Fife Local Development Plan Monitoring Statement January 2012

Appendix 2 - Fife Local Development Plan Monitoring Statement January 2012

CONTENTS

1. Introduction 3

2. The Current Development Plan 5

3. Objectives as set out in the Adopted Local Plans 6

PHYSICAL 6 Brownfield 6 Population 9

ECONOMIC 10 Tourism 12 Rural Economy 14 Employment 15 Retail 22 Business 24

SOCIAL 24 Mixed Use Areas 24 Affordable Housing 27 Recreation & Health 31 Education 33

ENVIRONMENTAL 36 Landscape 36 Transport 40 Carbon Reduction/Renewable Energy Sources 44 Biodiversity 46

4. Technical Papers 48

5. Impact of Policies and Proposals within the Adopted Local Plans 49

PROPOSALS 49

POLICIES 50 Strategic Policy 50 Local Plan Policy 51

6. Conclusion 52

Appendix 1 – Technical Papers Informing the Main Issues Report Appendix 2 – Strategic Policy Comparison Appendix 3 – FIFEplan Local Development Plan Policy Monitor

1 List of Figures

Figure 1 Input to the Monitoring Statement 3 Figure 2 Total Population, Fife 10 Figure 3 Total Benefit Claimants, Fife 19 Figure 4 Jobseekers Allowance Claimants, Fife 19 Figure 5 Affordable Housing Completions since 2006/07 28 Figure 6 Population with a Degree 35

List of Tables

Table 1 Employment Land Take 21 Table 2 Strategic Land Allocations 29

2 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 places a statutory duty on Fife Council to prepare a local development plan for the area and also sets a new framework for planning practice as part of modernising the planning system in Scotland.

1.2 The Act requires that a monitoring statement is prepared to accompany a main issues report for the local development plan when it is published. A monitoring statement must contain sufficient data to enable the main issues report to be prepared and to relate to the following: • the changes to the principal physical, economic, social and environmental characteristics of the district; and • the impact of the policies and proposals in the current development plan.

1.3 This monitoring statement will form part of the evidence base for the local development plan and provide a baseline for future monitoring of the local development plan. It has been informed by the documents illustrated in Figure 1:

Figure 1 – Input to the Monitoring Statement

3 1.4 As this is the first local development plan that Fife Council has prepared, it cannot look back to monitor the progress of a previous local development plan. Instead, it has to consider the existing development plan documents prepared under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

4 2.0 THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The development plan in Fife, at November 2012, comprises TAYplan, SESplan, the Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 (for all but the area of north Fife covered by TAYplan), three recently adopted local plans covering Mid Fife, Dunfermline & West Fife, and St Andrews & East Fife, and the adopted Fife Minerals Subject Local Plan.

2.2 There is also an adopted Fife Core Paths Plan which identifies core paths for walking, cycling, horse riding and use by the disabled across Fife and which is relevant to the content of the local development plan.

2.3 This monitoring statement reviews the performance of these plans to date and identifies what should be taken forward through the local development plan. This will help to inform the new local development plan, justify its content and provide a baseline for future monitoring. In this respect the report is divided into two main parts.

• Section 3 assesses the overall performance of the local plans against the core strategic land use and locational objectives that are contained within the plans; and • Section 5 assesses the performance of proposals and particular policy areas in order to identify where significant change may be required.

2.4 Fife Council’s local plans have all recently been adopted during 2012. The Mid Fife Local Plan was adopted in January, the St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan in October, and the Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plan in November. Therefore, the existing plans are up to date and there has been little time for the objectives and proposals within these local plans to be realised. This has been compounded further by the economic downturn which has resulted in many proposals not being implemented within the timescales originally programmed.

FIFEplan: The New Local Development Plan

2.5 Fife Council Planning Committee agreed in June 2011 to prepare a single local development plan for Fife. It will amalgamate current plan strategies into a single Fife-wide planning vision. We are calling the local development plan FIFEplan to give it a Fife identity as it spans the strategic development plan areas of TAYplan to the north and SESplan to the south.

3.0 OBJECTIVES AS SET OUT IN THE ADOPTED LOCAL PLANS

3.1 The following section brings together the objectives that are set out in the strategies of the adopted Mid Fife, Dunfermline & West Fife and St Andrews & East Fife Local Plans and illustrates how they are being addressed through policies and proposals. They have been split into physical, economic, social and environmental objectives. The geographical area that each objective relates to is highlighted in brackets after the objective number along with whether the objective is ongoing or complete.

PHYSICAL Brownfield sites

Objective 1. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Promoting the re-use of suitable and appropriately remediated brownfield land and buildings where possible.

3.2 The Mid Fife, Dunfermline & West Fife and the St Andrews & East Fife Local Plans promote brownfield opportunity sites through specific proposals and promote these sites to the market as being available for redevelopment. The action programmes that accompany these plans group these proposals together and monitor their reuse. Fife Council also produces a vacant and derelict land study which further identifies brownfield sites and promotes their reuse.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 1

Policies -

Proposals – Brownfield Opportunity Sites Mid Fife CRH02 – Former Grounds Maintenance Depot & Church, Main Street, Crosshill; BUR06 – Grange Distillery, Burntisland; BUR07 – Greenmount Hotel, Burntisland; BUR08 – South of Lammerlaws Road, Burntisland; COW10 – Adjacent Gas Works, Cowdenbeath; COW11 – High Street, Cowdenbeath; COW12 – Rosebank, Cowdenbeath; CRO04 – Builders Yard adjacent to Crossgates Primary School, Crossgates; CRO05 – Rear of Hillview Crescent, Crossgates; LES03 – 250 - 254 High Street, Leslie; LES04 – Prinlaws Mill, Leslie; LES05 – South of Walkerton Drive, Leslie; KEL07 – Old Gas Works, Kelty;

KNH02 – Viewforth Place, Kinghorn; KDY41 – Den Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY42 – Former Car Sales Garage, Millie Street, Kirkcaldy; KDY43 – Junction Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY44 – Millie Street, Kirkcaldy; KDY45 – Park Road/Lawson Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY46 – Smeaton Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY47 – Victoria Road, Former Power Station, Kirkcaldy; KDY48 – Victoria Road, Kirkcaldy; BKN05 – Factory Road, Buckhaven MET08 – Glencast Foundry, Methil MET09 – Rear Bayview Park, Kirkland Road, Methil; MET10 – Land to the east of Aberhill Primary School, Methil; MET11 – Methil Power Station, Methil; MET12 – Riverside, Methil; KEN05 – Kennoway School, Kennoway; LGY10 – Cartmore Road, Lochgelly; LGY11 – Old Filling Station, Lumphinnans Road, Lochgelly; THO07 – Network Rail Land, Thornton; THO08 – Orebank Terrace/Strathore Road, Thornton; and THO09 – Riverside, Thornton.

West Fife ABD001 – Hillside School, Aberdour; CHL003 – Land at Charlestown Harbour (Ballast Bank), Charlestown; CUL001 – Blackadder Haven, Culross; DUN061 – South of Elliot Street, Dunfermline; DUN062 – Paton Street North, Dunfermline; DUN063 – Paton Street South, Dunfermline; DUN064 – School Row, Dunfermline; DUN065 – Rolland Street/Moodie Street, Dunfermline; DUN066 – Priory Lane West, Dunfermline; DUN067 – Priory Lane/New Row Corner, Dunfermline; DUN068 – New Row/Park Avenue, Dunfermline; DUN069 – Viewfield House Car Park, Dunfermline; DUN070 – Chalmers Street, Dunfermline; DUN071 – Randolph St, City Centre, Dunfermline; DUN072 – Pittencrieff Street, Dunfermline; DUN073 – Walmer Drive, Dunfermline; HVF003 – Abbey Street, High Valleyfield; HVF004 – Chapel Place/Carlisle Street, High Valleyfield; INV012/INV004 – Land at Prestonhill Quarry, Inverkeithing; INV010/INV004 – Caldwell Mill, Inverkeithing; INV011/INV004 – RM Supplies, Inverkeithing; OAK005 – Holy Name Primary School, Oakley; ROS016 – Land adjacent Ferrytoll Road, Rosyth; TWH001 – Townhill Power Station Site, Townhill; TWH002 – Townhill Loch Car Park, Townhill; LWD012 – Saline Road Oakley; LWD013 – Land at Knockhill; and LWD014 – Castlehill Mine.

