Agenda Item 04(1) WHITEHILL SAWMILL, PARKEND, CROSSGATES APPLICATION REF. 13/01616/PPP. NOTICE OF REVIEW (submitted by applicant)

Transcription

1 Agenda Item 04(1) WHITEHILL SAWMILL, PARKEND, CROSSGATES APPLICATION REF. 13/01616/PPP NOTICE OF REVIEW (submitted by applicant) 4

2 5

3 6

4 7

5 8

6 9

7 10

8 11

9 12

10 13

11 14

12 15

13 16

14 17

15 18

16 19

17 20

18 21

19 22

20 23

21 24

22 25

23 26

24 27

25 28

26 29

27 Agenda Item 04(2) WHITEHILL SAWMILL, PARKEND, CROSSGATES APPLICATION REF. 13/01616/PPP PLANNING DECISION NOTICE REPORT OF HANDLING 30

28 The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Montgomery Forgan Associates Enterprise, Planning and Protective Services Development & Buildings Enterprise, Planning and Protective Services Kingdom House, Kingdom Avenue, Glenrothes, KY7 5LY

29 Eden Park House Cupar Fife KY15 4HS Dear Sir/Madam Application No: Proposal: Address: Andy Taylor Your Ref: Our Ref: 13/01616/PPP Date 2nd August /01616/PPP Planning permission in Principle for residential development Whitehill Sawmill Parkend Crossgates Cowdenbeath Fife Please find enclosed a copy of Fife Council s decision notice indicating refusal of your application. Reasons for this decision are given, and the accompanying notes explain how to begin the appeal procedure should you wish to follow that course. Should you require clarification of any matters in connection with this decision please get in touch with me. Yours faithfully, Andy Taylor, Planner, Development Management Enc 32

30 13/01616/PPP Fife Council, in exercise of its powers under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 REFUSES PLANNING PERMISSION IN PRINCIPLE for the particulars specified below Application No: Proposal: Address: The plans and any other submissions which form part of this Decision notice are as shown as Refused for application reference 13/01616/PPP on Fife Council s Planning Applications Online REFUSE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S): 1. In the interest of safeguarding the countryside from unjustified development; the site lies outwith any designated settlement boundary and is not zoned for residential development. The proposed dwellinghouse would therefore be contrary to the guidance contained within Policies E1, E15 and E16 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012), Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside (2010) and Scottish Planning Policy (2010). 2. In the interests of safeguarding the countryside from unjustified development; the proposed development would not be in a clearly defined cluster of 5 or more dwellinghouses, would not be warranted by the needs of agriculture or forestry operations and would result in the erosion of the existing rural landscape. Furthermore, the proposal would not contribute to the overall enhancement or retention of the rural landscape and would set an undesirable precedent for housing in the countryside; all contrary to Policies E1, E15 and E16 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012), Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside (2010) and Scottish Planning Policy (2010). 3. In the interests of road safety; the proposal is unacceptable as it is within an unsustainable location and will result in an intensification of vehicle turning manoeuvres at an access with sub-standard visibility splays, which is located on an unrestricted road outwith the established built-up area, all to the detriment of road safety.; all contrary to Policy T2 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012). PLANS The plan(s) and other submissions which form part of this decision are: - Reference Plan Description 01 Location Plan DECISION NOTICE PLANNING PERMISSION IN PRINCIPLE 13/01616/PPP Planning permission in Principle for residential development Whitehill Sawmill Parkend Crossgates Cowdenbeath Fife Dated:2nd August 2013 Decision Notice (Page 1 of 1) For Head of Enterprise, Planning and Protective Services Fife Council 33

31 IMPORTANT NOTES ABOUT THIS DECISION 13/01616/PPP LOCAL REVIEW If you are not satisfied with this decision by the Council you may request a review of the decision by the Council s Local Review Body. The local review should be made in accordance with section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 by notice sent within three months of the date specified on this notice. Please note that this date cannot be extended. The appropriate forms can be found following the links at Completed forms should be sent to: Fife Council, Committee Services, Corporate Services Directorate Fife House North Street Glenrothes, Fife KY7 5LT or ed to local.review@fife.gov.uk LAND NOT CAPABLE OF BENEFICIAL USE If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the Planning Authority or by the Scottish Minister, and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot be rendered capable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted, he/she may serve on the Planning Authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of his/her interest in the land in accordance with Part V Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act,

