• Agenda

Minutes of Meeting of the Ross, Skye and Lochaber Planning Applications and Review Committee held in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, High Street, Dingwall on Tuesday, 29^th January 2008 at 10.30 am.

 

Committee Members Present
Mr Billy Barclay Mrs Biz Campbell Mr David Chisholm	Mrs Isobel McCallum Mr Ian Renwick Mrs Audrey Sinclair
Officials in attendance:   Mrs Dorothy Stott, Principal Planner Mr Steven Grant, Principal Technician Ms Susan Blease, Solicitor/Clerk Mrs Alison MacArthur, Clerical Officer

 

Mr David Chisholm in the Chair

 

Business

 

1.           Apologies for Absence

 

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr Peter Cairns, Mr Donald Cameron, Mr Bill Clark, Mr Michael Foxley, Mr Eddie Hunter and Mr Hamish Fraser.

 

2.           Applications 

 

	Applicant	Location	Nature of Development
2.1	Moray Facilities Ltd (Application Reference No 07/00812/FULRC)	Land to the North of Schoolcroft, Culbokie	Formation of 12 Serviced House Plots and 15 Affordable Houses

 

There had been circulated Report No. PLR-010-08 (1507kb) by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending the grant of Planning Permission subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.	For the avoidance of doubt, the number of affordable houses hereby approved shall not exceed 15, however determination of the final number of houses shall be reserved until fully detailed proposals are submitted for the prior approval of the Planning Authority including the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings within this part of the development, the means of access thereto, proposals for landscaping, surface water drainage and all boundary treatment.  The development of this part of the site shall be designed in such a way to minimise any detrimental impact on neighbouring properties and shall ensure compatibility of design, scale and siting. For the avoidance of doubt, the proposals for two storey flatted units hard onto the frontage with the B9169 are not considered appropriate to this village setting and shall not be included within the layout.  These are further reserved matters required in connection with the development hereby approved and no work shall commence on this part of the site until such further application has been determined by the Planning Authority.
	Reason: As no details have been submitted with this application.
2.	No development shall commence on site until the developer has entered into a design and build contract with a social housing provider or equivalent to deliver the proposed affordable housing units within Community Scotland benchmark costs and built to Community Scotland housing for variable needs standards unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. The detailed nature of the affordable housing provision must be agreed with the Planning Authority in consultation with Housing Services prior to development commencing on any part of the development.
	Reason:  In accordance with the layout plan submitted as part of the application and in the interests of securing compliance with the Council’s Affordable Housing Policy as contained in the Development Plan.
3.	Prior to any work commencing on site, a Design Brief shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority in respect of the serviced plots.  This shall ensure that the design and layout of all houses within the site shall be undertaken in such a way as to minimise any detrimental impact on neighbouring properties and shall ensure compatibility of design, scale and siting.  In this respect it will also be expected that details for within plot tree planting/landscaping shall be included particularly along the mutual boundaries with those established residential properties adjacent.
	Reason:  In the interests of protecting the established amenity and privacy of existing properties.
4.	Surface water drainage proposals shall be based on the SuDS layout forming part of this application and shall be implemented by the developers at their expense in respect of all surface and any ground water arisings.  The drainage plans shall require to comply with the principles of Sustainable Drainage Solutions(SuDS) and further details shall require to be approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA prior to development commencing.
	Reason:  In the interests of securing adequate drainage systems.
5.	The serviced plot development shall proceed in a phased programme of releasing sites that does not exceed 4 houses being completed or occupied per year over the 4 year period ending 31 January 2012.   Such phasing shall be agreed in advance with the Planning Authority.   The affordable housing shall be developed as a single phase, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority and no more than 4 of the private plots shall be occupied until such time as there is first occupation of the affordable housing.
	Reason:  In the interests of controlling growth to a rate that meets with the objectives of the Adopted Local Plan and in compliance with Council policy on affordable housing.
6.	There shall be no commencement of work on the site whatsoever until the minor road between the junction of the B9169 and the site access is improved to the full satisfaction of the Roads Authority at the developer's expense.   This shall incorporate the following elements; a footpath link from the site to the existing footpath adjacent to the hall; road widened to 6m to accommodate two way movement; forward visibility in the vicinity of the hall car park entrance; change of surface and traffic calming and all appropriate road markings and signage.  The access road into the site shall thereafter be constructed to the full satisfaction of the Roads Authority and all works shall be subject to Road Construction Consent.
	Reason:  In the interests of road safety.
7.	Prior to the commencement of any work on site including site preparation, a clear definition of the phasing of development shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority.  This shall include a management report detailing the methods and practices for on-site construction including identification of any proposed compound and storage areas and the hours of operation.  Construction shall thereafter accord with the terms of such report.
	Reason:  In the interests of clarification and amenity.
8.	Prior to occupation of any fifth plot within the serviced house sites, the footpath link between this part of the site and the affordable housing area shall be completed by the developer at his expense to the full satisfaction of the Planning Authority.  This shall accommodate cycle and disability use and shall be maintained as such in perpetuity to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
	Reason:  In the interests of amenity and ensuring the proposed footpath link is maintained as part of the development.
9.	Prior to the commencement of any development on site, a fully detailed landscape plan, including details of management shall be submitted by the developer in respect of the amenity space identified to the west of the serviced plots hereby approved.  This shall include indigenous tree planting, in particular along the western boundary and the connection to the footpath linking the site with the affordable housing area.  All planting shall be carried out at the latest within the first planting season following commencement of any works on site and shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved Scheme of Maintenance.  Any plants which, within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development, die, are removed or become damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the immediately following planting season with others of a similar size and species.  The landscape plan shall also include details of boundary treatment around the amenity space.
	Reason:  In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to help absorb the development into the landscape.
10.	Prior to the commencement of development, agreement shall be reached over the provision of a childrens’ play area within the site or alternatively a commuted sum to be provided to improve existing childrens’ play facilities within the village all to be agreed with the Planning Authority after consultation with TEC Services.
	Reason:  In the interests of amenity and in accordance with the Council’s Development Plan Policy Guidelines.
11.	There shall be a developers’ contribution in respect of the wider provision of recreational and leisure developments within the community and the provisions of enhanced public transport as stated in the Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan.  No development may commence on any part of this site until evidence of this agreement and a programme of contribution is lodged with the Council.
	Reason:  In the interests of compliance with Council Policy.

