of the built environment of the town centre as a whole.” The Reporter considers that it will detract from the amenity of the centre of Penicuik to a material degree. “Additionally, the visual environment to the east of the location of the supermarket and the car parks around the roundabout includes the buildings of the historic town cemetery on Kirkhill Road. The cemetery includes a number of significant vertical elements, including the unusual square tower of Old St Mungo’s church.” The Reporter considered that “a tall, illuminated sign at the proposed location will be experienced as a significantly discordant element in views of the cemetery buildings and surrounding trees, and will substantially detract from the interest and visual amenity which these buildings and the cemetery location gives to the town centre.” 3.4 In considering the impact on domestic residential amenity, the Reporter reached the following conclusions: “Some of the terraced houses on Imrie Place to the north of the Lidl car park have a degree of screening from the roundabout retail area, the supermarket and car park from a line of trees in front of the terrace.” Page 173 of 208
Page 174
The Reporter outlines that “it is probable that an illuminated sign on a 6 metre pole at the proposed location will be visible from their windows, particularly in lower daylight levels, and when the trees are bare. It is therefore considered the view that the tall, illuminated sign is likely to adversely affect the amenity of these houses, even if none of the residents have objected to the proposed sign.” “Even though the locality is lit at night by tall street lighting, the coloured and illuminated sign if likely to be more noticeable than any effect from the street lighting.” 4 RECOMMENDATION 4.1 It is recommended that the Committee notes the Scottish Government Reporter’s decision to dismiss the appeal for express advertisement consent for the erection of illuminated flagpole signage at Lidl, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik. Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Contact Person: Lauren McKellar Lauren.Mckellar@midlothian.gov.uk Page 174 of 208
Page 175
File No. 1:625Scale: 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 Midlothian Council Licence No. 100023416 (2018) Midlothian Council Fairfield House 8 Lothian Road Dalkeith EH22 3AA Education, Economy & Communities 24/00581/DPP Erection of illuminated flagpole signage at Lidl, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik, EH26 8NB. Page 175 of 208
Page 176
Planning and Environmental Appeals Division Hadrian House, Callendar Business Park, Falkirk, FK1 1XR E: dpea@gov.scot T: 0300 244 6668 Appeal Decision Notice Decision I dismiss the appeal and refuse advertisement consent. Reasoning 1. Regulation 4(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984 limits the exercise of the powers of control of advertisements solely to the interests of amenity and public safety, and these matters are elaborated in regulation 4(2). The council has not raised any road or public safety concerns, and I did not identify any such issues on my site visit. Accordingly, on the basis of the site inspection and the written submissions, I consider that the sole determining issue is the impact on amenity. 2. The location of the advertisement as proposed would be within the boundaries of Penicuik Conservation Area, which were reviewed in 2008. As the 1984 regulations indicate, regard must be had to the conservation area in considering amenity impact, and in addition, section 64(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 requires me to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area, in so far as this relates to amenity. In general terms, amenity is basically “pleasantness of place”. 3. The council’s Conservation Area Management Plan of 2018 describes Penicuik town centre as follows. “The original planned layout of the 18th Century town still exists to this day in the road and street pattern. The town was established around the main toll route running from the south and the Borders to Edinburgh via Croft Street, High Street and John Street. The route (now the A701) has been realigned at various points and now runs via Bridge Street and a bypass of the southern part of John Street. (Note – this bypass includes St Kentigern Way, and High Street). The original core of the town was the Square, originally late 18th century, but subsequently developed with Victorian buildings. The High Street forms an informal roughly rectangular space again comprising of several smaller two storey older 18th Century buildings together Decision by Frances M McChlery, a Reporter appointed by the Scottish Ministers • Advertisement appeal reference: ADA-290-2002 • Site address: Lidl supermarket, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik, EH26 8NB • Appeal by Lidl Great Britain Ltd against a decision by Midlothian Council • Application for advertisement consent reference 24/00581/ADV refused by notice dated 10 December 2024 • The advertisement proposed: erection of illuminated flagpole signage • Date of site visit by Reporter: 17 April 2025 Date of appeal decision: 12 May 2025 Appendix A Page 176 of 208
Page 177
ADA-290-2002 2 with larger Victorian structures often three storeys in height. This juxtaposition of scale and architectural form creates an interesting town centre with a variety of buildings of historical importance and special interest.” 4. The application here is for consent for an internally illuminated sign on a flagpole to be located in the northwest corner of a Lidl supermarket car park, close to the roundabout on the A701 / St Kentigern Way “bypass”, and on the east side of the road. This location is part of Penicuik town centre. The streets of the more traditional town centre pattern lie to the north and west, so that the appeal site is on the eastern edge of the commercial area of the centre. St Kentigern’s Way is a comparatively modern road, and the roundabout gives access to the car parks of both the Lidl store to the east and another supermarket car park to the west of the road, so that there are open car parks on both sides. At the proposed location the flagpole sign would be located in open ground, rather than immediately adjacent to any buildings. 5. The proposed sign would be located about 5.98 metres above ground, and would be a polycarbonate sign on a galvanised steel frame, bearing the familiar “Lidl” logo in blue and yellow. The council refused consent because they considered that the sign would not be in keeping with the character or appearance of the conservation area, and was generally out of character with the locality, adversely affecting amenity. 6. The appellants say that the commercial and more modern buildings on both sides of St Kentigern Way adjacent to the roundabout are isolated from the historic core of the conservation area, and make no contribution to it. They point out that the Lidl supermarket building was given consent by the council in 2007, and an extension was permitted in 2015, which they say establishes that the council considered that a modern supermarket building with little intrinsic architectural merit was acceptable within the conservation area. They refer to the other modern commercial buildings and offices in the immediate locality, and argue that modern commercial signage will be expected by members of the public in this context. They state that the sign will be significantly less tall than the supermarket itself, which is about 9 metres high, and less tall than the modern street lighting which surrounds the roundabout and car parks. They say that the sign will be screened from neighbouring houses by trees most of the year, and highlight that there have been no objections from the public. 7. As described above in the conservation area management plan, one of the key characteristics and points of interest of much of the Penicuik Conservation Area lies in the continued existence of the various traditional buildings of quality, most of which are modest in scale, largely two storeys in height, with a few buildings with a third storey. The management of change in the town centre has preserved this traditional feel and modest scale in more modern developments in and around the centre, including the two supermarkets around the roundabout. In my judgement, overall, a person visiting Penicuik and using St Kentigern’s Way and the High Street will continue to receive an impression of Penicuik as a traditional market town with a pleasing and harmonious built environment, where the streets have a preponderance of two and three storey buildings. In terms of their height, design materials and massing, the two supermarkets and the nearby modern buildings on St Kentigern’s Way, including the appellant’s building, are not strikingly different in scale from the rest of the town centre. I would not consider them to be separate or isolated. They are experienced as part of a modern extension to the centre, with modern buildings which are utilitarian in design, but which are largely in keeping in scale and in appearance with the older built environment. Page 177 of 208
Page 178
ADA-290-2002 3 8. Against this background, in my opinion, a new illuminated sign on a galvanised pole nearly 6 metres high, located close to the road edge but in an open car park, will be striking and prominent, and discordant, both in the proposed roadside location, and in the context of the built environment of the town centre as a whole. I consider that it will detract from the amenity of the centre of Penicuik to a material degree. 9. In addition, the visual environment to the east of the location of the supermarket and the car parks around the roundabout includes the buildings of the historic town cemetery on Kirkhill Road. The cemetery includes a number of significant vertical elements, including the unusual square tower of Old St Mungo’s church. This was under scaffolding at the time of my visit and so I assume under repair. I consider that a tall illuminated sign at the proposed location will be experienced as a significantly discordant element in views of the cemetery buildings and surrounding trees, and will substantially detract from the interest and visual amenity which these buildings and the cemetery location gives to the town centre. 10. As to domestic residential amenity, some of the terraced houses on Imrie Place to the north of the Lidl car park have a degree of screening from the roundabout retail area, the supermarket and car park from a line of trees in front of the terrace. In my view, it is probable that an illuminated sign on a 6 metre pole at the proposed location will be visible from their windows, particularly in lower daylight levels, and when the trees are bare. I take the view that the tall illuminated sign is likely to adversely affect the amenity of these houses, even if none of the residents have objected to the proposed sign. I take the point that the locality is lit at night by tall street lighting, but in my view the coloured and illuminated sign is likely to be more noticeable than any effect from the street lighting. 11. The council and the appellants have both referred to broader planning policies, in relation to retail policy, town centres, design quality and the historic environment. However, section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 does not apply to applications for advertisements. That said, I have taken cognisance of any aspects of any planning policies mentioned which provided guidance on the matter of amenity. 12. I have had regard to all other matters raised by the parties but have not identified any which would lead me to a different conclusion. Frances M McChlery Reporter Page 178 of 208