32 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT OF HANDLING DELEGATED APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION IN PRINCIPLE REF: 13/01616/PPP SITE ADDRESS: PROPOSAL : APPLICANT: WARD NO: WHITEHILL SAWMILL PARKEND CROSSGATES PLANNING PERMISSION IN PRINCIPLE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MR & MRS JAMES THOMSON WHITEHILL SAWMILL PARKEND CROSSGATES Cowdenbeath CASE OFFICER: Andy Taylor DATE REGISTERED: 03/06/2013 DATE OF INSPECTION: 24/07/2013 DATE OF REPORT 30/07/2013 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The application is recommended for: Refusal ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Under Section 25 of the Planning Act the determination of the application is to be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 1.0 Background 1.1 The application site measuring 0.89 hectares is located 2km north of Aberdour and 2km to the south of Crossgates within a countryside setting and the grounds of the adjacent Ferry View to the south west. The site is also within a designated Local Landscape Area. The site appears unkempt consisting of various small containers and sheds and a mixture of boundary treatments. There are a number of properties bounding the site including Woodend Farm and Whitehill Kennel to the west and open countryside on other aspects. As well as the existing single storey detached dwellinghouse the adjacent area has been used in the past as a sawmill, which is no longer in operation and the building was demolished a number of years ago. Vehicular access to the site is via an existing access from the C26 public road at the north of the site. 1.2 The proposal seeks planning permission in principle for residential development. 35

33 1.3 Planning application (Reference 11/01963/FULL) was approved in August 2011 for the erection of a workshop to manufacture timber products for the existing business. The workshop was never completed and a partly built structure can be seen on site consisting of one built gable and a steel frame. 1.4 The application has been advertised in the Dunfermline Press as being contrary to the Development Plan as it proposes new dwellinghouses within the countryside. The proposal is however not considered to be significantly contrary to the Development Plan therefore no discretionary hearing is required in this particular case. 2.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 2.1 The issues to be assessed against the development plan and other guidance are as follows:- - Principle of Residential Development - Design/Visual Impact on the Surrounding Rural Area - Road Safety - Residential Amenity/Garden Ground - Contamination - Developer Contributions - Water and Drainage - Natural Heritage 2.2 Principle of Residential Development The application site is located in an area which is identified as countryside in the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012). The assessment of this proposal therefore falls under housing in the countryside policies in the Development Plan and within National Planning Guidance and Advice The Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) promotes the use of the plan-led system to provide a practical framework for decision making on planning applications thus reinforcing the provisions of Section 25 of the Act. The SPP seeks to promote the use of previously developed land and better access by sustainable transport modes and advises that new residential units should be concentrated within existing settlements. Furthermore, it advises that isolated developments should be discouraged in the open countryside unless particular circumstances are clearly defined in development plans, and the reuse of redundant or vacant buildings and the reuse of brownfield sites should be encouraged Policy E1 of the Adopted Local Plan advises that outwith settlement envelopes, development will only be supported where it accords with Policies E15 to E29 respectively Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside advises that new dwellings in the countryside should only be supported where justified by the operational needs of agriculture/forestry or other rural businesses; involves the renovation of an existing house with a substantially complete building; or, takes the form of an alteration or change of use of redundant non-residential buildings of traditional long life construction Policy E15 of the Adopted Local Plan advises that development in the countryside will only be supported where it is for housing which complies with Policy E16 and is of a scale and nature 36