East Fife ANS04 – Depot, Pittenweem Road, Anstruther; ANS05 – Anstruther Wester Primary School, Anstruther; COB02 – South Wynd Depot, Colinsburgh; CUP05 – Ceres Road, Cupar; CUP06 – Former Snooker Hall, North Burnside, Cupar; CUP07 – Kirk Wynd, Cupar; CUP08 – Provost Wynd, Former Leuchars Removals, Cupar; DSH01 – Former Dunshalt Primary School, Dunshalt; LAD06 – Former Railway Goods Yard, Ladybank; LAR02 – Opposite Staghead, Largoward; and NEB02 – Mugdrum East, Newburgh.

Objective 2. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Identifying and promoting many significant regeneration opportunities along the coastal route from Burntisland to Methil on land that is vacant and/or derelict. The redevelopment of brownfield land along the coast will be balanced by other policies that will maintain and enhance the environmental, recreational, and tourism appeal of the Fife coast. Development along the coast within the plan boundaries will take account of the Fife Coastal Path, given its value as a tourism and leisure asset.

3.3 The Mid Fife Local Plan promotes regeneration opportunities along the coast on brownfield land including Energy Park Fife (Methil), Invertiel (Kirkcaldy), and Burntisland Docks. To date Fife’s flagship Energy Park has attracted in the region of £100 million plus of investment. The development framework for Invertiel places great importance on the adjacent Fife Coastal Path and the tourism potential for the area. The action programme that accompanies the Mid Fife Local Plan will monitor the progress of these proposals and inform the proposed plan.

3.4 In addition, Policy E27 (The Coast) provides policy protection that will maintain and enhance the environmental, recreational, and tourism appeal of the Fife coast. Implementation of the Fife Tourism Strategy (2010) will also help achieve this objective.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 2

Policies Policy E27 – The Coast

Proposals – Brownfield Opportunity Sites Mid Fife BUR06 – Grange Distillery, Burntisland; BUR07 – Greenmount Hotel, Burntisland; BUR08 – South of Lammerlaws Road, Burntisland; KDY41 – Den Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY42 – Former Car Sales Garage, Millie Street, Kirkcaldy; KDY43 – Junction Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY44 – Millie Street, Kirkcaldy; KDY45 – Park Road/Lawson Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY46 – Smeaton Road, Kirkcaldy; KDY47 – Victoria Road, Former Power Station, Kirkcaldy; KDY48 – Victoria Road, Kirkcaldy; BKN05 – Factory Road, Buckhaven; MET08 – Glencast Foundry, Methil; MET09 – Rear Bayview Park, Kirkland Road, Methil; MET10 – Land to the east of Aberhill Primary School, Methil; MET11 – Methil Power Station, Methil; and MET12 - Riverside, Methil.

Population

Objective 3. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Accommodating projected growth in Fife’s population.

3.5 The approved Fife Structure Plan (2009) set the housing land requirement for Fife to accommodate for projected growth in Fife’s population. The three local plans all offer a range of housing sites to meet this housing land requirement and therefore accommodate projected growth. Through the local plan examination process more sites were added to the Mid Fife and Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plans to offer additional flexibility in housing allocations to meet the housing land requirement and help address the delivery shortfall resulting from the economic downturn.

370,000

368,000

366,000

364,000

362,000 Total Population

Population 360,000

358,000

356,000

354,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

Figure 2 – Total Population, Fife Source: General registers of Scotland

3.6 The graph above shows steady population growth each year from 2006 with an average of 0.42% growth with a rise of 0.62% growth in 2011.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 3

Policies -

Proposals All housing proposals of the adopted local plans.

ECONOMIC

Objective 4. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Capturing the benefits of all investments .

3.7 There are many ways in which the development plan captures the benefits accruing from investment. Two such examples that have a direct effect on the local economy are the Local Employment Agreements policy and ensuring that a mix of land uses/balanced communities is achieved through the proposals in the local plans. Local Employment Agreements increase job opportunities, particularly in areas of high unemployment and can

improve levels of social inclusion. More information on Local Employment Agreements can be found in the commentary in the Employment section accompanying Objectives 10 to 14. The creation of balanced communities has the additional benefit of allowing people the opportunity to live and work in the same area and so reducing the need to travel.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 4

Policies D2 – Local Employment Agreements

Proposals -

Objective 5. (East & West Fife - ongoing) - Attracting inward investment; supporting and strengthening the rural economy; and supporting existing businesses through skilled labour, a range of high quality land and premises, good accessibility and an attractive environment. In this context: Dunfermline will be promoted as one of Fife’s key town centres and will be developed as an important regional centre for cultural, sporting, leisure, business activities and as a visitor destination; and St Andrews will be promoted as one of Fife’s key town centres and will be developed as an international destination with the potential to build on its international profile as a cultural, sporting, leisure, visitor destination and centre of academic excellence.

3.8 The St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan strategy, St Andrews settlement plan and proposals St Andrews West Strategic Land Allocation (STA01), Strathtyrum (STA05), St Leonards & Memorial Hospital Site (STA07), East Sands/Harbour Improvement Area (STA08), West Sands (STA09) and Craigtoun Country Park (LW415) all support this objective. These proposals when implemented will help St Andrews build on its international profile as a cultural, sporting, leisure, visitor destination and centre of academic excellence.

3.9 The Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plan, Dunfermline settlement plan and proposals Aberdour Road (DUN060), Paton Street North (DUN062), Paton Street South (DUN063), Randolph Street, City Centre (DUN071), Pittencrieff Street (DUN072), Walmer Drive (DUN073) and Dunfermline Town Centre (DUN084) all support this objective. These proposals when implemented will help Dunfermline further develop as an important regional centre for cultural, sporting, leisure, business activities and as a visitor destination.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 5

Policies -

Proposals – Tourism Related Proposals East Fife STA01 – St Andrews West, St Andrews; STA05 - Strathtyrum, St Andrews; STA07 – St Leonards and Memorial Hospital Site, St Andrews; STA08 – East Sands/Harbour Improvement Area, St Andrews; STA09 – West Sands, St Andrews; and LWD415 – Craigtoun Country Park.

West Fife DUN060 – Aberdour Road, Dunfermline; DUN062 – Paton Street North, Dunfermline; DUN063 – Paton Street South, Dunfermline; DUN071 – Randolph St, City Centre, Dunfermline; DUN072 – Pittencrieff Street, Dunfermline; DUN073 – Walmer Drive, Dunfermline; and DUN084 – Dunfermline Town Centre (land to rear of City Chambers), Dunfermline.

Tourism

Objective 6. (East Fife - ongoing) - Further developing St Andrews as a high quality tourist destination and building on the tourism industry throughout Fife.