Page 179
Planning and Environmental Appeals Division Hadrian House, Callendar Business Park, Falkirk, FK1 1XR E: dpea@gov.scot T: 0300 244 6668 Appeal Decision Notice Decision I dismiss the appeal and refuse advertisement consent. Reasoning 1. Regulation 4(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984 limits the exercise of the powers of control of advertisements solely to the interests of amenity and public safety, and these matters are elaborated in regulation 4(2). The council has not raised any road or public safety concerns, and I did not identify any such issues on my site visit. Accordingly, on the basis of the site inspection and the written submissions, I consider that the sole determining issue is the impact on amenity. 2. The location of the advertisement as proposed would be within the boundaries of Penicuik Conservation Area, which were reviewed in 2008. As the 1984 regulations indicate, regard must be had to the conservation area in considering amenity impact, and in addition, section 64(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 requires me to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area, in so far as this relates to amenity. In general terms, amenity is basically “pleasantness of place”. 3. The council’s Conservation Area Management Plan of 2018 describes Penicuik town centre as follows. “The original planned layout of the 18th Century town still exists to this day in the road and street pattern. The town was established around the main toll route running from the south and the Borders to Edinburgh via Croft Street, High Street and John Street. The route (now the A701) has been realigned at various points and now runs via Bridge Street and a bypass of the southern part of John Street. (Note – this bypass includes St Kentigern Way, and High Street). The original core of the town was the Square, originally late 18th century, but subsequently developed with Victorian buildings. The High Street forms an informal roughly rectangular space again comprising of several smaller two storey older 18th Century buildings together Decision by Frances M McChlery, a Reporter appointed by the Scottish Ministers • Advertisement appeal reference: ADA-290-2002 • Site address: Lidl supermarket, 7 St Kentigern Way, Penicuik, EH26 8NB • Appeal by Lidl Great Britain Ltd against a decision by Midlothian Council • Application for advertisement consent reference 24/00581/ADV refused by notice dated 10 December 2024 • The advertisement proposed: erection of illuminated flagpole signage • Date of site visit by Reporter: 17 April 2025 Date of appeal decision: 12 May 2025 Page 179 of 208
Page 180
ADA-290-2002 2 with larger Victorian structures often three storeys in height. This juxtaposition of scale and architectural form creates an interesting town centre with a variety of buildings of historical importance and special interest.” 4. The application here is for consent for an internally illuminated sign on a flagpole to be located in the northwest corner of a Lidl supermarket car park, close to the roundabout on the A701 / St Kentigern Way “bypass”, and on the east side of the road. This location is part of Penicuik town centre. The streets of the more traditional town centre pattern lie to the north and west, so that the appeal site is on the eastern edge of the commercial area of the centre. St Kentigern’s Way is a comparatively modern road, and the roundabout gives access to the car parks of both the Lidl store to the east and another supermarket car park to the west of the road, so that there are open car parks on both sides. At the proposed location the flagpole sign would be located in open ground, rather than immediately adjacent to any buildings. 5. The proposed sign would be located about 5.98 metres above ground, and would be a polycarbonate sign on a galvanised steel frame, bearing the familiar “Lidl” logo in blue and yellow. The council refused consent because they considered that the sign would not be in keeping with the character or appearance of the conservation area, and was generally out of character with the locality, adversely affecting amenity. 6. The appellants say that the commercial and more modern buildings on both sides of St Kentigern Way adjacent to the roundabout are isolated from the historic core of the conservation area, and make no contribution to it. They point out that the Lidl supermarket building was given consent by the council in 2007, and an extension was permitted in 2015, which they say establishes that the council considered that a modern supermarket building with little intrinsic architectural merit was acceptable within the conservation area. They refer to the other modern commercial buildings and offices in the immediate locality, and argue that modern commercial signage will be expected by members of the public in this context. They state that the sign will be significantly less tall than the supermarket itself, which is about 9 metres high, and less tall than the modern street lighting which surrounds the roundabout and car parks. They say that the sign will be screened from neighbouring houses by trees most of the year, and highlight that there have been no objections from the public. 7. As described above in the conservation area management plan, one of the key characteristics and points of interest of much of the Penicuik Conservation Area lies in the continued existence of the various traditional buildings of quality, most of which are modest in scale, largely two storeys in height, with a few buildings with a third storey. The management of change in the town centre has preserved this traditional feel and modest scale in more modern developments in and around the centre, including the two supermarkets around the roundabout. In my judgement, overall, a person visiting Penicuik and using St Kentigern’s Way and the High Street will continue to receive an impression of Penicuik as a traditional market town with a pleasing and harmonious built environment, where the streets have a preponderance of two and three storey buildings. In terms of their height, design materials and massing, the two supermarkets and the nearby modern buildings on St Kentigern’s Way, including the appellant’s building, are not strikingly different in scale from the rest of the town centre. I would not consider them to be separate or isolated. They are experienced as part of a modern extension to the centre, with modern buildings which are utilitarian in design, but which are largely in keeping in scale and in appearance with the older built environment. Page 180 of 208
Page 181
ADA-290-2002 3 8. Against this background, in my opinion, a new illuminated sign on a galvanised pole nearly 6 metres high, located close to the road edge but in an open car park, will be striking and prominent, and discordant, both in the proposed roadside location, and in the context of the built environment of the town centre as a whole. I consider that it will detract from the amenity of the centre of Penicuik to a material degree. 9. In addition, the visual environment to the east of the location of the supermarket and the car parks around the roundabout includes the buildings of the historic town cemetery on Kirkhill Road. The cemetery includes a number of significant vertical elements, including the unusual square tower of Old St Mungo’s church. This was under scaffolding at the time of my visit and so I assume under repair. I consider that a tall illuminated sign at the proposed location will be experienced as a significantly discordant element in views of the cemetery buildings and surrounding trees, and will substantially detract from the interest and visual amenity which these buildings and the cemetery location gives to the town centre. 10. As to domestic residential amenity, some of the terraced houses on Imrie Place to the north of the Lidl car park have a degree of screening from the roundabout retail area, the supermarket and car park from a line of trees in front of the terrace. In my view, it is probable that an illuminated sign on a 6 metre pole at the proposed location will be visible from their windows, particularly in lower daylight levels, and when the trees are bare. I take the view that the tall illuminated sign is likely to adversely affect the amenity of these houses, even if none of the residents have objected to the proposed sign. I take the point that the locality is lit at night by tall street lighting, but in my view the coloured and illuminated sign is likely to be more noticeable than any effect from the street lighting. 11. The council and the appellants have both referred to broader planning policies, in relation to retail policy, town centres, design quality and the historic environment. However, section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 does not apply to applications for advertisements. That said, I have taken cognisance of any aspects of any planning policies mentioned which provided guidance on the matter of amenity. 12. I have had regard to all other matters raised by the parties but have not identified any which would lead me to a different conclusion. Frances M McChlery Reporter Page 181 of 208
Page 182