34 which is compatible with surrounding uses; is well located in respect of available infrastructure and contributes to the need for any improved infrastructure; and will result in an overall enhancement to the landscape and environmental quality of an area Policy E16 of the Adopted Local Plan states that new housing development in the countryside will only be permitted where it is required for the operational needs of a rural business; or is for small scale affordable housing which meets an identified need; or is for a site within an established and clearly defined cluster of dwellings of 5 houses or more; or is for the renovation of a substantially complete building last used as a house; or provides for the rehabilitation and/or conversion of complete or substantially complete existing buildings of traditional long life construction; or is for the demolition and replacement of a house; or secures the development of a derelict site with ruinous buildings where this would result in an overriding benefit in terms of visual and environmental improvement Whilst each planning application must be considered on its own individual merits, the Council must reasonably consider the potential precedent a planning approval may set in certain circumstances. A core objective of the Council's countryside policy is to preserve the character and appearance of the countryside by limiting unacceptable or unjustified development. This objective is based on the view that an essential characteristic of the countryside is that it is undeveloped and that any additional development no matter how sympathetic, represents an erosion of this basic character In this instance, the proposal involves the erection of residential dwellings, and as it does not meet any of the relevant criteria for new housing in the countryside, as set out in both the Development Plan and the non-statutory guidance outlined above, the Planning Authority therefore sees no overriding reason or justification to depart from approved policies and guidance. There are existing dwellings adjacent the site attached to Whitehill Kennels and Woodend Farm, however, it is considered that the proposed site is not within a cluster of 5 or more clearly defined dwellinghouses, but would rather form an extension to the existing dwellinghouses to the south west of the site which would result in the erosion of the existing rural landscape. The applicant has also submitted no sound justification to demonstrate an essential need for a rural location. It is therefore considered that the proposal is unjustified and contravenes the Development Plan Policies relating to housing development in the countryside. The loss of this rural site and the erection of dwellinghouses would also not realise any environmental benefit and would not result in an overall enhancement or retention of the landscape and environmental quality of the surrounding Local Landscape Area. It is considered that the approval of this proposal would be contrary to the related policies of the adopted Development Plan as it would potentially lead to the introduction of sporadic housing development in the countryside and set an undesirable precedent for such development. The principle of residential development at this site, is therefore not considered acceptable and would introduce, ad hoc, unjustified new housing in the countryside. 2.3 Design/Visual Impact on Surrounding Rural Area SPP (Housing) advises that the siting and design of new housing should take account of its setting, the surrounding landscape, topography, character and appearance (para 78) and that the density of new development should be determined in relation to the character of the place (para 83). Furthermore, it also states that all new development should respond to the specific local character of the location, fit in the landscape and seek to achieve high design and environmental standards (para 95). 37

35 2.3.2 PAN44 and PAN72 advise that new housing developments should be well sited, and of a high quality of design to ensure the existing landscape character and natural heritage of an area are protected Policy E4 of the Adopted Local Plan requires all new development to make a positive contribution to its immediate environment. Policy E15 of the Adopted Local Plan advises that development in the countryside will only be supported where it is for housing which complies with Policy E16 and is of a scale and nature which is compatible with surrounding uses and will result in an overall enhancement to the landscape and environmental quality of an area. Policy E19 of the Adopted Local Plan, protects development proposed within an Local Landscape Area where it has no significant adverse affect on the identified landscape qualities of the area and/or its overall landscape integrity and setting. Proposals must demonstrate through form, scale, layout, detailing, siting, design, materials, and landscape treatment, how the development will contribute to the conservation, restoration, or enhancement of the special landscape area and its associated character and qualities In this instance, it is considered that given the brownfield nature of the site, the proposed dwellinghouses could potentially be designed in a way which would allow the proposal to sit comfortably within the site with no detrimental visual impact on the surrounding rural area. The proposal would, therefore, be acceptable and would comply with Development Plan Policy in this respect. However, this would not be the determining factor in this instance given the principle of this proposal is not acceptable. 2.4 Road Safety SPP (Transport) advises that decisions on new developments should take account of the existing transport network and environmental and operational constraints. Policy T2 of the Adopted Local Plan advise that car parking requirements, turning areas, visibility splays and other detailed road matters should meet the design standards adopted by Fife Council In this case, Fife Council's Transportation Services Development Management (TDM) team have recommended the proposal for refusal on the grounds that there is a presumption against the formation of new accesses or the increase in use of existing vehicular accesses and junctions on unrestricted distributor roads that are outwith established built up areas because such accesses introduce, or increase, traffic turning manoeuvres that conflict with through traffic movements and so increase the probability of accidents occurring, to the detriment of road safety. Although no specific details have been provided on numbers of dwellings as the application is in principle only, the applicant has indicated only 6 8 dwellings would be proposed. However, the site is capable of accommodating at least 20 dwellings given the area. TDM have stated that sustainable housing development requires links with the surrounding existing communities to ensure the site has full access to local facilities (shops, post office, schools, etc.) and is fully accessible to public transport and will encourage walking, cycling and public transport use in preference to the private car. The nearest significant settlement Crossgates is over 1.5 km away and there are no footways, footpaths, cyclepaths or bus services (apart from school buses) within the area. TDM has highlighted that housing development at this location would clearly rely solely on car based trips and would therefore generate significantly more vehicular trips when compared against the small scale sawmill that was approved (but never built) under consent 11/01963/FULL TDM have confirmed that according to the current Fife Council Transportation Development Guidelines (TDG), 6m x 210m visibility splays must be provided and maintained 38