3.10 The St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan strategy, St Andrews settlement plan and proposals STA01 (St Andrews West Strategic Land Allocation), STA05 (Strathtyrum), STA07 (St Leonards & Memorial Hospital Site), STA08 (East Sands/Harbour Improvement Area), STA09 (West Sands), and LW415 (Craigtoun Country Park) which are all tourism based, or have tourism elements to them, support this objective. The action programme that accompanies this local plan will monitor progress of these proposals.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 6

Policies -

Objective 7. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Developing tourism related economic development through access to coast and countryside supported by the core paths system.

3.11 Policy E27 (The Coast) provides policy protection that will maintain and enhance the environmental, recreational, and tourism appeal of the Fife coast. Implementation of the Fife Tourism Strategy (2010) will help realise this objective.

3.12 The Core Paths Plan and Policy C8 (Footpaths/Cycleways/Bridleways) support access to the coast and countryside supported by a core paths system. Policy C8 provides protection for core paths and will seek to maintain and extend the network, where appropriate, for multi use including walkers, cyclists, horse riders and paths accessible to people of all abilities, and will support new development that contributes to this end.

3.13 There are also areas identified specifically for recreation and tourism development in Mid Fife. The Land Art project at St Ninians and the area around the M90 junction 4 (KEL08) are supported for tourism related economic development projects. This reflects a number of live proposals and planning permissions in this area for tourism related development.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 7

Policies E27 – The Coast; and C8 – Footpaths/Cycleways/Bridleways.

Proposals – Tourism Related Proposals Mid Fife KEL08 – Kathellan Home Farm, Kelty.

Rural Economy

Objective 8. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Supporting and strengthening the rural economy by encouraging diversification of the economy.

3.14 Supporting and strengthening the rural economy by encouraging diversification is supported in Scottish Planning Policy and by Policy E15 (Development in the Countryside). Policy E15 supports development where it creates diversification, or extension of an established business, or are facilities for access to the countryside, or outdoor recreation, or tourism or other development which requires a countryside location.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 8

Policies E15 – Development In the Countryside

Proposals -

Objective 9. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Protecting the countryside from unplanned development sprawl but still allowing for development that supports the rural economy or has a specific need for a rural location.

3.15 Policies E15 (Development in the Countryside) and E16 (Housing Development in the Countryside) provide policy protection for countryside areas but at the same time support new enterprises which either diversify the current land-based businesses to bring economic support to the existing business or add local value by using the products of, or servicing, land- based businesses or other established countryside activities that supports the rural economy or has a specific need for a rural location.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 9

Policies E15 – Development in the Countryside; and E16 – Housing Development in the Countryside.

Proposals -

Employment

Objective 10. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Increasing job opportunities particularly in areas of high unemployment; directing new employment to areas across St Andrews and West Fife including supporting home working practices or similar; and directing development that will create new employment within the main towns in Mid Fife and the strategic land allocations. This will help enable priority groups to access new job opportunities through the use of local employment agreements, initially in new housing and retail developments.

Objective 11. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Identifying strategic employment sites together with a seven-year supply of employment land in towns with a population greater than 5,000 and in clusters in rural areas.

Policies and Proposals for Objectives 10 and 11

Policies B1 – Established Employment Areas – Safeguarding; B2 – Protecting Existing Employment/Tourism/Local Community Facilities; B3 – Working from Home; and D2 – Local Employment Agreements.

Proposals Mid Fife LHR03 – Loanhead Avenue, Lochore;

COW05 – Woodend Industrial Estate, Cowdenbeath; HOB02 – Land to the south of Hill of Beath B, Hill of Beath; GLE13 – Bankhead South, Glenrothes; GLE14 – Crompton Road East, Glenrothes; GLE15 – Crompton Road North, Glenrothes; GLE16 – Crompton Road West, Glenrothes; GLE17 – Dalton Road B & C, Glenrothes; GLE18 – Detroit Road, Glenrothes; GLE19 – Eastfield East, Glenrothes; GLE20 – Eastfield West, Glenrothes; GLE21 – Fife Food Centre, Glenrothes; GLE22 – Land at Leslie Road, Glenrothes; GLE23 – Naysmith Road, Glenrothes; GLE24 – Pentland Park North, Glenrothes; GLE25 – Pentland Park South, Glenrothes; GLE26 – Single user site to the south of Fife Airport, Glenrothes; GLE27 – Southfield South East, Glenrothes; GLE28 – Spectrogon, Glenrothes; GLE29 – Viewfield South, Glenrothes; GLE30 – Wheatstone Place, Dalton Road A, Glenrothes; GLE31 – Whitworth Road, Glenrothes; KEL05 – Cocklaw Street, Kelty; KLS02 – Lochtyside, Kinglassie; KDY28 – Former Forbo Nairn site, Kirkcaldy; KDY29 – John Smith Business Park, Chapel, Kirkcaldy; KDY30 – Mitchelston A, Kirkcaldy; KDY31 – Mitchelston B, Kirkcaldy; KDY32 – Mitchelston C, Kirkcaldy; KDY33 – Mitchelston D, Kirkcaldy; KDY34 – Mitchelston E, Kirkcaldy; LEV05 – Mountfleurie, Leven; LEV06 – Riverside Road, Leven; KEN04 – East of Sandy Brae Industrial Estate, Kennoway; WDY04 – Cameron Bridge A, Windygates; WDY05 – Cameron Bridge B, Windygates; LGY07 – Cartmore Industrial Estate Extension, Lochgelly; LGY08 – Lochgelly Industrial Park, Lochgelly; THO06 – The Former Rothes Colliery, Thornton; and LWD501 – Westfield Green Business Park.

West Fife CNH003 – Conscience Bridge, Cairneyhill; CHL001 – Land at Scottish Lime Centre, Charlestown; DGB002 – Ferris Way, Dalgety Bay; DGB004 – Fulmar Way 1, Dalgety Bay; DUN047 – Carnegie Campus 3, Dunfermline; DUN048 – Carnegie Campus 1, Dunfermline; DUN049 – Elgin Street 1E, Dunfermline; DUN050 – Axis Point, Dunfermline; DUN051 – Calais Muir (Central), Dunfermline; DUN052 – Calais Muir (South), Dunfermline;

DUN053 – Carnegie Campus 2, Dunfermline; DUN054 – Land to East of Inchkeith Drive, Dunfermline; DUN055 – Pitreavie Drive, Dunfermline; DUN056 – Calais Muir (North), Dunfermline; DUN057 – Pitreavie Way, Dunfermline; DUN058 – Carnegie Campus, Dunfermline; DUN059 – Freescale Extension, Dunfermline; INV005 – Belleknowes IE, Inverkeithing; INV006 – Black Shed Site PH1, Inverkeithing; INV007 – Belleknowes 2, Inverkeithing; KCD006 – Kincardine Eastern Expansion Phase 1 & 2 (Kincardine Bypass), Kincardine; LVF001 – Forthview 1E, Lower Valleyfield; OAK004 – Land north of Employment Estate, Oakley; ROS008 – Rosyth Europark 3, Rosyth; ROS009 – Rosyth Waterfront 1, Rosyth; ROS010 – Rosyth Europark 1, Rosyth; ROS011 – Rosyth Europark 2, Rosyth; ROS012 – Rosyth Waterfront 2, Rosyth; ROS013 – Rosyth Waterfront 3, Rosyth; and ROS014 – Admiralty Park, Rosyth.

East Fife ANS06 – St Andrews Road extension, Anstruther; AUC02 – Adjacent to cemetery, Auchtermuchty; AUC03 – North of Old Station, (Sterling Warehouse), Auchtermuchty; CRA04 – St Andrews Road, Crail; CUP01 – Cupar North, Cupar; CUP04 – Prestonhall East, Cupar; FAL01 – St Johns Work, Falkland; LAD05 – The Beeches, Ladybank; LEU01 – Main Street, Leuchars; LEU02 – Main Street, Leuchars; NEB01 – South of Cupar Road, Newburgh; STA04 – Bassaguard, St Andrews; STA05 – Strathtyrum, St Andrews; and STM02 – Netherton Industrial Estate, St Monans.