Planning Committee Tuesday 10 June 2025 Item No 5.6 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 24/00661/DPP AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT 24/00663/LBC FOR RE-DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH SCHOOL INCLUDING ERECTION OF EXTENSIONS; PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS; LANDSCAPING; INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS; AND ASSOCIATED WORKS AT PENICUIK HIGH SCHOOL, 39A CARLOPS ROAD, PENICUIK Report by Chief Officer Place 1 SUMMARY OF APPLICATION AND RECOMMENDED DECISION 1.1 The planning application and listed building consent application are for the re-development of high school including erection of extensions; partial demolition of buildings; landscaping; internal and external alterations; and associated works at Penicuik High School, 39A Carlops Road, Penicuik. 1.2 There has been one representation and consultation responses from the Historic Environment Scotland, Scottish Water, the Council’s Archaeological Advisor, the Council’s Ecological Advisor (TWIC), the Council’s Senior Manager Neighbourhood Services (Roads) and the Council’s Senior Manager Protective Services (Environmental Health). 1.3 The relevant development plan policies are policies 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 21, 22 and 23 of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and policies DEV2, DEV5, DEV6, DEV7, TRAN1, TRAN5, ENV9, ENV10, ENV11, ENV15, ENV16, ENV18, ENV22, ENV24, ENV25, IMP1, IMP2 and IMP3 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 (MLDP). 1.4 The recommendation is to grant planning permission and listed building consent subject to conditions. 2 LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 The application site measures approximately 2.12 hectares and comprises of the Penicuik High School buildings and the associated grounds. The existing buildings are a mix of three storey, two storey and single storey structures. Page 182 of 208
Page 183
2.2 The main original school building is a two-storey structure with basement and later additions to the rear. In design terms it comprises a 23-bay near-symmetrical double quadrangular-plan, a generously fenestrated linear building with classical detailing. This building is category B listed because of its soberly elegant 1930's design and fine detailing – the listing includes the gate piers (now without their lamps). 2.3 The most substantial later addition is a flat roofed two and three storey extension of modernist form that reflected the architectural style of the time it was erected in the 1960’s. The remainder of the site is host to two single storey detached buildings, one of which is the Broomhill Day Care Centre, areas of hardstanding including a car park and areas of landscaped open space associated with the school. There is a row of mature trees along the northwest boundary of the site, with a further cluster of trees on the southeast boundary. 2.4 The surrounding area predominantly comprises of residential properties. The Penicuik Centre and the Scared Heart Primary School are located to the northwest of the application site. Montgomery Park is located to the southeast of the application site and comprises a grassed area containing open space mainly used as football and rugby pitches. 3 PROPOSAL 3.1 It is noted that the proposals were revised during the assessment of the planning and listed building consent applications that sought revisions to the design of the extension by reducing the footprint and amending the site layout. The revised plans and supporting documents were submitted on the 1 May 2025. The revisions did not change the character or description of the development; however, the changes were significant enough to warrant the re-neighbour notification, advertisement and re-consultation of the planning and listed building consent applications. 3.2 Planning permission and listed building consent are sought for the re- development of high school including erection of extensions; partial demolition of buildings; landscaping; internal and external alterations; and associated works at Penicuik High School, 39A Carlops Road, Penicuik. 3.3 The redevelopment will see the expansion and refurbishment of the school to provide a refreshed space for pupils with the expansion of core areas for games, sport, dining, catering and ASN provision. The proposed re-development of the school comprises of the following: • Demolition of the two and three storey 1960’s extensions to the rear of the original 1930’s school building; • Retrofitting and refurbishment of the 1930’s school building including the installation of replacement windows; Page 183 of 208
Page 184
• The erection of a three-storey infill extension to the rear of the 1930’s school building; • The formation of a new staff car park with 30 parking spaces to be accessed from Bellmans Road; • Formation of drop off space for the ASN utilising the existing access that links Carlops Road and Bellmans Road; • Formation of a secure 36 cycle storage space for student and staff; • Formation of 12 visitor cycle spaces; • Formation of hard and soft landscaping so as to provide external teaching spaces, playground areas, a multi-purpose half-sized playing court, ASN garden, sensory woodland trails and outdoor dining areas; and • Formation of sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS), including features such as a blue roof, filter trenching and rain gardens. 3.4 It is noted that the existing Broomhill Day Care Centre is to be retained and will continue to operate as usual. The existing Music Hub building to the northeast of original 1930’s part of the school will be retained and repurposed for a use associated with the school. 3.5 The proposed extension has a flat roof and is a three-storey extension with two storey elements. The overall footprint of the extension looks to infill and extend the original 1930’s building and courtyard so as to form a square footprint building. 3.6 The first two storeys of the external walls of the extension are to be finished in a buff coloured brick laid in a variety of ways so as to create texture and interest within the elevations. The third storey is to be finished in a metal cladding, to match the tone of the bricks, with large vertical recessed windows. 3.7 A six phased approach is to be taken to the re-development of the site so as to ensure the existing school remains open: • Phase 1 will see minor internal alterations and the temporary retention of the 1960’s extensions so as to enable the main 1930’s school building to be decanted to allow refurbishment; • Phase 2 will see the initial demolition works of extensions to the rear of the main 1930’s building including the dining block, gym hall and changing blocks and works to the day care centre; • Phase 3 will see the erection of extension and the refurbishment works to the main 1930’s building; • Phase 4 will see the occupation of the 1930’s building and new extension and the demolition of the 1960’s extensions; • Phase 5 will see the demolition of the remaining corridor link façade with external alterations to the building to make good along with the external ground works, including formation of car Page 184 of 208
Page 185
parking, cycle parking and associated hard and soft landscaping works; and • Phase 6 will see the completion of all external works. 3.8 The main vehicle access to the site is taken from Bellmans Road and will provide access to 30 standard parking spaces situated to the northeast of the school. A one way, ASN vehicle drop off point is to be formed between Bellmans Road and Carlops Road and will also provide vehicle access for delivery and service vehicles to the east of the school. It is noted that there is an associated planning application for the improvements to and alterations to footway, roadway and verge including formation of vehicle and pedestrian access and associated landscaping at Bellmans Road. This is being assessed separately due to it being outwith this application’s site boundary. 3.9 The applicant has confirmed that there will be no significant road closures proposed during construction. There will be some local traffic management to enable the alterations to the vehicle access and associated works on Bellmans Road to be completed. 3.10 The application is accompanied by: • Design and Access Statement; • Full Architectural Drawing Package; • Existing Building Survey Information; • Planning Statement; • Pre-Application Consultation Report; • Heritage Impact Assessment; • Preliminary Ecological Assessment; • Bat Surveys; • Landscape and Planting Plans; • Tree Survey; • Landscape Management Plan; • Biodiversity Net Gain and Enhancement Scheme; • Landscape and Ecology Management Plan; • Site Investigation/Coal Mining Risk Assessment; • Flood Risk Assessment; • Drainage Strategy; • Energy Statement; and • Window Condition Survey. 4 BACKGROUND 4.1 The applicant carried out a pre application consultation (23/00363/PAC) for the re-development of existing high school including; erection of extensions; partial demolition of buildings; landscaping; formation of roads and sports pitches; and associated works in June - August 2024. The pre application consultation was reported to the Committee at its meeting in August 2024. The Planning Committee requested the following actions: Page 185 of 208
Page 186
• No development on any part of Montgomery Park. 4.2 An associated planning application (24/00773/DPP) has been submitted and pending consideration for the alterations to footway, roadway and verge including formation of vehicle and pedestrian access and associated landscaping at Bellmans Road. 4.2 Listed building consent (20/00300/LBC) for the formation of access ramps; new door openings and internal alterations was granted in 2020. 4.3 Listed building consent (06/00293/LBC) for the Installation of double glazed replacement windows to gymnasium was granted in 2006. 4.4 Reserved matters application (05/00150/RES) for the erection of community swimming pool and library with associated parking, bus turning area and drop off and landscaping was granted in 2005 – to discharge conditions on outline planning permission 02/00279/OUT. 4.5 Listed building consent (05/00149/LBC) for the erection of community swimming pool and library, including the demolition of existing buildings and alterations to existing gate piers and walls was granted in 2005. 4.6 Outline planning permission (02/00729/OUT) for the erection of a public swimming pool and library, with associated parking was granted in 2002. 4.7 As part of the assessment of the current application the planning authority issued a screening opinion for the current proposals on 27 September 2024. The screening opinion confirmed that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was not required. 4.8 The application site area exceeds two hectares. The application therefore constitutes a ‘Major Development’ as defined in the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 and thereby it requires to be determined by the Committee. 5 CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Historic Environment Scotland (HES) does not object to the applications and welcome the plan to retain and reuse the original 1930s buildings. The removal of the later additions and extensions to the rear, and the construction of new buildings in their place is acceptable. The reuse and sensitive upgrading of the early school building addresses the aspirations of NPF4 and it is considered that care has been taken to retain characterful elements of the interior like the main stair and historic joinery. Historic Environment Scotland welcome the revisions to match the proposed windows with the original geometry of the glass panes while continuing the astragals up in front of the louvres. Historic Environment Scotland noted that whilst it is Page 186 of 208