The Chairman welcomed parties to the hearing and outlined the hearings procedure, notes on which had been previously circulated.

 

The Principal Planner then introduced the application, giving a brief description of the proposed development and outlining the policies against which the application was to be assessed and the key material considerations to be taken into account.

Mr Greg Duncan, Architect, then addressed the meeting on behalf of the applicant, emphasising that there were no technical objections to the application, that the applicant was offering up to 15 affordable houses, which was over 50% of the development and that the location was perfect for affordable housing being close to services and to the primary school.  With regard to local plan policy to delay development at this site until 2010, he reminded members that the local plan advised this restriction was to be subject to review once the new primary school was open, which it now was. 

Questioned by members, Mr Duncan provided the following additional information:

 

·        The applicant would be bringing forward a redesigned layout to take the flats proposed as part of the affordable housing away from the road edge.  This might mean a reduction in number of affordable houses, if required to produce a layout acceptable to the planning authority.

·        Assuming planning consent was granted, suspensive conditions purified and building warrants obtained by September 2008, he estimated occupation of the first of the serviced plots by September 2009.

·        The original design had shown one access to the whole development taken from a point opposite the school and integration of the four affordable houses then proposed with the serviced plots.  However, this had changed in discussions with Cairn Housing who were looking for more than four affordable houses.  By taking a separate access to the serviced plots from Findon Road, it had been possible to increase the number of affordable houses.  Cairn were happy with the proposed separation of the affordable housing development from the serviced house plots.

·        The configuration of the land in the area shown as amenity land would be changed and the area landscaped.  The applicant would also make the required contribution to recreational facilities in the wider area.