Objective 12. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Promoting class 4 (business) uses in town centre locations.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 12

Policies R1 – Retail Centres.

Proposals -

Objective 13. (Fife wide - ongoing) – Developing high quality employment land sites such as John Smith Business Park in Kirkcaldy.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 13

Policies B1 – Established Employment Areas – Safeguarding; and B2 – Protecting Existing Employment/Tourism/Local Community Facilities.

Proposals - Employment Mid Fife KDY38 – John Smith Business Park, Kirkcaldy.

Objective 14. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Ensuring Glenrothes has an attractive and modern employment land supply. This includes proposals for enabling development to cross-subsidise new industrial and business facilities at Bankhead and Whitehill Industrial Estate.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 14

Policies B1 – Established Employment Areas – Safeguarding; and B2 – Protecting Existing Employment/Tourism/Local Community Facilities.

Proposals - Employment Mid Fife GLE33 – Westwood Park, Glenrothes; and GLE12/44 – Whitehill Industrial Estate, Glenrothes.

3.16 Increased Job Opportunities Increasing job opportunities, particularly in areas of high unemployment can improve levels of social inclusion. Policy D2 (Local Employment Agreements) looks to target and harness the opportunities created through new investment by local employment agreements. Such agreements benefit the local economy and often target areas of high unemployment.

40,000

39,000

38,000

37,000 Total Number of Claimants, Fife

36,000 Number Number of Claimants

35,000

34,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

Figure 3 – Total Benefit Claimants, Fife Source:© ONS, Nomis, DWP benefit claimants

12,000

10,000

8,000

Jobseekers Allowance 6,000 Claimants

4,000 Number of Claimants of Number

2,000

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

Figure 4 – Jobseekers Allowance Claimants, Fife Source:© ONS, Nomis, Claimant count 19

3.17 As can be seen from Figures 3 and 4 above, the total numbers of people claiming benefits and jobseekers allowance has increased over the past 6 years and the credit crunch has contributed to these increases. The development plan will require to ensure that effective/marketable development opportunities exist that can attract new investment and jobs to Fife. This will be monitored through the employment land audit and the local plan action programmes.

3.18 Employment Land Supply and Take-up The local plans also reflect the priorities of the Employment Land Strategy by identifying new employment land proposals in the key settlements, class 4 business use within the town centres and an employment land requirement within the strategic land allocations.

3.19 The monitoring of employment land within the local plans is categorised and monitored through the annual Fife Employment Land Audit. Currently sites are categorised as being immediately available, or as having minor or major constraints to development which allows an element of assessment to be made about the likely delivery of employment land.

3.20 The general employment land supply will contribute to a more localised, indigenous demand profile and will require to meet a 7 year land supply target. General employment land is identified and safeguarded in the local plans. Policies B1 (Established Employment Areas – Safeguarding) and B2 (Protecting Existing Employment/Tourism/Local Community Facilities) support and safeguard established employment areas. These contain strict policy criteria that requires to be met to develop non-employment uses on employment land.

3.21 The national and local economies have undergone an un-precedented scale of transformation which has ranged from the height of an economic boom in 2007/08, to the depths of recession in 2009/10, through to a current period of fragile recovery, anticipated to last for a few more years.

3.22 Evidence of the impact of the downturn is illustrated in take-up, which will impact on how Fife Council plans ahead, and the form that future action might take. The nature of demand has been influenced by the economic climate and resulted in a focus on demand in the key centres across Fife. Consequently, the nature of employment land supply has changed, and will need to continue to evolve in response to the new demands placed upon it.

3.23 As table 1 illustrates, the overall trend in land take is downward. Land take over the last ten years has averaged over 13 hectares per annum. Despite the recent global economic downturn employment land take up in Fife has remained relatively high. Development in Fife has largely focused on two areas, Forth Bridgehead Area (Dunfermline & Rosyth) and Glenrothes. This reflects the location of major developments over the last ten years. The 2011 audit period has seen a sharp increase in the amount of employment land under construction due, in the main, to the Amazon Fulfilment Centre located in Dunfermline’s Eastern Expansion .

Audit Period Land Take (Ha) Comments 1996 21.2 1997 13.4 1998 3.7 1999 36.1 2000 15.2 Pre-methodology change 2001 20.9 2002 15.7 2003 7.7 2004 2.9 1st Aug 2004 - 31st July 2005 6.2 DTZ audit (Pre-audit change to 1st Aug 2005 - 31st July 2006 4.31 audit process) 1st Aug 2006 - 31st July 2008 6.58 2 year audit 1st Aug 2008 - 31st July 2009 8.37 1st Aug 2009 - 31st July 2010 8.26 Move across to emerging local 1st Aug 2010 - 31st July 2011 12.48 plan sites

Table 1 – Employment Land Take Source: Employment Land Audits, Fife Council

3.24 Through the employment land audit the local development plan will require to ensure that a suitable range of employment sites across Fife are available to satisfy demand.

3.25 In addition to identifying new employment land opportunities the local development plan will require to review existing local plan employment land allocations to ensure they are still appropriate and deliverable and if not, take the necessary action required. One such example where such a review has taken place is in the John Smith Business Park in Kirkcaldy. The development proposal in the local plan has been reviewed and supplementary planning guidance approved to provide more flexibility over the location of the agreed land uses within the business park to reflect changing commercial requirements. This guidance has been consulted upon and gained committee approval.

3.26 In addition to new premium employment land opportunities such as the green campus style development of the John Smith Business Park, the Mid Fife Local Plan also seeks to deliver an attractive and modern employment land supply in areas where facilities require re-investment. This will be facilitated by allowing enabling development to cross-subsidise the refurbishment, or in some cases, development of new employment or industrial uses. Examples of enabling development being proposed to cross-subsidise investment in the current employment stock can be found in Westwood Park (GLE33) and Whitehill Industrial Estate (GLE12/GLE44), Glenrothes and Thistle Industrial Estate (COW07), Woodend Business Centre (COW08), and Woodend Extension (COW09) in Cowdenbeath. Therefore, while Objective 14 relates specifically to Glenrothes, it is being implemented wider across Mid Fife to include Cowdenbeath. The local development plan will require to review the progress of these proposals and ascertain if any other employment land requires enabling development to cross-subsidise the refurbishment, or in some cases, development of new employment or industrial uses. 21

3.27 Home Working Home working is supported through Policy B3 (Working From Home) and the local plans recognise that dwelling houses can provide suitable accommodation for new and small-scale businesses that create no disturbance to neighbours.

Retail

Objective 15. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Focussing retail growth in Kirkcaldy, Dunfermline, St Andrews and in Cupar as district shopping centres; enhancing the service role of Inverkeithing, Kincardine, Dalgety Bay, Rosyth, Glenrothes, Cowdenbeath, Leven and Cupar Town Centre; and consolidating growth in other towns, town centres and villages. Ensuring that new retail development outwith existing town centres does not undermine them but rather complements them.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 15

Policies R1 – Retail Centres; R2 – Convenience Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres; and R3 – Comparison Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres.

Proposals -

Objective 16. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Further promoting and developing Kirkcaldy’s potential as a shopping, employment, cultural, leisure, and visitor destination.

3.28 The new Fife Council administration has signalled a renewed emphasis on promoting town centres. To help achieve Objectives 15 and 16, Fife Council carries out an annual Retail Capacity Study to highlight where the market could sustain new retail development. In addition, a Household

Survey report was produced in early 2010 to identify new consumer shopping habits and patterns. This is programmed to be updated in 2014.