Page 187
regrettable that the two stair cores in the northern side are proposed for replacement; they are content with the justification provided. 5.2 Scottish Water does not object to the applications. The water supply will be fed from Rosebery Water Treatment Works. The foul water drainage will be dealt with by the Penicuik Waste Water Treatment Works. Both have sufficient capacity at present, however it is not possible to reserve capacity for future developments. 5.3 For reasons of sustainability and to protect Scottish Water customers from potential future sewer flooding, Scottish Water will not accept any surface water connections into the combined sewer system. There may be limited exceptional circumstances where they would allow such a connection for brownfield sites only, however this will require significant justification from the customer taking account of various factors including legal, physical and technical challenges. 5.4 In order to avoid costs and delays where a surface water discharge to the combined sewer system is anticipated, the developer should contact Scottish Water at the earliest opportunity with strong evidence to support the intended drainage plan prior to making a connection request (this is separate regulatory process between the applicant and Scottish Water). 5.5 Scottish Water also advised that their records indicate that there is live infrastructure in the proximity of the development site. Scottish Water advised that the applicant must gain written permission before starting any works within the area of Scottish Waters apparatus. 5.6 The Council’s Archaeological Advisor does not object to the applications and advised that the assessment of the potential impacts of this development upon the Historic Environment has been carried out as part of determining the applications - the potential impacts arising from this development are: • Loss of/disturbance to historic listed buildings/building features and fabric • Change in character to a historic listed building 5.7 The Council’s Archaeological Advisor concluded that there is a potential impact upon historic environment assets and the impacts are judged to be significant enough that a suitable mitigated response is required. Therefore, it is essential that a Programme of Archaeological Works (Historic Building Recording and Public Engagement) should be carried out at the site by professional archaeologists (or a suitably qualified Historic Buildings Specialist). This can be secured via condition. 5.8 The Councils Ecological Advisor - The Wildlife Information Centre (TWIC) does not object to the application and advised that the submitted Preliminary Ecological Assessment (PEA) and Preliminary Page 187 of 208
Page 188
Bat Roost Assessment (PRA) were generally thorough and professional. The submitted PEA detailed a number of measures to maintain or create additional habitats on site and measures to provide nesting, roosting or sources of forage for wildlife are detailed under sections 5.2.1 and 5.3.1 of the report. Further details of these measures are to be submitted. The submitted PRA concluded that 10 buildings, including the 1930s school building, 1930s music hub building, day centre, school kitchens and building B1 (part of 1980s extension) were assessed as having ‘high’ bat roost suitability, and four buildings, including the 1980s extension, leisure centre and western building (B2) were assessed as having ‘moderate’ suitability for roosting bats. Therefore, it was advised that further dusk bat surveys supported by Night Vision Aids (NVAs) will therefore need to be undertaken by suitably qualified Ecologists required following Bat Conservation Trust guidelines (Collins, 2023) prior to works commencing. All recommendations and additional requirements can be secured via condition. 5.9 The Council’s Senior Manager Neighbourhood Services (Roads) does not object to the applications and made general comments relating to the provision of cycle parking, SUDS and car parking. 5.10 The Council’s Senior Manager Protective Services (Environmental Health) does not object to the applications but raised concerns regarding the development proposal in terms of contaminated land and noise from any plant or machinery which potentially could impact future users of the site and nearby residential properties. It is recommended that conditions be attached to any grant of planning permission requiring a scheme to address any contaminated land issues and placing noise restrictions on any plant or machinery on the site. 6 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 There have been no representations received. 7 PLANNING POLICY 7.1 Planning policy currently comprises of National Planning Framework 4 and the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. 7.2 The following policies are relevant to the proposal: National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) 7.3 Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crisis; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crisis. Page 188 of 208
Page 189
7.4 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. 7.5 Policy 3 Biodiversity; sets out to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks. 7.6 Policy 6 Forestry, woodland and trees; sets out to protect and expand forests, woodland and trees. 7.7 Policy 7 Historic assets and places; sets out to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places, and to enable positive change as a catalyst for the regeneration of places. 7.8 Policy 9 Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings, and to help reduce the need for greenfield development. 7.9 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. 7.10 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. 7.11 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. 7.12 Policy 21 Play, recreation and sport; sets out to encourage, promote and facilitate spaces and opportunities for play, recreation and sport. 7.13 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. 7.14 Policy 23 Health and safety; sets out 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. Page 189 of 208
Page 190
Other National Policy 7.15 Designing Places, A Policy Statement for Scotland sets out the six key qualities which are at the heart of good design namely identity, safe and pleasant environment, ease of movement, a sense of welcome, adaptability and good use of resources. 7.16 The Scottish Government’s Policy on Architecture for Scotland sets out a commitment to raising the quality of architecture and design. 7.17 Section 59 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 places a duty on planning authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. 7.18 Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (HEPS) 2019 offers guidance on the protection and management of the historic environment and Conservation Areas and areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Their designation provides the basis for the positive management of an area. The Policy Statement also indicated that the planning authority should consider the design, materials, scale and sitting of any development, and its impact on the character of the historic environment. 7.19 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on Windows states that windows make a substantial contribution to the character, authenticity and physical integrity of most historic buildings and also to the character and interest of historic streets and places. They are an important element of a building’s design. The size, shape and positioning of the openings are significant, as are the form and design of the framing, astragals and glazing. Their style, detailing and materials help us to understand the date when a building was constructed or altered, its function, and advances in related technology. 7.20 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on Doorways states that the doorway and associated features of a historic building, or groups of historic buildings, form important elements in defining their character. Age, design, materials, and associated features are amongst the numerous factors that contribute to the interest of historic doorways. 7.21 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on Interiors states that the interiors of a historic building are important in defining its character and special interest. Proposals for interior alteration should always seek to protect the character of the building. Page 190 of 208
Page 191
7.22 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on accessibility states that where physical alterations are required, it is usually possible to achieve access improvements that are sensitive to the historic character of the building or place through high-quality design, management and maintenance. 7.23 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on Interiors states that the interiors of a historic building are important in defining its character and special interest. Proposals for interior alteration should always seek to protect the character of the building. 7.24 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on accessibility states that where physical alterations are required, it is usually possible to achieve access improvements that are sensitive to the historic character of the building or place through high-quality design, management and maintenance. 7.25 Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change in the Historic Environment document on Demolition refers to the total or substantial loss of a listed building. This states there is a strong presumption to retain listed buildings and so the decision to demolish a listed building is a last resort. It will almost always be made it the end of a process that has considered and discounted all other feasible options. There will be some exceptional circumstances where the demolition of a listed building can be justified. These are: if the building is no longer of special architectural or historic interest; if the building is incapable of meaningful repair; is the demolition of the building essential to the delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community; or that the repair and the reuse of the building is not economically viable. Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 (MLDP) 7.26 Policy DEV2: Protecting Amenity within the Built-Up Area states that development will not be permitted within existing and future built- up areas where it is likely to detract materially from the existing character or amenity of the area. 7.27 Policy DEV5: Sustainability in New Development sets out the requirements for development with regards to sustainability principles. 7.28 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. Page 191 of 208
Page 192