36 clear of all obstructions exceeding one metre in height above the adjoining road channel level at the junction of the access to the site and the public road. In addition, 210 metre forward visibility must be available for drivers of vehicles turning right into the site from the public road. TDM have stated that an approximate visibility splay of only 6m x 40m can be provided in the oncoming direction due to features in the neighbouring garden obscuring visibility and this splay is substandard providing less than 20% of the necessary visibility splay. A splay of approximately 6m x 105m is available in the South direction due to a combination of the geometry of the public road and the hedge on the West side of the carriageway obscuring visibility. This splay is also substandard providing 50% of the necessary visibility splay. Any potential improvements to this splay would be dependent on the hedge on the West side of the carriageway either being within land in the applicant s control or the public road boundary. The proposal is unacceptable as it is within an unsustainable location and will result in an intensification of vehicle turning manoeuvres at an access with sub-standard visibility splays, which is located on an unrestricted road outwith the established built-up area, all to the detriment of road safety and contrary to the Adopted Local Plan. 2.5 Residential Amenity/Garden Ground Policy E4 of the Adopted Local Plan and Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Daylight and Sunlight advise that new development should not reduce personal privacy or amenity and those unacceptable impacts on light to nearby properties should be minimised and preferably avoided Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Garden Ground advises that all new and existing residential properties shall be served by a minimum of 100 square metres of useable garden space and that a ratio of building footprint of 1:3 will be required It is considered that the proposed dwellinghouses could easily be designed and positioned in such a way to ensure that there are no residential amenity issues. However, these issues would be assessed in more detail as part of any future detailed design and, therefore, this is not the main determining factor in this instance given only the principle is being considered. The proposal would therefore comply with the Development Plan in this respect and would be acceptable in this instance. 2.6 Contamination PAN33 advises that suspected and actual contamination should be investigated and, if necessary, remediated to ensure that sites are suitable for the proposed end use. Policy E6 of the Adopted Local Plan advises development proposals involving sites suspected of contamination, a site investigation should be submitted to assess the nature and extent of any contamination, which may be present. It also advises that where contamination is known to be present, appropriate mitigation measures should be agreed with the Council and where possible remediation strategies should be agreed prior to the determination of any planning application In this particular case, Fife Council's Contaminated Land Team have advised that given that the site was formerly occupied by a sawmill, a suspensive condition should be attached to any approval requiring that a comprehensive contaminated land risk assessment, carried out to the appropriate level of detail, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as planning authority. 39

37 2.7 Developer Contributions PAN2/2010 sets out government advice on the provision of affordable housing. Policy H2 of the Adopted Local Plan advises that housing proposals must accord with the structure plan housing land requirement and this is further considered in Fife Council's updated Supplementary Guidance on Affordable Housing (2011) Policy D1 of the Adopted Local Plan stresses that the Council will seek contributions from developers to address any shortfalls in community infrastructure and/or mitigate any adverse impact brought about by their development Fife Council's Education Services have been consulted in relation to this application and have confirmed there is currently sufficient capacity at the catchment schools and the Education & Learning Directorate would not be requesting planning obligations to overcome capacity issues. Fife Council Housing Services have also been consulted but have not responded. 2.8 Water and Drainage Policy SS1 of the Approved Structure Plan and Policies I3, I4, and I5 of the Adopted Local Plan advise that developments should not place unacceptable demands on public infrastructure including drainage systems, developments will not be supported if they would increase the risk of flooding, nor will they be supported if Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) or other similar appropriate measures are not undertaken. Consideration should also be given to the guidance contained within the Council's advice note on flooding and drainage With regards to water supply, Scottish Water have been consulted and have no objections to the proposed development. Fife Council, Harbours Flood and Coast Team (HFCT) has been consulted and have stated that the site is not shown to be at risk of flooding on SEPA's indicative flood risk map. However, HFCT has stated that SEPA maps only identify locations at risk where a watercourse catchment greater than 3 square Km in area. There is a minor watercourse at the north end of the proposed development and therefore the site may be at risk. A flood risk assessment should therefore be requested in support of this application This could be condition as part of any detailed application and the proposal would, therefore be acceptable and would comply with Development Plan Policy in this respect. This would, however, not be a determining factor in this instance given the principle of this proposal is not acceptable. 2.9 Natural Heritage Policies E20, E22 and E23 of the Adopted Local Plan seek to protect local sites designated for their nature conservation interest and also to protect any valuable wildlife habitats and protect from development where it would have an adverse effect, either directly or indirectly, on the ecological status of waterbodies or the quality of groundwater. The site is not designated for any specific nature or ecology related purpose and therefore the element of the policies that apply here are the parts relating to the protection of valuable wildlife habitats and/or any protected species. Fife Council s Natural Heritage Team (NHT)has been consulted and have clarified that the site contains very little habitat. However there are hedgerow/trees along the road boundary which should be retained and protected. However, NHT have stated that there is potential to enhance this and other boundaries with planting but this should be of native species 40