3.29 In terms of policy, this is constantly evolving. The current suite of local plans contain a strong set of retail & town centre policies – Policy R1 (Retail Centres), R2 (Convenience Retail Outwith Town Centres) and R3 (Comparison Retail Outwith Town Centres). From lessons learned from recent local plan examinations and assessing planning applications, these policies will be amended through the local development plan to ensure they become more effective.

3.30 Business Improvement District (BID) companies were established in 2008/09 for Kirkcaldy and Dunfermline and are contributing directly and indirectly to sustaining and growing the retail offering in their respective town centres. Examples of their contribution include:

• Partnering Fife Council in delivering business development support grants. These have the express aim of supporting existing business to develop alternative or new trading activity and to support new businesses become established; • Both companies provide information and work with prospective businesses to find suitable premises and provide advice; and • Marketing and promotional activity, printed media, radio, seasonal and special campaigns.

3.31 Turning to realising Kirkcaldy’s potential, a new swimming pool is currently under construction along with a major refurbishment of the museum and library thus enhancing Kirkcaldy’s potential as a cultural, leisure, and visitor destination. Town Centre Opportunity Proposals KDY49 (Below Mercat North), KDY50 (Charlotte Street), KDY51 (Redburn Wynd), KDY52 (The Postings), KDY53 (Thistle Street) and KDY54 – Toolbooth Street will also contribute to further realising Kirkcaldy’s potential.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 16

Policies R1 – Retail Centres; R2 – Convenience Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres; and R3 – Comparison Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres

Proposals – Town Centre Opportunity Sites Mid Fife KDY49 – Below Mercat North, Kirkcaldy; KDY50 – Charlotte Street, Kirkcaldy; KDY51 – Redburn Wynd, Kirkcaldy; KDY52 – The Postings, Kirkcaldy; KDY53 – Thistle Street, Kirkcaldy; and KDY54 – Tolbooth Street, Kirkcaldy.

Business

Objective 17. (West Fife - ongoing) - Supporting Rosyth as a location for freight distribution, container terminal and associated port uses.

3.32 This objective is supported by Proposal ROS17 (RD 57). The current planning application for the container port has been through a public local inquiry and the decision is awaited. The outcome of the inquiry will inform the local development plan.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 17

Policies -

Proposals – Other Transport Proposal West Fife ROS17 – RD 57 (NPF2 Container Port), Rosyth.

SOCIAL Mixed Use Areas

Objective 18. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Creating balanced communities by providing employment land, community facilities, good public transport links, and offering a choice of quality housing with a range of different locations, prices and tenures and so reducing the need to travel.

3.33 The designations within the local plans strive to create balanced communities. Development is integrated so that it includes housing, local employment, shopping and community facilities and so reduces the need to travel. In the large strategic development areas, development frameworks outline the various land uses required and masterplanning will ensure attractive and balanced communities are created.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 18

Policies -

Proposals All local plan proposals.

Objective 19. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Ensuring new development follows the principles of sustainability to create places where people will enjoy living and working.

3.34 As highlighted above in the commentary on Objective 18, the local plans strive to create balanced communities by integrating land uses which result in attractive and pleasant communities where the need to travel is reduced and so is according with the principles of sustainability.

3.35 However, in addition to creating balanced communities, the local plans also promote high standards of design and environmental quality. Policy E3 (Development Quality – Environmental Impact) in the local plans sets out criteria to support this objective and assess environmental impact. It will be used to support a move within new development to low and zero carbon development through the use of energy efficient, micro-generating and renewable energy systems. This approach is also supported through Policy T1 (Renewable Energy) which sets out specific requirements for all new developments.

3.36 Furthermore, the Mid Fife Local Plan is testing the market with an eco- demonstration project proposal which follows the zero waste, zero energy model making no demands on water, sewerage, power and waste collection infrastructure. Full details can be found in Proposal LW503.

3.37 The sustainability checklist is also used Fife-wide to assess major planning applications and to work with developers to improve the sustainability of new developments. The checklist adopts sustainable indicators set out as elements with differing gradings. There are 7 key themes of sustainability that have to be complied with and a demonstration of meeting a minimum silver standard has to be provided in the form of a sustainability statement. The checklist can be accessed at: http://tinyurl.com/bl5j9b5

Policies and Proposals for Objective 19

Policies E3 – Development Quality – Environmental Impact; and I1 – Renewable Energy.

Proposals Mid Fife LW503.

Objective 20. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Promoting mixed use developments to achieve improved accessibility.

3.38 All three local plans designate mixed use proposals that create improved accessibility to a range of complimentary uses. The action programmes which accompany these local plans monitor the progress of these proposals. Policy B4 (Areas of Mixed Use) provides policy protection for these areas.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 20 Policies B4 – Areas of Mixed Use.

Proposals – Areas of Mixed Use Mid Fife BUR04 – Burntisland Dock East, Burntisland; BUR05 – North of Lammerlaws, Burntisland; COW06 – Central Park, Cowdenbeath; COW07 – Thistle Industrial Estate, Cowdenbeath; COW08 – Woodend Business Centre, Cowdenbeath; COW09 – Woodend Extension, Cowdenbeath; GLE33 – Westwood Park, Glenrothes; LES02 – Fettykill Mill, Leslie; KDY37 – Invertiel, Kirkcaldy; KDY38 – John Smith Business Park, Kirkcaldy; KDY39 – Mitchelston South, Kirkcaldy; KDY40 – Nairn Street, Kirkcaldy; MET07 – Aberhill, Methil; and LW502 – Bankhead Farm.

West Fife DUN087 – Halbeath East, Dunfermline; DUN088 – Dover Heights, Dunfermline; and LWD019 – Halbeath Triangle North West.

East Fife AUC04 – Former Ironworks Station Road, Auchtermuchty; LWD416 – Crail Airfield; CUP09 – Bell Baxter West Port, Cupar; CUP10 – Granary Site (Watts) Coal Road, Cupar; CUP11 – South Road, Cupar; GUA05 – Site of Former Curtis Fine Papers, Guardbridge; NEW04 – North of Forgan Roundabout, Newport; STA06 – New Park School, St Andrews; STA07 – St Leonard’s and Memorial Hospital Site, St Andrews; STA08 – East Sands/Harbour Improvement Area, St Andrews; TAY06 – Abertay Works, Tayport; LWD407 – Northbank Farm, Cameron; and LWD414 – Cameron.

Objective 21. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Developing and maintaining sustainable communities by delivering affordable housing as part of new development. This includes promoting strategic land allocations in Cupar; St Andrews; Tayport/Newport/Wormit; the East Neuk settlements; Inverkeithing; Dunfermline; the West Villages; Kirkcaldy East/South West; Lochgelly; Levenmouth; Burntisland; Kelty/Ballingry/Lochore; and Glenrothes East/Markinch which will provide benefits to the wider community.

Affordable Housing

3.39 All housing proposals need to accord with the affordable housing policy. This ensures that all developments of over 20 units in urban areas and over 10 units in rural areas provide affordable housing.

450

400

350

300

250 Fife Council New Build Low Cost Home Ownership 200 Housing Association Rent

Number of Number of Units 150

100

0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Year

Figure 5 – Affordable Housing Completions since 2006/07 Source - The Scottish Government (Housing Supply Division), 2012

Notes • In addition to the above - 3 discounted sales developments have been completed through the affordable housing policy. • 2009 - Regent Street, Kincardine 6 discounted sales units (were not successfully sold as discounted sale). • 2009 - Former Crystals Arena, Glenrothes 5 discounted sales units (were not successfully sold as discounted sale). • 2011 - Kinglassie 4 discounted sale units (all sold as such).