7.29 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. 7.30 Policy TRAN1: Sustainable Travel aims to encourage sustainable modes of travel. 7.31 Policy TRAN5: Electric Vehicle Charging seeks to support and promote the development of a network of electric vehicle charging stations by requiring provision to be considered as an integral part of any new development or redevelopment proposals. 7.32 Policy ENV9: Flooding presumes against development which would be at unacceptable risk of flooding or would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. It states that 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. Furthermore, it states that sustainable urban 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. 7.33 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. 7.34 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. 7.35 Policy ENV15: Species and Habitat Protection and Enhancement presumes against development that would affect a species protected by European or UK law. 7.36 Policy ENV16: Vacant, Derelict and Contaminated Land supports the redevelopment of vacant and derelict land for uses compatible with their location. Developments will be required to demonstrate that the site is suitable for the proposed new use in terms of the risk posed by contamination and instability from historic uses. 7.37 Policy ENV18: Noise requires that where new noise sensitive uses are proposed in the locality of existing noisy uses, the Council will seek to Page 192 of 208
Page 193
ensure that the function of established operations is not adversely affected. 7.38 Policy ENV22: Listed Buildings does not permit development which would adversely affect the character or appearance of a listed building, its setting or any feature of special architectural or historic interest. 7.39 Policy ENV24: Other Important Archaeological or Historic Sites seeks to prevent development that would adversely affect regionally or locally important archaeological or historic sites, or their setting. 7.40 Policy ENV25: Site Assessment, Evaluation and Recording requires that where development could affect an identified site of archaeological importance, the applicant will be required to provide an assessment of the archaeological value of the site and of the likely impact of the proposal on the archaeological resource. 7.41 Policies IMP1: New Development and IMP2: Essential Infrastructure Required to Enable New Development to Take Place require the developer to deliver, or contribute to, the required infrastructure to mitigate the impact of the development. 7.42 Policy IMP3: Water and Drainage require sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) to be incorporated into new development. 8 PLANNING ISSUES 8.1 The main planning issue to be considered in determining this application is whether the proposal complies with development plan policies, NPF4 policies and Historic Environment Scotland’s policies and guidance unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. The consultation responses received are material considerations. Principle of development 8.2 The site is within the built-up area of Penicuik and is currently used for educational and community purposes and as such there is a presumption in favour of appropriate redevelopment of the site to provide enhanced facilities, subject to the proposed extensions being compatible to the neighbouring land uses, complementing the character of the host listed building and local area and protecting the amenity of existing neighbouring properties. The consultation responses have not identified any material considerations which outweigh this presumption in favour of development. 8.3 The application site comprises land that currently accommodates the high school buildings and associated buildings, Day Care Centre, the car park and hard surface playground and grassed open space. The site will see the formation of outdoor learning and breakout areas, Page 193 of 208
Page 194
formation of an informal basketball pitch, sensory woodland, outdoor gym equipment area, tree avenues and plaza, growing gardens, ASN- specific play areas which is a betterment of the current facilities available and increases the playing and community capacity at the school. It is noted that there is a number of sports pitches available for use at Mongomery and Penicuik Park to the south of the site which will remain in situ. 8.4 With regard NPF4, although the site is currently occupied by a high school, consideration still needs to be given to the site’s location in terms of sustainability. In this regard the site is within close proximity to areas of high population, public transport options and active travel connections and as such is considered to be a sustainable location in compliance with NPF4. Demolition 8.5 The proposed demolitions, including the large 1960’s extension, will not result in the loss of the original historic building – the structures being removed being additions themselves to the original school building. Whilst the extensions are referred to in the listing description, the later additions are of a scale, form and design which at today’s standards fail to respect the listed building or the character of the area. The removal of the unsympathetic additions will enable the redevelopment of the historic school building with a more sympathetic design solution that respects the character and appearance of the listed building and the character and amenity of the area. 8.6 Where permission is granted for the demolition of a listed building, there is a separate requirement through Section 7 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) to allow HES the opportunity to carry out recording of the building before this is demolished. The applicant will be notified of this requirement and HES were consulted on the applications. Internal Alterations 8.7 With regards to the internal alterations to the original parts of the school building, in terms of the character and appearance of the listed building, whilst the proposed alterations sees the removal of some historic fabric and alters the historic layout, it is considered that the alterations do not result in an adverse impact upon the overall historic character or appearance of the listed building. A condition is proposed to ensure recordings of any historic fabric prior to their removal and that details of re-use or salvage of any historic fabric are agreed with the planning authority. 8.8 Overall, with regards to the proposed internal alterations, whilst the internal alterations look to change the internal layout, the works ensure the most significant areas are protected and maintained. The proposals Page 194 of 208
Page 195
see the conversion, enhancement and long-term occupation of a listed building without resulting in a significant adverse impact upon the character or appearance of the listed building. Layout, Form, Design and Materials 8.9 The re-development of the existing site looks to improve accessibility to the site whilst also improving educational and community facilities within the area. The phased approach to be taken to the redevelopment of the site so as to ensure the existing school remains open; sees the temporary retention of the main three and two storey 1960’s extensions so as to enable the main 1930’s school building to be decanted into these structures to enable initial demolition works of extensions to the rear of the main 1930’s building and the erection of extension and the refurbishment works to this building. Upon completion of the alterations and extension to the 1930’s building, the 1960’s buildings will be decanted and demolished prior to the completion of all remaining external works including hard and soft landscaping. 8.10 The existing layout of the school is dis-jointed and fails to maximise the useability of internal and external spaces due to the restrictions of existing buildings or infrastructure. The revised layout provides clear multi-purpose areas for staff and pupils and maximises the sites accessibility, permeability and useability. 8.11 The revised layout, when compared to the existing layout, moves the main car parking and vehicle access from the north and east of the buildings to the north whilst also providing a separate area for ASN drop off, service and deliveries to the east. The main accessible entrance will be to the north of the building with secondary stepped access taken from the south which allows for the historic access and frontage of the building to be retained. This allows for accessibility to the site to be enhanced whilst also creating an attractive external learning space that also respects the character and appearance of the original listed building. The setting of the building will also be enhanced by sympathetic hard and soft landscaping. Overall, in terms of layout, form and design, the development proposal maximises accessibility whilst respecting the surrounding character, appearance and setting of the area and the listed building. 8.12 The proposed extensions are located to the rear of the main part of the original 1930s building. The proposed three-storey extension will replace the existing gymnasium, dining and kitchen block and will provide additional teaching spaces. The existing courtyard areas are to be enclosed so as to form two floors of additional internal floor area. The infill roof will be set below the roof of the main school so as not to disrupt the roofline or visually dominate the character or appearance of the listed building or local area. Page 195 of 208
Page 196
8.13 The proposed extension is of a scale, form and design that does not detract from the character or appearance of the listed building. The colour palette of the external materials to be used for the proposed extension draw from the external finishes of the original 1930’s school. The proposal is to be finished in materials that match and reflect the contemporary design approach and subject to the quality of the materials used the extension can complement the design of the listed building. Therefore, the proposed extension will not result in an adverse impact upon the character, appearance or setting of the listed building or the local area. 8.14 In overall design terms, the proposed alterations and extension to the existing listed building see the removal of the existing later additions that fail to make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the historic school whilst ensuring any significant and important historic fabric is retained. The proposed alterations and extension will result in a positive outcome for this historic building and contribute to the enhance functionality of the school. The proposed extension is of a simple contemporary design that includes a flat roof, large vertical windows finished in a combination of brick and metal cladding that ensure the proposed extension does not visually compete with the historic school. The extension to the school building will have a contemporary appearance further enhanced by a contemporary palette of materials. This approach will ensure the extension to the original school building is a landmark addition in the locality, whilst by means of its height and orientation on the site it will sit comfortably in the local townscape without visually dominating the character, appearance or amenity of the listed building or local area. Landscaping 8.15 The contribution of mature trees to carbon capture, biodiversity and other ecosystem services such as water management and air quality is now widely understood and the removal of veteran and mature trees conflicts with Council and Scottish Government policies related to deforestation, climate action and addressing the twin threats of the Climate Emergency and Nature Crisis. 8.16 The redevelopment of the site will see the removal of some trees which are identified as either dead or dangerous tree (Category U) listed in Tree Survey. Compensatory tree and hedge planting is proposed to compensate for the unavoidable tree loss. Whilst the loss of trees is disappointing and contrary to policy, it is noted that the trees are not healthy or safe and would be subject of removal in the coming years. 8.17 The trees identified as category A, B or C within the Tree Survey are to be retained and protected during construction with appropriate root protection measures. This can be secured by the use of a condition on a grant of planning permission. Page 196 of 208