38 of native provenance. To the west the site is bounded by a small watercourse. This has been impacted by works to the site with material being pushed onto and over the banking. The watercourse will need to be restored and a 10m buffer should be maintained as a riparian habitat corridor between the watercourse and development on the site. Details of biodiversity enhancement (as required by policy) will need to be submitted if approved However, as before, subject to appropriately imposed conditions, this would not be a determining factor given the principle of this proposal is not acceptable. CONSULTATIONS Scottish Water Scottish Environment Protection Agency EP+PS - Contaminated Land Education (Directorate) Housing And Neighbourhood Services Structural Services (Harbours, Flood And Coast) Transportation Highlight potential concerns regarding public sewerage and connection No objections Requires Site Specific Contamination Assessment. No contributions required No response. Requires a flood risk assessment. Refuse REPRESENTATIONS None CONCLUSIONS The proposed residential use on the site would result in an unjustified development within the countryside, which is not warranted by the needs of agriculture or forestry or other rural operations, would not result in the conversion of substantially complete building(s) of traditional long-life construction, would not be sited within a cluster of 5 or more dwellinghouses and would not result in the redevelopment of a derelict site where there would be an overriding benefit in terms of environmental improvement. In addition the proposal would also be contrary to the current Fife Council Transportation Development Guidelines with respect to road safety issues. As such it is considered that the proposal would be contrary to the terms of the Development plan, related national Guidance Fife Council Planning Customer Guidelines relating to housing in the countryside. 41

39 RECOMMENDATION The application be refused for the following reason(s) 1. In the interest of safeguarding the countryside from unjustified development; the site lies outwith any designated settlement boundary and is not zoned for residential development. The proposed dwellinghouse would therefore be contrary to the guidance contained within Policies E1, E15 and E16 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012), Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside (2010) and Scottish Planning Policy (2010). 2. In the interests of safeguarding the countryside from unjustified development; the proposed development would not be in a clearly defined cluster of 5 or more dwellinghouses, would not be warranted by the needs of agriculture or forestry operations and would result in the erosion of the existing rural landscape. Furthermore, the proposal would not contribute to the overall enhancement or retention of the rural landscape and would set an undesirable precedent for housing in the countryside; all contrary to Policies E1, E15 and E16 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012), Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside (2010) and Scottish Planning Policy (2010). 3. In the interests of road safety; the proposal is unacceptable as it is within an unsustainable location and will result in an intensification of vehicle turning manoeuvres at an access with substandard visibility splays, which is located on an unrestricted road outwith the established builtup area, all to the detriment of road safety.; all contrary to Policy T2 of the Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012). STATUTORY POLICIES, GUIDANCE & BACKGROUND PAPERS National Guidance SPP - Scottish Planning Policy (2010) PAN2/ Affordable Housing PAN 33 - Development of Contaminated Land (2000) PAN 44 - Fitting New Housing Development into the Landscape (1994) PAN 72 - Housing in the Countryside (2005) Development Plan Approved SESplan Strategic Development Plan (June 2013) Adopted Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan (2012) Other Guidance Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Housing Development in the Countryside (2010) Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Garden Ground (2011) Fife Council's Planning Customer Guidelines on Daylight and Sunlight (2011) 42

40 REPORT OF HANDLING - DELEGATED APPLICATION REF: 13/01616/PPP ADDRESS: WHITEHILL SAWMILL PARKEND CROSSGATES CASE OFFICER: ANDY TAYLOR DRAFT DECISION REASON FINAL DECISION AUDIT SIGNATURE DATE 1. Case Officer Plans ticked in uniform Added Value entered 1 set of plans sorted (paper submissions) If applicable: - Check if Neighbour Notification has expired Check if Publication Dates have expired Refund Required (CLP s from Gateway) PD Rights Removed Added Legal Agreement (Y to be entered in Recommendation) Temp Permission Expiry Date Entered 2. Lead Officer/Service Manager Quality Check Report Signed Off 3. Resources Pass file to Technicians Decision basket Quality Check Conditions/Reasons Print Decision Notice Upload Report to Idox Change Decision Notice to public in Idox Mail Decision Notice SIGNATURE INITIALS DATE 43