3.40 As can be seen above, the number of affordable houses being developed has reduced gradually from 2006/07 – 2011/12. This coincides with the funding to Registered Social Landlords being reduced. A key objective of the new Fife Council administration is to deliver 2,700 new affordable homes for rent between 2012-2017. The local development plan will play a key role in the identification of land appropriate for housing development. A Fife Council cross–service working group has been established to fundamentally review the current mechanisms and potential opportunities for delivering new affordable housing in Fife.

3.41 A large element of future affordable housing will be delivered through the strategic land allocations identified in the three local plans (3101 houses). As highlighted below in Table 2, all the strategic land allocations are at different stages and the affordable housing requirement for each site varies as it is calculated using the affordable housing requirement for the specific settlement it is located within.

3.42 Strategic Land Allocations (SLAs)

SLA Position Cupar Discussions ongoing with development consortium at Cupar North. No formal proposal of application notice or pre-application registered as yet. The affordable housing contribution is 20% of total (1,400), equating to 280 homes.

St Andrews Discussions ongoing with relevant landowners and agents. The affordable housing contribution is 30% of the total (1,090), equating to 327 homes.

East Neuk The affordable housing contribution is 30% of the total (487), equating to 146 homes.

Tayport/Newport/ The affordable housing contribution is 30% of the total (496), equating to 149 Wormit homes.

Kirkcaldy East Total capacity is 2,850. Kirkcaldy East has an approved planning permission in principle for 1,080 houses. The affordable housing contribution is 15% of the total equating to 428 homes.

Kirkcaldy South A planning application is currently pending (as at October 2012) for permission West in principle to erect a mixed use development including 1,000 houses. The affordable housing contribution is 15% of the total, equating to 150 homes.

Ballingry/Lochore/ The affordable housing contribution is 5% of the total (440), equating to 22 Kelty homes.

Glenrothes East/ An application for planning permission in principle has been submitted for Markinch Westwood Park (450 homes) and a proposal of application notice has been submitted for Cadham Road. To date no applications have been submitted for the remaining sites. The affordable housing contribution is 10% of the total (1,000), equating to 100 homes.

Levenmouth Discussions are ongoing with relevant landowners and agents. Two proposal of application notices have been submitted for the erection of a business park and the erection of residential development and a care home both at Muiredge, Buckhaven. The affordable housing contribution is 5% of the total (1,650), equating to 83 homes.

Lochgelly Advanced discussions ongoing with relevant landowners and agents and detailed Supplementary Planning & Transportation Guidance has been approved. The affordable housing contribution is 5% of the total (1,750), equating to 88 homes.

Burntisland The affordable housing contribution is 15% of the total (350), equating to 53 homes.

Dunfermline Development proposal progressing with an application expected early 2013. The affordable housing contribution is 25% of the total (4,200), equating to 1,050 homes.

Inverkeithing The affordable housing contribution is 25% of the total (400), equating to 100 homes.

West Villages A planning application has been submitted for housing development at south west Saline. To date, no applications have been submitted for the remaining sites in Oakley or Kincardine. The affordable housing contribution is 25% of the total (500), equating to 125 homes.

Table 2: Strategic Land Allocations

3.43 The annual housing land audit provides phasing of the sites which make up the strategic land allocations in Fife. Due to the economic downturn the phasing of the majority of these sites has been pushed back which will raise issues for the delivery of affordable housing and will require review through the preparation of the proposed plan. The 2012 Housing Land Audit can be viewed here http://tinyurl.com/ct5tw82 .

Policies and Proposals for Objective 21

Policies H2 (Mid & West Fife) – Affordable and Special Needs Housing; and H1 (East) - Affordable and Special Needs Housing.

Proposals – Strategic Land Allocations Mid Fife BUR04 – Burntisland Docks East, Burntisland; GLE32 – Land to the south Cadham Road, Glenrothes; GLE33 – Westwood Park, Glenrothes; CLB01 – Coaltown of Balgonie East, Coaltown of Balgonie; CLB02 – Land to the North of Pytree Road, Coaltown of Balgonie; CLB03 – North of Main Street, Coaltown of Balgonie; MAR02 – Markinch South, Markinch; MAR03 – Former Sappi Mill, Alburne Park, Markinch; MAR04 – Sweetbank Park Terrace, Markinch; BGY04 – Land to the east of Ballingry, Ballingry; LHR04 – Capledrae Farm, Lochore; KEL06 – Netherton Farm, Kelty; KDY35 – Kirkcaldy East, Kirkcaldy; KDY36 – Kirkcaldy South West, Kirkcaldy; LVA01 – Sea Road, Muiredge, Percival Road, Cameron; LVA02 – Land at Cupar Road, Leven; and LGY09 – Lochgelly.

West Fife BLA001 – Land south of Blairhall, Blairhall; BLA003 – Land West of Rintoul Avenue, Blairhall; DUN085 – Dunfermline Strategic Land Allocation; HVF002 – Woodhead Farm, High Valleyfield; INV004 – Inverkeithing Strategic Land Allocation; KCD002 – Kincardine Eastern Expansion Phase 1, Kincardine; KCD003 – Kincardine Eastern Expansion Phase 2, Kincardine; OAK002 – Land at Pavilion & Bowling Green, Oakley; OAK003 – Land to north of Oakley, Oakley; OAK007 – Land to north of Oakley, Oakley; and SAL002 – Land at Kinnedar Mains, Saline.

East Fife ANS01 – Cellardyke Caravan Park, Anstruther; COB01 – South East of Village, Colinsburgh; CRA02 – Pinkerton Farm Phase 3, Crail;

CRA03 – St Andrews Road, Crail; CUP01 – Cupar North, Cupar; EAE01 – South of Health Centre, Elie and Earlsferry; KIN01 – West of the Square, Kingsbarns; LAR01 – Hall Park West, Largoward; LLA01 – East of Durham Wynd, Lower Largo; NEW02 – Ericht Road, Newport; NEW03 – South of Victoria Park, Newport; WOR01 – Wormit Farm, Wormit; WOR02 – Wormit Sandpit, Wormit; WOR03 – South of Wormit Farm, Wormit; PIT01 – St Margaret’s Farm, Pittenweem; STA01 – St Andrews West, St Andrews; STM01 – West of Manse, St Monans; TAY01 – Links Road 2, Tayport; TAY02 – Nelson Street, Tayport; and TAY05 – North of Spears, Tayport.

Recreation and Health

Objective 22. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Supporting existing and new opportunities for informal and formal sport and general outdoor recreation to help create and maintain healthy communities.

3.44 The Fife Institute in Glenrothes is currently being redeveloped to improve the sports facilities on offer and the new Kirkcaldy swimming pool/leisure centre is currently under construction (KDY54). In addition, a planning application has been approved to develop a sports hub in Lumphinnans. Outdoor gym equipment is also being rolled out in play areas across Mid Fife. Furthermore, there are a number of proposals in the Mid Fife Local Plan to safeguard and improve leisure provision in the local plan area at Lammerlaws Road, Burntisland (BUR09), Gilvenbank Park, Glenrothes (GLE34), Trotting Track, Kelty (KEL09) and Muir Park, Lochgelly (LGY14). In addition to the proposals highlighted above, Policy C1 (Community, Cultural and Leisure Facilities) provides policy support for this objective by supporting the development of community, cultural and leisure facilities where there is a particular demand for those types of facilities.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 22

Policies C1 – Community and Leisure Facilities.