Page 197
8.18 Whilst the general landscape layout is generally acceptable, the planting details and specification notes are still to be agreed. Therefore, a condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission requiring details to be submitted, so as to ensure that the proposed landscaping provides positive effects for biodiversity and enhances the development and character and appearance of the area and setting of the listed building. 8.19 Overall, it is noted that measures will be put in place to protect the trees worthy of retention and ensure that an adequate level of compensatory planting is included that contributes towards biodiversity, habitats and landscaping. If planning permission is granted these details can be secured by condition. Access and transportation 8.20 The proposed redevelopment of Penicuik High School will not see any increase in the number of pupils or staff. Therefore, there should be no impact upon transport requirements compared to existing. 8.21 The redevelopment of the site looks to provide a new dedicated car parking area with 30 standardised parking bays with vehicle access to be taken from Bellmans Road. The submitted plans did not include details of accessible parking or electric vehicle charging spaces. A condition can be attached to any grant of planning permission to secure these details. Whilst the proposal does not increase the number of parking spaces on site and fails to meet the Council’s parking standards, it is noted that there is no increase in staff or pupil numbers and therefore the situation is no worse than the current situation that would warrant the refusal of the planning application. 8.22 The existing school lies within an established residential area and so the existing pedestrian facilities are well established. Footways are generally 2m wide with dropped kerb crossings at major junctions. At the existing school entrance on Carlops Road there is a raised table crossing with additional street furniture and railings. 8.23 The redevelopment of the school will see the primary pedestrian and cycle access being located to the rear of the school from Bellmans Road. Pedestrian access will be improved by including level access to the building from the rear. Pedestrian and cycle access will still be available from the front of the school from Carlops Road. 8.24 The surrounding residential streets are 20mph, making them conducive for use by cyclists. Further afield, there are no dedicated cycle routes nearby, though the Midlothian Cycle Map indicates that the nearest off- site cycle route is on the B6482 to the west of the school. 8.25 The nearest bus stops to the application site are located on Carlops Road approximately 200m to the east of the campus. There are also Page 197 of 208
Page 198
stops on John Street, approximately 300m to the north. Both sets of bus stops are served by routes 37, 47 or 140 operated by Lothian Buses with a 30-minute frequency. 8.26 The proposed redevelopment of Penicuik High School includes enhancements to the pedestrian and cycle access points by upgrading and providing level access routes. The proposal includes cycle parking for pupils, staff and visitors in accordance with current Midlothian Council standards, which will encourage the switch to active travel modes and therefore complies with MLDP policy TRAN1 and NPF4 policy 13. 8.27 The proposed layout results in an increase in permeable areas when compared to the current school site layout. Surface water will be treated through porous paving to all parking areas, blue roof design, filter trenching and rain gardens to all surface water prior to discharge. Residential amenity 8.28 Whilst the redevelopment of the site results in the location of the massing of the building increasing to the front/eastern side of the site, there is no increase in staffing levels or pupil capacity. Therefore, the impact on the amenity of existing residential neighbours will be comparable to the existing situation. 8.29 The redevelopment of the site will open up the rear, north-western, part of the site through demolition of the later additions. This part of the site will see the introduction of an off-street parking area, cycle parking, a sprinkler compound, a growing garden with landscaping to frame it. 8.30 The redevelopment and extension to the school does not raise concerns in terms of overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing due to on-site separation distances comparable to existing. 8.31 Overall, the site has a long history of education and community uses and the impact on the amenity of existing residential neighbours will be comparable to the existing situation. 9 RECOMMENDATION 9.1 That planning permission (24/00661/DPP) be granted for the following reason: The site is located within the settlement boundary of Penicuik and on a site with an established educational and community use and as such there is presumption in favour of an appropriate educational and community use development. The proposed detailed scheme of development in terms of its layout, form, design and landscape framework is acceptable and as such accords with development plan Page 198 of 208
Page 199
policies. The presumption for development is not outweighed by any other material considerations. Subject to the following conditions: 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). 2. Prior to the installation of replacement windows within the original building, detailed elevation and sectional plans of proposed replacement windows shall be submitted to the planning authority for prior written approval. The proposed aluminium replacement windows should be designed to continue the astragals up (without the glass) and set back louvres, so as to emulate the partitioned design of the existing windows. Development shall thereafter be carried out using the approved materials or such alternatives as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting the character, appearance and setting of the listed building so as to comply with policies 7 of NPF4 and ENV22 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. 3. The development shall not begin until a scheme to deal with any contamination of the site has been submitted to and approved by the planning authority. The scheme shall contain details of the proposals to deal with any contamination and include: i. the nature, extent and types of contamination on the site; ii. measures to treat or remove contamination to ensure that the site is fit for the uses hereby approved, and that there is no risk to the wider environment from contamination originating within the site; iii. measures to deal with contamination encountered during construction work; and iv. the condition of the site on completion of the specified decontamination measures. 4. On completion of any required decontamination/ remediation works, referred to in Condition 3, and prior to any part of the building being occupied for its approved use, a validation report 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 building shall be occupied unless or until the planning authority have approved the required validation. Page 199 of 208
Page 200
Reason for conditions 3 and 4: To ensure that any contamination on the site is adequately identified and that appropriate decontamination 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. 5. Notwithstanding the plans and supporting statements hereby approved, the proposed softworks landscaping layout are hereby not approved. Development shall not begin until a scheme of hard and soft landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Details of the scheme shall include: i existing and finished ground levels and floor levels for all buildings, roads, parking areas and paths in relation to a fixed datum; ii existing trees, landscaping features and vegetation to be retained; removed, protected during development and in the case of damage, restored; iii proposed new planting including trees, shrubs, the wee forest, hedging and grassed areas; iv location and design of any proposed walls, fences and gates, including those surrounding bin stores or any other ancillary structures; v schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density; vi programme for completion and subsequent maintenance of all soft and hard landscaping including existing trees to be retained. The landscaping shall be completed prior to the development being occupied. Any tree felling or vegetation removal proposed as part of the landscaping scheme shall take place out with the bird breeding season (March-August); unless a suitably qualified ecologist has carried out a walkover survey of the felling/removal area in the 48 hours prior to the commencement of felling/removal, and confirmed in writing that no breeding birds will be affected; vii proposed car park configuration and surfacing; viii details of the location, design, height and specification of proposed street lighting within the development; ix proposed footpaths and cycle paths within the site; and x proposed cycle parking facilities. All hard and soft landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the scheme approved in writing by the planning authority as the programme for completion and subsequent maintenance (vi). Thereafter any trees or shrubs removed, dying, becoming seriously diseased or damaged within five years of the completion Page 200 of 208
Page 201