 

The Principal Technician then addressed the Committee.  He advised that TECs Roads’ initial concerns had largely been addressed by the applicant.  Remaining concerns would require to be addressed in the further details to be submitted prior to commencement of development in terms of the suspensive conditions proposed in the report.  The improvements required to the Findon road and to allow access to the serviced plots would be to the benefit of all users of that road.  The need for any further improvements, such as provision of more passing places on Findon Road, would be considered before TECs approval to the road works was finally given.  However, a balance had to be struck to ensure that the road was not improved to such an extent that traffic additional to traffic generated by the development was encouraged to use this road.

 

Mr Roger Piercy then addressed the meeting on behalf of Ferintosh Community Council.  The Community Council were very unhappy about the speed of development in Culbokie and departure from the phasing proposed in the local plan.  The plan advised that this site should not be developed before 2010.  In addition they felt the development of this site was piecemeal and should be held back until proposals for development of the remaining area of this land, also allocated for longer-term housing development, came forward.  The density of the proposed development was of particular concern.  The local plan suggested indicative capacity for just 15 houses on the whole of this area, whereas this proposal was for 15 affordable houses and 12 house plots, and the number of houses which would be proposed on the remainder of the allocated area was as yet unknown.  Finally, he asked members to note that when the housing on School Croft had been approved in the 1970s, a single plot had deliberately been left vacant and retained by the Council as a potential access to this adjacent area.  The Community Council wished to know why this had not been considered as a potential access to the present development.

 

Questioned as to what facilities the Community Council would wish the developer to provide outwith the application site, Mr Piercy advised that they did not as yet have detailed proposals but would wish to be consulted before any decision were taken on this.  They considered that the village had more than enough play equipment for younger children and would prefer that any contributions to facilities from this developer be put instead towards recreational facilities for older children.

 

He further confirmed that the applicant had not consulted the Community Council in relation to their proposals for this site.

 

Mrs Jacky Goode then addressed the meeting as one of the objectors to the application.  She voiced her concerns about overdevelopment, poor drainage, road safety and departure from the phasing and indicative housing capacity identified in the local plan.  She considered that the requirement to phase construction so that only 4 houses were completed each year would lead to considerable disturbance over a long period of time.  She advised that there had been flooding problems on the old School road which did not seem to have been addressed.  The road had recently been re-tarred by the Council but there were still problems.  Finally, she considered the committee meeting to be perfunctory, as it was clear from the report that the planning officer had already determined that the application should be approved.

 

Mr Colin Gilmour then addressed the meeting on behalf of Culbokie Primary School, which objected to the application.  The School’s main concern was road safety and hazards which would be created by the proposed access to the affordable housing site which would be opposite the access to the School.  They were also concerned at the piecemeal development of this part of the allocated housing expansion area and felt it should be considered only in conjunction with detailed proposals for the remainder of the allocated expansion area.

 

There being no other objector present who wished to address the meeting, Mr Duncan then confirmed that he did not wish to make any further submissions on behalf of the applicants in response to the issues raised by Mr Piercy, Mrs Goode and Mr Gilmour.

 

The Chairman then asked the parties whether they were satisfied with the way in which the hearing had been conducted and they confirmed that they were so satisfied.

 

The Principal Planner then presented her report and recommendation to approve the development subject to the conditions set out in the report, with amendment to condition 10 (in light of Mr Piercy’s comments about the adequacy of existing play facilities for young children) to provide that the commuted sum to be provided in lieu of provision of a children’s play area be for the improvement of “recreational facilities” within the village rather than “children’s play facilities”.

 

Following debate, Mrs McCallum, seconded by Mrs Campbell, moved that the application be granted in accordance with the Principal Planner’s recommendation.

 

Mr Chisholm moved as an amendment that determination of the application be deferred for further consideration by the applicant of provision of an alternative access through the School Croft development.  There being no seconder, Mr Chisholm’s motion fell.

 

The Committee accordingly agreed the recommendation to grant planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the report, with amendment of condition 10 to refer to “recreational facilities” rather than “children’s play facilities”.

 

The meeting ended at 12.15 pm.