41 Agenda Item 04(3) WHITEHILL SAWMILL, PARKEND, CROSSGATES APPLICATION REF. 13/01616/PPP INTERIM DECISION NOTICE 44

42 Fife Planning Review Body FPRB Reference J Review Decision Notice (Interim) Decision by Fife Planning Review Body (the FPRB) Site address: Land at Whitehill Sawmill, Park End Crossgates Application for review by Mr and Mrs James Thomson against the decision by an appointed officer of Fife Council Application 13/01616/PPP for planning permission in principle for residential development Application Drawings: FC Ref 13/01616/PPP 01 Location Plan; FC Ref 13/01616/PPP 02 Supporting Statement; A site inspection was carried out on the 13 th of January, 2014 Date of Decision Notice: 27 th January, 2014 Decision The FPRB reverses the determination reviewed by them and intends to approve Planning Permission subject to the conditions and reasons outlined below in section 4.0 and subject to a legal agreement requiring the payment of a commuted sum relating to the affordable housing provision. If the legal agreement is not secured with a three month period from the date of this decision letter the FPRB reserves the right to reconsider this decision at a further meeting of the FPRB. 1.0 Preliminary 1.1 This Notice constitutes the formal decision notice of the Local Review Body as required by the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations The above application for planning permission was considered by the FPRB at its meeting on 13 th January The Review Body was attended by Councillor William Campbell (Chair), Councillor David Mogg, Councillor Dorothea Morrison, Councillor Margaret Taylor and Councillor Jim Young. 1.3 Councillor Morrison intimated that she did not agree with the approval decision and asked that her dissent be recorded in the minute of the meeting. 2.0 Proposal 45

43 The proposal involves an application for planning permission in principle for a residential development on a 0.89 hectare site located within land zoned as countryside within the Adopted Mid Fife Local Plan. The site was a former sawmill and has been cleared of any previous buildings although the site is wholly covered by hard standing. In 2011 a workshop building was granted planning permission and building work commenced but was not completed leaving an unfinished concrete block work structure consisting of 3 walls located in the western corner of the site. To the east of the site is a single storey detached dwellinghouse and the west of the site is bounded by the properties of Woodend Farm and Whitehill Kennels. The remaining surrounding area is open countryside. The C26 public road runs the length of the northern boundary of the site and there is an existing vehicular access onto this road from the site. 3.0 Reasoning 3.1 The determining issues in this review were the principle of housing development within the countryside, whether the application site could be considered as Brownfield land and road safety. The FPRB considered the terms of the Development Plan, which comprises the SESplan Strategic Development Plan 2013 and the Mid Fife Local Plan The FPRB noted that the application site was very close to the boundary of 2 Local Plan Areas although the application is wholly within the Adopted Mid Fife Local Plan Area. 3.2 The FPRB firstly considered that the land is zoned as countryside within the Local Plan yet, although now cleared of buildings, it had previously been developed. The FPRB therefore considered the definition of Brownfield land within the Development plan in relation to the current classification of the site. The FPRB noted that within this definition the lack of buildings on the site did not exclude the site from the qualifying criteria of Brownfield land. The FPRB then considered Policies E15 and E16 of the Local Plan which relates to new development within the countryside. The FPRB noted that Policy E15 directs applications for housing developments to Policy E16. The FPRB noted that the whilst there were 2 dwellinghouses flanking each end of the development site and sporadic, isolated dwellings located within the area there was no pattern or proximity that could result in the application site being classed as falling within a cluster of 5 or more dwellinghouses and it could not therefore meet this criterion. The FPRB noted the other qualifying criteria for supporting new housing within the countryside and noted that the application did not meet these. The FPRB noted that there was provision within Policy E16 (part g) for the redevelopment of a derelict site but only allowing redevelopment where ruinous buildings were present on site. Although there is an unfinished building on the site this is not technically ruinous and part (g) of the policy could not therefore apply to this proposal The FPRB were however sympathetic to the case presented by the applicant relating to the brownfield nature of the site and its current unsightly condition. Despite the lack of ruinous buildings the FPRB considered that there would be a significant environmental improvement resulting from a well-designed residential development on this site. This was the underlying aspiration of Policy E16 (g) and the FPRB were minded to support the development even though it did not comply with the full terms of this policy criterion. The FPRB noted that the application was only for planning 46