of the development shall be replaced in the following planting season by trees/shrubs of a similar species to those originally required. Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is enhanced by landscaping to reflect its setting in accordance with policy DEV7 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 and national planning policy, guidance and advice. 6. Development cannot be commenced until the tree protection measures, complying with BS5837 and the Arborcultural Method Statement hereby approved, for all trees that are to be retained; have been implemented in full and maintained as such for the duration of construction. Evidence of the tree protection measures are in place shall be submitted to the planning authority for prior written approval. 7. During construction of the development hereby approved, the Root Protection Areas of trees to be retained shall be protected in accordance with the Arboricultural Method Statement with no plant or machinery to be used in these areas. Reason for conditions 6 and 7: To ensure the development does not result in the loss or damage of a tree which merits retention. 8. Prior to the commencement of development, a pre-construction dusk bat survey shall be undertaken as per the recommendations and requirements of section 4.1 of the approved Bat Preliminary Roost Assessment Report – September 2024 (Revised January 2025). Reason: The submitted and approved Bat Preliminary Roost Assessment Report – September 2024 (Revised January 2025) made recommendations that relate to bats should be adhered to. 9. Development shall not begin until details of that all future establishment and management of habitats is detailed within a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) or Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) have been submitted to the Planning Authority for prior written approval as per section 5.3.2 of the approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal - July 2024. Reason: The submitted and approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal –July 2024 made recommendations that should be adhered to. Page 201 of 208
Page 202
10. During construction the precautionary mitigation measures outlined in section 4.2.7 of the approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal –July 2024 shall be adhered to. Reason: The line of trees on site is likely to provide suitable foraging/commuting habitat for bats and the submitted and approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal –July 2024 made recommendations that should be adhered to, so as to ensure there is no harm or impact upon the habitat. 11. The ecological enhancements shall comprise of the recommendations and measures outlined in Sections 5.2.1 and 5.3.1 of the approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal - July 2024 shall be adhered to during development works. Reason: The submitted and approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal –July 2024 made recommendations that should be adhered to. 12. Development shall not begin until details and, if requested, samples of materials to be used on external surfaces of the buildings; hard ground cover surfaces; means of enclosure and ancillary structures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out using the approved materials or such alternatives as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority. Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is enhanced by the use of quality materials to reflect its setting in accordance with policies DEV2 and DEV6 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017 and national planning policy, guidance and advice. 13. Development shall not begin until an application for approval of matters specified in conditions for a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The CEMP shall include: i. details of construction access routes; ii. signage for construction traffic, pedestrians and other users of the site; iii. controls on the arrival and departure times for construction vehicles, delivery vehicles and for site workers (to avoid school arrival/departure times); iv. details of piling methods (if employed); v. details of any earthworks; vi. control of emissions strategy; vii. a dust management plan strategy; viii. waste management and disposal of material strategy; Page 202 of 208
Page 203
ix. a community liaison representative will be identified to deal with the provision of information on the development to the local community and to deal with any complaints regarding construction on the site; x. prevention of mud/debris being deposited on the public highway; xi. material and hazardous material storage and removal; and xii. controls on construction, engineering or any other operations or the delivery of plant, machinery and materials (to take place between 0700 to 1900hrs Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1300hrs on Saturdays). Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details or such alternatives as may be approved in writing with the planning authority. Reason: In order to control the construction activity on the site, ensure environmental impact during the construction period is acceptable and to ensure appropriate mitigation is in place. 14. Development shall not begin until details of the provision and use of accessible parking bays and electric vehicle charging stations 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 with the planning authority. Reason: To ensure there is suitable and accessible parking. To ensure the development accords with the requirements of policy DEV6 and TRAN5 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. 15. No development shall take place on the site until the applicant has undertaken and reported upon a programme of archaeological (Historic Building Recording and Public Engagement) work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the planning authority. Reason: To ensure this development does not result in the unnecessary loss of archaeological material in accordance with policies ENV24 and ENV25 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan. 16. The design and installation of all plant, machinery and equipment shall be such that the combined noise level shall not exceed NR 30 daytime (07:00 to 23:00 hrs), or NR 25 if the noise is tonal, and NR 25 night-time (23:00 to 07:00 hrs), or NR 20 if the noise is tonal, as measured from within any living apartment in any Page 203 of 208
Page 204
neighbouring noise-sensitive premises. For the purposes of this condition the assessment position shall be as identified by BS 7445 in relation to internal noise measurements. Reason: To mitigate the potential noise impact of the development in the interest of safeguarding the amenity of neighbouring noise sensitive properties. 9.2 That listed building consent (24/00663/LBC) be granted for the following reason: The proposals will not detract from the character, appearance or setting of this listed building. The proposals comply with the aims of Historic Environment Scotland's Policy Statement, Historic Environment Scotland's Managing Change in the Historic Environment Guidance Notes, and policies 7 of NPF4 and ENV22 of the Midlothian Local Development Plan 2017. Subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the installation of replacement windows within the original building, detailed elevation and cross-section plans of proposed replacement windows shall be submitted to the planning authority for prior written approval. The proposed aluminium replacement windows should be designed to continue the astragals up (without the glass) and set back louvres, so as to emulate the partitioned design of the existing windows. Development shall thereafter be carried out using the approved materials or such alternatives as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority. 2. Prior to the removal of any historic fabric, hereby approved, details of all removals shall be recorded, and details of the retention, salvage and reuse of historic fittings shall be submitted to the planning authority for approval. Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details, or such alternatives as may be approved in writing with the planning authority. Reason for conditions 1 and 2: In the interest of protecting the character and appearance of the listed building 3. No external works shall not begin until details and, if requested, samples of materials to be used on external surfaces of the buildings; hard ground cover surfaces; means of enclosure and ancillary structures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out using the approved materials or such alternatives as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority. Page 204 of 208
Page 205
Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is enhanced by the use of quality materials. In the interest of protecting the character and appearance of the listed building. 4. No development shall take place on the site until the applicant has undertaken and reported upon a programme of archaeological (Historic Building Recording and Public Engagement) work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the planning authority. Reason: To ensure this development does not result in the unnecessary loss of archaeological material in accordance with policies ENV24 and ENV25 of the adopted Midlothian Local Development Plan. Advisory Note Where permission is granted for the demolition of a listed building, there is a separate requirement through section 7 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) to allow HES the opportunity to carry out recording of the building before this is demolished. To avoid any unnecessary delay in the case of consent being granted, applicants are strongly encouraged to complete and return the Consent Application Referral Form found at www.historicenvironment.scot/about-us/what-we-do/survey- andrecording/threatened-buildings-survey-programme. Peter Arnsdorf Planning, Sustainable Growth and Investment Manager Date: 29 May 2025 Application No: 24/00661/DPP & 24/00663/LBC Applicant: Midlothian Council Agent: Adam McConaghy, Iceni Projects Validation Date: 1/11/2024 and 29/10/2024 – amended plans submitted 1 May 2025 Contact Person: Whitney Lindsay, Planning Officer Email: Whitney.Lindsay@midlothian.gov.uk Background Papers: 24/00773/DPP, 24/00514/SCR, 24/00363/PAC Attached Plans: Location Plan, Site Plan and Elevations Page 205 of 208
Page 206
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 (2025) Re-development of existing high school including; erection of extensions, partial demolition of buildings, landscaping, formation of parking; and associated works Penicuik High School, 39A Carlops Road, Penicuik File No. 24/00661/DPP & 24/00663/LBC Scale 1:2000Page 206 of 208
Page 207