Proposals – Community and Leisure Facilities Mid Fife BUR09 – Lammerlaws Road, Burntisland; GLE34 – Gilvenbank Park, Glenrothes; KDY54 – Tolbooth Street, Kirkcaldy; KEL09 – Trotting Track, Kelty; and LGY14 – Muir Park, Lochgelly.

Objective 23. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Encouraging public access to the countryside for health, recreation, and environmental education through the core paths system.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 23

Policies C8 – Footpaths/Cycleways/Bridleways; and T1 – The Transport Network

Proposals -

Objective 24. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Maximising benefits of walking and cycling, sustainable transportation systems, health and recreation, tourism related local economic development, and community regeneration in accordance with the Fife Access Strategy Review 2006 - 16 and the Fife Core Paths Plan.

3.45 As identified above in the commentary on Objective 7, Policy E27 (The Coast) provides policy protection that will maintain and enhance the environmental, recreational, and tourism appeal of the Fife coast. Implementation of the Fife Tourism Strategy (2010) will help realise this objective.

3.46 The Core Paths Plan and Policy C8 (Footpaths/Cycleways/Bridleways) support access to the coast and countryside supported by the core paths system. This policy provides protection for core paths and will seek to maintain and extend the network, where appropriate, for multi use including walkers, cyclists, horse riders and paths accessible to people of all abilities, by establishing a Core Path Plan, and will support new development that contributes to this end.

3.47 There are also areas identified specifically for recreation and tourism development within Mid Fife. The Land Art project at St Ninians and the area around the M90 junction 4 (KEL08) are supported for tourism related economic development projects. This reflects a number of live proposals and planning permissions in this area for tourism related development.

3.48 Policy T1 (The Transport Network) promotes walking and cycling, sustainable transportation systems and so provides additional policy support for this objective.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 24

Policies E27 – The Coast; C8 – Footpaths/Cycleways/Bridleways; and T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals Mid Fife KEL08 – Kathellan Home Farm, Kelty.

Education

Objective 25. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Increasing the number of graduates in Fife by examining the potential for a physical expansion of degree level education provision in Mid Fife in particular.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 25 Policies -

Proposals -

Objective 26. (East Fife - ongoing) – Supporting St Andrews’ development as an asset for the knowledge based economy. This includes support to realise the commercial potential of higher education sector and working with the university to explore development of the campus.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 26

Policies -

Proposals – Education related East Fife STA01 – St Andrews West

Objective 27. (West Fife - ongoing) – Supporting the commercial potential of higher education sector in Dunfermline.

50,000

45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000 Population with Degree

Population 20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

Figure 6 – Population with a Degree Source: ONS, Nomis. APS

3.49 The number of people with degrees in Fife had generally increased until 2011 where there was a slight decrease. Fife Council will continue to work with the higher and further education sector to identify opportunities to provide refurbished and/or new facilities creating a modern and accessible learning environment including:

• the redevelopment of Adam Smith College in Glenrothes to provide state of the art learning facilities;

• working with St Andrews University to realise its potential to create economic opportunities from its academic activities as part of a western expansion of St Andrews through the strategic land allocation (Proposal STA01); and

• building on Dunfermline’s potential academic links to foster business opportunities. Carnegie College’s Halbeath campus has already begun to diversify with the building of a conference centre and hotel to serve both the college and commercial needs.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 27

Policies -

Proposals STA01 – St Andrews West

ENVIRONMENTAL Landscape

Objective 28. (East and West Fife - complete) - Designating a green belt for St Andrews and Dunfermline which will manage long term planned growth for the towns and take account of the need to protect the towns’ character, landscape setting and identity.

3.50 The adopted St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan (Proposal LW424) and the adopted Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plan (Proposal DUN086) designate green belts and Policy E17 (Green Belt) in those local plans provides policy protection for these areas.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 28

Policies E17 – Green Belt.

Proposals – Green Belt West Fife DUN086 – Dunfermline West/Crossford.

East Fife LW424 – St Andrews.

Objective 29. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Ensuring appropriate site boundary treatments are provided as part of any new development, especially on the edge of settlements.

3.51 This objective, while only identified as a specific objective for Mid Fife, is being implemented Fife-wide. Local plan policies E3 (Development Quality – Environmental Impact), E4 (Development Quality – Design), Designing Streets guidance and urban design guidance provide policy protection to achieve this. Developments that require masterplans and development frameworks will be required to show how they will address boundary treatments. The development management process will assess this as proposals move through the planning application process.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 29

Policies E3 – Development Quality – Environmental Impact; and E4 – Development Quality – Design.

Proposals -

Objective 30. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Protecting and enhancing the character and distinctiveness of the towns and villages in Fife by promoting high standards of design and development and avoiding the coalescence of settlements.

3.52 Policies E4 (Development Quality – Design), E5 (Housing Development and Open Space), E7 (Conservation Areas), E8 (Listed Buildings), E10 (Protection of Orchards and Riggs) and E11 (Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes) provide policy protection for safeguarding and enhancing the character and distinctiveness of towns and villages. Designing Streets also provides guidance for developers on promoting high standards of design in new developments.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 30

Policies E4 – Development Quality – Design; E5 – Housing Development and Open Space; E7 – Conservation Areas; E8 – Listed Buildings; E10 – Protection of Orchards and Riggs; and E11 – Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes.

Proposals -

Objective 31. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Conserving sites that are important to the natural environment in terms of habitat or species, and conserving the built heritage.

3.53 The existing local plans were subject to Strategic Environmental Assessment and a Habitats Regulation Appraisal. These assess all potential proposals in relation to their individual and cumulative environmental impact. Only proposals which were environmentally acceptable were taken forward as proposals in the local plans. This process will be replicated for the Local Development Plan and ensures that this objective is met and that all sensitive natural heritage sites are protected from development.

3.54 In addition, the local plans contain designation maps which identify all sensitive areas of natural and built heritage and the Safeguarding and Improving the Environment policies provide policy protection for these areas (policies E1 – E29).

Policies and Proposals for Objective 31

Policies E1 – E29 – All Safeguarding and Improving the Environment Policies

Proposals -

Objective 32. (East and West Fife - ongoing) - Promoting the protection of the qualities of the Special Landscape Areas.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 32

Policies E19 – Local Landscape Areas.

Proposals -

Objective 33. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Demonstrating commitment to the protection, restoration and enhancement of all of the Mid Fife landscape, including the particular qualities of the Local Landscape Areas.

3.55 Special Landscape Areas have now been renamed Local Landscape Areas. All three local plans have accompanying designation maps which highlight the Local Landscape Areas and in addition the Local Landscape Areas are identified on the relevant settlement insets. Policy E19 (Local Landscape Areas) provides policy protection for these areas while encouraging their restoration and enhancement.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 33

Policies E19 – Local Landscape Areas.

Proposals -

Objective 34. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Protecting and enhancing existing trees and woodlands, encouraging their active management and promoting the creation of new woodlands.

3.56 Policies E24 (Tree Preservation Orders), E25 (Trees on Development Sites) and E26 (New Tree Planting) provide policy protection for existing trees, woodlands and new woodlands by setting strict criteria for the removal of trees and encouraging new tree planting.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 34

Policies E24 – Tree Preservation Orders; E25 – Trees on Development Sites; and E26 – New Tree Planting.

Proposals -

Objective 35. (West Fife - ongoing) - Contributing towards the creation of the Central Scotland Green network in accordance with the National Planning Framework for Scotland 2.

3.57 Work is progressing within Fife Council to contribute towards the creation of the Central Scotland Green Network and this will feed into the local development plan. The Central Scotland Green Network covers the SESplan area so while only identified as a west Fife objective it will also be implemented in Mid Fife.