44 - 3 - permission in principle and that issues of design within the countryside location would be further matters requiring approval by condition (ARC applications). 3.4 The FPRB then considered whether the introduction of new housing would be suitable in terms of the vehicular access onto the C26 public road. The Local Plan policy T2 requires the development to meet the Council standards with regard to access design and The Council s Transportation Development Management staff had recommended refusal due to the countryside location and the lack of visibility at the site access. The FPRB noted the standard of the existing access to the site at the site visit and the available visibility offered along the site s frontage to the C26. The FPRB were content that there was adequate visibility in both directions for vehicles to safely leave and enter the site from the C26. The FPRB did however consider that the existing access arrangement was not the optimum one that could be achieved on site due to its proximity to the junction of the C26 and B925 which is to the west of the site. The FPRB considered that a new access should be moved to a central point on the northern boundary of the site. The FPRB noted that the site was adequate in area to provide onsite parking and turning areas as would be required for a standard housing layout. The FPRB did not therefore feel that the development should be refused for road safety grounds. 3.5 The FPRB were therefore content that planning permission in principle could be granted for a residential development on the site. The FPRB were content that details of access, parking, design, drainage and landscaping would be further matters approved by condition. The FPRB then assessed what other matters were required to be specified by condition for the redevelopment of the site. 3.6 The FPRB noted that whilst the site was not within an area identified for flood risk by SEPA there were 2 small water courses in the immediate vicinity that could potentially flood. The FPRB therefore considered it was prudent to request a flood risk assessment be carried out in tandem with any designed layout for the site through a condition. 3.7 The FPRB noted that there were hedgerows and trees located within the site on the northern boundary and that a condition should ensure, where possible, these are retained as part of the landscaping of the site. The FPRB noted that whilst previously developed the site was within the countryside and adjacent to a watercourse and therefore biodiversity enhancement and creation of a riparian corridor between the watercourse to the west of the site would be part of the benefits of the redevelopment of the site and appropriate ARC conditions should reflect this. 3.8 The FPRB noted that the local schools were not at capacity and there would not therefore be a requirement for developer contributions in relation to education payments. The FPRB noted that due to the site s size and the potential that a minimum of 5 dwellings could be built the development would exceed the threshold requiring developer contributions to Fife Council s Affordable Housing Scheme. The FPRB noted that an onsite provision of affordable housing would not be required but that a financial contribution should be sought and a legal agreement would be the appropriate mechanism to ensure this contribution is made on a pro-rata basis based on the eventual number of houses developed at the site. The financial contribution for this area of Fife would be 2,700 per dwellinghouse created. The FPRB were content that a legal agreement would ensure provision of this contribution. 47

45 In summary therefore the FPRB considered that the principle of development was acceptable and matters relating to flooding, drainage, access, design, landscaping etc. could be satisfactorily addressed in subsequent ARC applications through the use of conditions. The FPRB therefore upheld the determination of the Appointed Officer and refused the application. 4.0 Conditions and Reasons 4.1 The FPRB decided that planning permission should be approved subject to a legal agreement for the provision of a financial contribution to Fife Council s Affordable Hosuing Scheme and the following conditions and reasons 1. A further application(s) for certain matters (Approval of Matters Required by Condition) shall be submitted for the requisite approval of the Planning Authority, together with the relative detailed plans which shall include:- (a) A location plan of all the site to be developed to a scale of not less than 1:2500, showing generally the site, any existing trees, hedges, walls (or other boundary markers) layout of the roads and sewers, and the position of all buildings; (b) A detailed plan to a scale of not less than 1:500 showing the site contours, the position and width of all proposed roads and footpaths including public access provision, the siting of the proposed buildings, finished floor levels, new walls and fences and details of proposed landscape treatment; (c) The detailed plans, sections and elevations of all buildings proposed to be erected on the site, together with details of the proposed method of drainage and the colour and type of materials to be used externally on walls and roofs; (d) The proposed foul and surface water drainage for the site including any SUDS facility or septic tank required to address this matter. (e) The vehicular access arrangements, visibility splays, car parking spaces and a turning area suitable for a domestic car within the curtilage of each dwellinghouse in accordance with the Council's Transportation Development Guidelines. (f) A landscaping scheme for the whole site including tree protection measures, biodiversity enhancement and creation of a riparian corridor on the west boundary of the site. (g) The proposed boundary markers for the new domestic curtilages to be created for the dwellinghouses. (h) A contaminated land site specific risk assessment including details of any remediation or mitigation measures. The investigation shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of PAN 33, Part 11A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, DEFRA/EA Contaminated land Report 11 and BS10175:2001. (i) A flood risk assessment demonstrating that all dwellinghouses on site would not be at risk from flooding form adjacent watercourses. No work shall be started on site until the written permission of this Planning Authority has been granted for these proposals, or such other details as may be acceptable. 48