MH MH CS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 13 9 10 11 23 14 15 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 MS 2 1 3 5 4 BS 18000 6000 10 987654321 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 21 20 19 18 17 16 UP UP UP UP r 6 Existing substation to be upgraded, refer to M&E Proposals Indicative service vehicle route Existing daycare centre boundary retained and refurbished 30 no.standard car parking spaces Secure cycle storage for students and staff - 36 spaces Proposed accessible ramp to drop-off Existing frontage planters to be enhanced. New planting to fill gaps and existing planting in good condition to be retained. Utilities compound to engineer's design surface treatment and boundary height TBC Existing ramp to be resurfaced Existing embankment regraded and extended to create larger green space Existing gas kiosk to be removed Gravel margin to building edge Proposed bin store Existing daycare centre playground to be retained Proposed ASN storage location Existing fire exit to be retained temporary location for schools existing growing garden trees/ planters equipment during construction works Emergency and delivery lay-by Existing daycare centre frontage and parking spaces to be retained and made good 2no accessible bays to be repainted and made good External canopy in construction academy yard space 12 no. visitor cycle spaces Woodland trail with informal nature play New pedestrian gate to ASN entrance Proposed railing to secure vehicle route to open space Proposed concrete plinth signage, details TBC Proposed concrete walls with signage to architect's specification Proposed ASN drop off space Proposed ASN garden with raised planters, outdoor gym equipment and flexible space Pocket garden to front lawn Existing vehicle access point retained Existing pedestrian access retained Existing access retained Existing access retained Existing access retained Existing daycare centre garage retained Bellmans Road Landscape under separate application refer to ED14222-WA-XX-XX-DR-L-0005 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 HARDWORKS LEGEND SITE BOUNDARY SOFTWORKS REFER TO ED14222-WA-XX-XX-DR-L-0002 PLANTING PLAN FOR SPECIES SPECIFICATION EXISTING LAWN To be retained, protected and made good ORNAMENTAL SHRUB / HERBACEOUS PLANTING RAIN GARDEN / SUDS PLANTING NATIVE HEDGEROW PROPOSED TREE PLANTING AMENITY GRASS PT01 - EXISTING HARDSTANDING - To be retained and made good PT03 - FEATURE AVENUE BLOCK PAVING SPEC:Plaza paving, AG Paving DIMS: 500 x 135 x 120mm 425 x 135 x 120mm 325 x 135 x 120mm 250 x 135 x 120mm COLOUR: 20% Salt 80% Flaxen - random mix BOND: Stretcher bond Vehicular make up for emergency access- to engineers specification PT06 - PEDESTRIAN TARMAC SURFACE - Pedestrian make up to engineers specification PT04 - PEDESTRIAN BLOCK PAVING SPEC: Plaza Paving, AG Paving DIMS: 200 x 150 x 60mm COLOUR: 20% Salt 80% Safran BOND: Stretcher bond Pedestrian / vehicle make up (dependant on location) PT05 - VEHICULAR PAVING SPEC: Xflo Plaza Permeable Paving DIMS: 200x100x80mm COLOUR:Lakrids (bays delineated in Salt) BOND: Herringbone -Vehicular make up to engineers specification EXISTING WALLS To be retained and refurbished as required PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS Wall finish to match proposed building facade BD01 balustrade where fall height exceeds 600mm BD02 - 1.8m METAL RAILING 1.8m height vertical bar railing, powder coated steel SITE BOUNDARIES EXISTING TREES To be retained and protected refer to ED14222-WA-XX-XX-DR-L-0004 Tree Retention and Removal Layout PT02 - PROPOSED VEHICULAR ASPHALT - Vehicular make up to engineers specification PROPOSED GATE To match adjacent boundary Existing cast iron gates to be retained and refurbished INDICATIVE DRAINAGE CHANNELS GRAVEL MARGIN - Loose gravel margin to building edge - 300mm width BD01 - 1.1m METAL RAILING 1.1m height vertical bar railing, powder coated steel Atop retaining wall where fall height exceeds 600mm PT07 - PAINTED TARMAC SURFACE - Pedestrian make up to engineers specification PT08 - TACTILE PAVING SPEC: Tactile Flags - Corduroy DIMS: L400 X W400 X D50 mm COLOUR: Natural PT10 - BARK PLAY SURFACE - Bark chip to BS EN1177 - To natural play areas in sensory woodland CONCRETE SIGNAGE PLINTH Concrete signage plinth to architect's specification BD03 - TIMBER FENCE 1.8m height timber vertical slat fence to bin store 3m height to utility compound (TBC with M&E engineer) PT09 - RUBBER CRUMB PLAY SURFACE - Rubber crumb to BS EN1177, product TBC - To play areas in ASN garden F01 - PROPOSED CANOPY / PERGOLA FSC Certified Timber B1 - PROPOSED BLEACHER BENCH Pre-cast concrete amphitheatre steps with incorporated timber top seating B2 - PROPOSED BENCH Product: Litchard Bench' Supplier: Broxap or equal Groundfixed B3 - PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE PICNIC TABLES Product: Garthdee Picnic Tables with Wheelchair Access Supplier: Broxap or equal Groundfixed FURNITURE B4 - PROPOSED PICNIC TABLES Product: Garthdee Picnic Tables Supplier: Broxap or equal Groundfixed F02 - PROPOSED GROWING PLANTERS Product: Sheldon Planter Spl312 Supplier: Langley Design or equal To be backfilled with topsoil in line with BS3882-2015 CR - PROPOSED CYCLE RACKS Product: Sheffield Cycle Stand Supplier: Falco 36 secured spaces for staff & students; 12 visitor spaces; Groundfixed P1 - PROPOSED FEATURE BOULDERS Product: Natural Boulders Supplier: Caledonia Play or equal P2 - PROPOSED TIMBER SLEEPERS Product: Stepping Log Columns Supplier: Caledonia Play or equal P3 - PROPOSED BALANCE BEAM Product; Balance Beam Robinia' No. 1 ref. FRO215 Supplier: Kompan P4 - PROPOSED STEPPING LOGS FSC certified timber, product TBC P5 - PROPOSED OUTDOOR GYM EQUIPMENT Parallel Bars Supplier: Playdale or equal P6 - PROPOSED OUTDOOR GYM EQUIPMENT Chin up bars Supplier: Playdale or equal P7 - INFORMAL HALF BASKETBALL PITCH with basketball hoop. Product:Gladiator ground install Supplier: TTS PROPOSED STEPS Pre-cast concrete steps & associated handrails and tactile paving CS - SECURED CYCLE SHELTER Product: Falcolok-600 Cycle store Supplier: Falco Groundfixed CS MS MS - MAINTENANCE SHED Product: Saracen Supplier: Asgard or equal B5 - PROPOSED MOVABLE SEAT - Product TBC Copyright Reservedc DRAWN BY CHECKED BY CLIENT PROJECT DRAWING TITLE SCALE DATE APPROVED BY APP'DCHK'DREVISION DETAILS DATE DRAWN DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING N:\ED\ED14222 - PENICUIK HIGH SCHOOL\03 - DESIGN\AUTOCAD\PHS-WAS-XX-XX-DR-L-00001 LANDSCAPE GENERAL ARRANGEMENT P07.DWG DRG No. DRG SIZE A1 REV SUIT. CODE Midlothian Council Penicuik High School Landscape General Arrangement PLANNING PHS-WAS-XX-XX-DR-L-00001 P07 - 1:500 01.07.24 LP RB NM north NOTE: The number of EVC spaces in the new school car park to be agreed with Midlothian Council P06 Planning Issue RLB, substation and day center pakring update 10.01.25 LP AH AH P07 Planning resubmission 30.04.25 LP AH AH Page 207 of 208
Page 208
Level 00 0.000 m Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level 01 3.950 m Level 00 - B 190.043 m Level RF - New-Build Extension 11.900 m Level RF - New-Build Extension 11.900 m Level 02 7.925 m Level 02 7.925 m ACEGIKMNOP D BL J FH 12640 3 43342925292558502925292529452905950490045001350585058503410 05. 01. 05. 05. 04. 03. 03. 03. 04. 05. 01. 05. 02. 09. 08. 01. 1 8 3 29 7 12 11 10 13 66 5 Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level B1 185.381 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m 07. 09. 3245 3950 3830 3300 08. 186799 Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level B1 185.381 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m 07. 07. 08. 09. 186823 185301 Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level B1 185.381 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m 3245 3950 3830 3300 07. 186465 09. 08. 07. 08. 187021 Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m 3950 3830 3300 Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m 09. 07. 08. 07. 3950 3830 3300 09. 07. Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - Existing 199.706 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m Level RF - New-Build Extension 11.900 m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 09. 07. 3950 3830 3300 820 5213 3075 3664 7606 2805 7300 7300 7300 3800 05. 05. Rooflight Upstands Light grey guardrail Level 00 0.000 m Level 02 - B 197.026 m Level 01 - B 193.343 m Level 00 - B 190.043 m 01. 01. 06. 01. 188626 Material Key Type Description 01. Brick-Buff 02. Brick-Buff (10mm Brick protrusion detail) 03. Precast Concrete 04. Metal Cladding (Dark) 05. Metal Cladding (Light) 06. Curtain Wall System with Spandrel Panels 07. Existing Harled Surface 08. Existing Stone / Masonry 09. Existing Slate Roof Level 01 3.950 m Level RF - New-Build Extension 11.900 m Level 02 7.925 m A C E G I K M NDB LJF H 4740 4334 2925 2925 5850 2925 2925 2945 2905 950 4900 4500 1350 5850 Light grey guardrail 05. 05. Level 00 0.000 m Level 01 3.950 m Level Roof Eaves - Existing 7.780 m Level RF - New-Build Extension 11.900 m 12345678910 03. 03. 01. 05. 05. 05. 02. 3950 3830 4120 09. 07. New Ramp Light grey guardrail Copyright and not to be reproduced without the consent of Holmes Miller Holmes Miller accepts responsibility for this document only to the commissioning Party and not to any other. Holmes Miller does not accept liability for accuracy or veracity of survey information provided by others and horizontal dimensions and levels provided by Holmes Miller and based on survey information provided by others must be verified on site DO NOT SCALE: Use figured dimensions only Notes Holmes Miller Project Drawing Name Drawing Number Scale @ A1 89 Minerva Street Glasgow G3 8LE 0141 204 2080 www.holmesmiller.com Checked Revision As indicated JH P05 Proposed GA Elevations Penicuik High School PHS-HML-02-ZZ-D-A-10300 52415241 Scale (m) 0 4 8 1 : 200 Proposed North West Elevation 021 1 : 1000 Plan Key - GA Elevations 1 : 200 Proposed GA Elevation North East 02 and 033 1 : 200 Proposed GA Elevation North East 012 1 : 200 South-East Elevation 039 1 : 200 South-East Elevation 028 1 : 200 South-East Elevation 017 1 : 200 North West Elevation 0112 1 : 200 South-West Elevation 0211 1 : 200 South-West Elevation 0110 1 : 200 North East Elevation 0713 *Drawing Naming Note: Refer to 5241-HML-02-ZZ-D-A-10300 for Previous Revisions Prior to Changing Naming Conventions 26.08.2024 Rev Notes Drawn Appr Date P01 First Issue ACO RH 15.07.24 P02 Updated drawing for Stage 02 submission ACO RH 30.07.24 P03 Drawing updated for Planning Issue ACO RH 24.10.24 P04 Stage 3 Costing Issue CB JH 29.11.24 P05 Planning Issue ACO JH 30.04.25 1 : 200 Proposed Level 02 South-East Elevation6 Light grey guardrail Note: Refer to 5241-HML-02-ZZ-D-A-10971 - 1930s Building Condition Survey for Repairs to Existing Elevation. 1 : 200 Proposed GA Elevation North East 045 Changes include: Canted wing of new extension removed, CN entrance relocated, Gym layout simplified, two no. existing stair cores to north removed and replaced with new stair cores, steps to link building retained, link external door removed from NE Elevation. Page 208 of 208