46 - 5 - Reason: To be in compliance with section 59 of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended. 2. All vehicular access to the site shall be taken from a new access point formed at central location on the site frontage to the C26 and the existing access point shall be permanently closed off; the details required by condition 1 shall reflect this requirement. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 3. BEFORE ANY DWELLINGHOUSE IS OCCUPIED the access onto the C26 public road required by condition 1 and the closure of the existing vehicular access shall be fully formed and completed in accordance with the details to be submitted under condition 1 above and thereafter permanently maintained. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 4. BEFORE ANY DWELLINGHOUSE IS OCCUPIED the turning areas required by condition 1 shall be fully formed and completed in accordance with the details to be submitted under condition 1 above and thereafter permanently maintained. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 5. BEFORE ANY DWELLINGHOUSE IS OCCUPIED off street car parking spaces shall be provided for the proposed houses outwith the turning area required by condition 1 above in accordance with the current Fife Council Transportation Development Guidelines and thereafter permanently maintained. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 6. Any remediation or mitigation measures required to address any contaminated land issues arising from the risk assessment submitted under condition 1 above shall be fully carried out prior to the commencement of the work on any buildings on the site. If works are required then written confirmation that the work has been completed in accordance with the advice contained with the risk assessment shall be submitted to Fife Council as Planning Authority within 3 months of the completion of the remediation or mitigation works. Reason: In the interests of public safety; to ensure that the relevant works are carried out if necessary 7. Any mitigation measures required to address any flooding issues arising from the flood risk assessment submitted under condition 1 above shall be fully carried out prior 49

47 - 6 - to the commencement of the work on any buildings on the site. If works are required then written confirmation that the work has been completed in accordance with the advice contained with the risk assessment shall be submitted to Fife Council as Planning Authority within 3 months of the completion of the mitigation works. Reason: In the interests of public safety in relation to flooding; to ensure that the relevant works are carried out if necessary 8. The flood risk assessment and the contaminated land site specific assessment required by condition 1 shall be submitted with the first application for matters reserved by condition and the design and layout of the site shall accord with the conclusions presented within those documents. Reason: To ensure these items are assessed before any works commence on the construction of any buildings or other infrastructure... Iain Matheson, Chief Legal Officer. 50

48 - 7 - TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 Notification to be sent to applicant on determination by the planning authority of an application following a review conducted under section 43A(8) Notice Under Regulation 21 of the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the planning authority to refuse permission or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant may question the validity of that decision by making an application to the Court of Session. An application to the Court of Session must be made within 6 weeks of the date of the decision. 2 If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot be rendered capable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted, the owner of the land may serve on the planning authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of the owner of the land s interest in the land in accordance with Part V of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland ) Act Notice under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by Sections 27A and 27B of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 You are required, prior to the development hereby approved commencing on site, to submit written notification to Fife Council as Planning Authority ( this Council ) of the intended date of commencement of the development. The development shall not commence until this notification has been acknowledged in writing by this Council. On completion of the development, you are also required to submit written notification to this Council of this as soon as practicably possible. COAL MINING DEVELOPMENT INFORMATIVE NOTE The proposed development lies within an area that has been defined by The Coal Authority as containing potential hazards arising from former coal mining activity. These hazards can include: mine entries (shafts and adits); shallow coal workings; geological features (fissures and break lines); mine gas and previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are seldom readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur in the future, particularly as a result of development taking place. 51

49 - 8 - It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required (for example the need for gas protection measures within the foundations), be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Standards approval (if relevant). Your attention is drawn to the Coal Authority policy in relation to new development and mine entries available at Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires the prior written permission of The Coal Authority. Such activities could include site investigation boreholes, digging of foundations, piling activities, other ground works and any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings and coal mine entries for ground stability purposes. Failure to obtain Coal Authority permission for such activities is trespass, with the potential for court action. Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from The Coal Authority s Property Search Service on or at If any of the coal mining features are unexpectedly encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on Further information is available on The Coal Authority website 52

50 Agenda Item 4(4) WHITEHILL SAWMILL, PARKEND CROSSGATES APPLICATION REF. 13/01616/PPP ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUEST BY THE REVIEW BODY ON 1 st SEPTEMBER, 2014* 53

51 FIFE PLANNING REVIEW BODY Extract Minute Sheet Review: Whitehill Sawmill, Parkend, Crossgates Members: Councillors Dorothea Morrison(Chair),Lawrence Brown, Kay Morrison, Elizabeth Riches and John Wincott Date: 1 st September, 2014 Decision: The Committee agreed:- (1) sufficient information was not before them to proceed to decide the matter; and (2) to request that written submissions be received from the Policy Planning Team on :- (i) (ii) the terms of the Supplementary Planning Guidance on Affordable Housing, recently consulted on; and the terms of the consultative draft if the FIFEplan (Local Development Plan); and how these documents may affect the requirement for the payment of a commuted sum relating to affordable housing provisions. 54