3.58 The local development plan will identify green networks at a strategic and large settlement level and identify opportunities for the enhancement of these green networks. The Green Infrastructure Supplementary Guidance (which will be consulted on alongside the Main Issues Report) will make the assessment of green networks around development sites a key consideration in the design of green infrastructure as part of new development. Furthermore, green networks are a consideration within the site assessment process for all potential local plan development sites. This helps identify opportunities for green networks through new development sites.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 35

Policies -

Proposals -

Transport

Objective 36. (East & West Fife - ongoing) - Maximising the efficient use of the Tay crossing and Forth bridgehead to increase car sharing and the use of public transport.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 36

Policies T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals East Fife NEW05 – South East of the Tay Bridge Roundabout at the A92/B946 junction, Newport.

West Fife ROS018 – Rosyth Rail Halt/Park and Choose, Rosyth.

Objective 37. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Supporting the provision of strategic transport improvements including: a replacement Forth crossing; international container terminal; mass rapid transit networks with safeguarded land for new rail links; a cross- Forth ferry/hovercraft service from South Fife to Edinburgh; upgrading the A92 Redhouse junction with a direct link to the Standing Stane Road; a proposed new rail halt in Kirkcaldy East; the re-opening of the Levenmouth Rail Link; and a relief road for Cupar and a link road for St Andrews.

3.59 Objectives 36 and 37 are wide ranging and are supported through the strategies and by a number of proposals in the three existing local plans. These include:

KDY35 – Kirkcaldy East SLA, Kirkcaldy KDY63 – Invertiel, Kirkcaldy BUR04 – Burntisland Docks East, Burntisland CRO03 – Land at Halbeath, Crossgates CUP01 – Cupar North SLA, Cupar STA01 – St Andrews West SLA, St Andrews NEW05 – South East of the Tay Bridge Roundabout at the A92/B946 junction, Newport NEB03 – Newburgh Rail Halt, Newburgh ROS017 – RD57 (NPF2 Container Base), Rosyth DUN074 - Dunfermline SLA, Rosyth and Inverkeithing Light Rapid Transit, Dunfermline DUN077 - Charlestown Rail Junction, Dunfermline – Additional Southern Link, Dunfermline

3.60 In addition to the strategies and proposals of the local plans identified above, Policy T1 (The Transport Network) provides the policy hook to make efficient use of the transportation network, including the promotion of sustainable transport and increased use of public transport.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 37

Policies T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals – Transport Proposals Mid Fife KDY35 – Kirkcaldy East SLA, Kirkcaldy; KDY63 – Invertiel, Kirkcaldy; BUR04 – Burntisland Docks East, Burntisland; and CRO03 – Land at Halbeath, Crossgates.

East Fife CUP01 – Cupar North SLA, Cupar; STA01 – St Andrews West SLA, St Andrews; NEW05 - South East of the Tay Bridge Roundabout at the A92/B946 junction, Newport; and NEB03 – Newburgh Rail Halt, Newburgh.

West Fife ROS017 – RD57 (NPF2 Container Base), Rosyth; DUN074 - Dunfermline SLA, Rosyth and Inverkeithing Light Rapid Transit, Dunfermline; and DUN077 - Charlestown Rail Junction, Dunfermline – Additional Southern Link, Dunfermline.

Objective 38. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Focussing developments on public transport interchanges and town centres served by public transport and increasing development densities in these areas. This includes identifying opportunities for improvements to public transport infrastructure.

3.61 The approved Fife Structure Plan, which the adopted local plans are based upon, has a density policy which supports higher densities within town centres and near public transport hubs. New development must accord with this policy approach and is a consideration within the site assessment process for all potential local plan development sites. Those sites which were successful in being allocated in the local plans have a density

appropriate to their location with higher densities being promoted in town centres and adjacent to public transport interchanges.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 38

Policies T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals -

Objective 39. (Mid Fife - ongoing) - Providing for a pattern of development that reduces unnecessary travel and supports a choice of more sustainable travel options including walking and cycling.

3.62 While only identified as a specific objective in Mid Fife, it is implemented Fife-wide. As highlighted above in the commentary on Objectives 18 and 19, the local plans strive to create balanced communities. They achieve this by integrating land uses which result in attractive and pleasant communities where the need to travel is reduced and so is according with the principles of sustainability. In the large strategic development areas, development frameworks outline the various land uses required and masterplanning will ensure attractive and balanced communities are created. Policy T1 (The Transport Network) provides policy support for this objective by stating that developers must make adequate provision for pedestrian and cycle movements in proposed schemes and must be accessible to existing or planned public transport networks.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 39

Policies T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals All proposals, especially the strategic land allocations.

Objective 40. (West Fife - ongoing) - Supporting sustainable modes of transport consistent with the Local Transport Strategy and West Fife Area Transport Plan.

3.63 While only identified as a specific objective in West Fife, it is implemented Fife-wide. Policy T1 (The Transport Network) outlines the policy approach of the three local plans and promotes sustainable modes of transport. In addition, the strategies and proposals of the individual local plans reflect the strategies and proposals that are set out in the Local Transport Strategy and Area Transport Plans.

3.64 Furthermore, the site assessment criteria that all potential local plan sites were tested against supported sustainable modes of transport and this methodology is also being used to assess potential local development plan sites.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 40

Policies T1 – The Transport Network.

Proposals West Fife DUN074 – Dunfermline SLA, Rosyth and Inverkeithing Light Rapid Transit; DUN075 – Elgin Street, Dunfermline Link Road; DUN076 – Appin Crescent Bypass, Dunfermline; DUN077 – Charlestown Rail Junction, Dunfermline – Additional Southern Link; DUN078 – Northern Expansion Link Road; DUN079 – Road Links into Northern SLA Development Area; DUN080 – Lyneburn Bypass, Dunfermline; ROS017 – RD57 (NPF2 Container Base), Rosyth; ROS018 – Rosyth Rail Halt/Park and Choose – Rosyth; ROS019 – Rosyth Bypass; and ROS020 – Rosyth A985 – Rosyth Strategic Road Link Route 1.

Carbon Reduction /Renewable Energy Sources

Objective 41. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Supporting new development which minimises and mitigates environmental impact including moving towards zero carbon development. Carbon emissions will be reduced through the provision of on-site zero and low carbon technologies and renewable sources of energy within new development to reduce emissions.

3.65 As highlighted above in the commentary for Objective 19, Policy E3 (Development Quality – Environmental Impact) in the local plans sets out

criteria to support this objective and assess environmental impact. It will be used to support a move within new development to low and zero carbon development through the use of energy efficient, micro-generating and renewable energy systems. This approach is also supported through Policy I1 (Renewable Energy) which sets out specific requirements for all new developments.

3.66 In addition, the Mid Fife Local Plan is testing the market with an eco- demonstration project proposal which follows the zero waste, zero energy model making no demands on water, sewerage, power and waste collection infrastructure. Full details can be found in Landward Proposal LW503.

3.67 The sustainability checklist is also used to assess major planning applications and to work with developers to improve the sustainability of new developments. The checklist adopts sustainable indicators set out as elements with differing gradings. There are 7 key themes of sustainability that have to be complied with and a demonstration of meeting a minimum silver standard has to be provided in the form of a sustainability statement. The checklist can be accessed at: http://tinyurl.com/bl5j9b5

3.68 Policy I1 (Renewable Energy) in the local plans also provides policy protection by stating that all new developments should make a positive contribution to environmental quality by incorporating on-site zero and low carbon technologies contributing at least an extra 15% reduction in CO2 emissions beyond the 2007 Building Regulations carbon dioxide emissions standard.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 41

Policies E3 - Development Quality – Environmental Impact; and I1 – Renewable Energy.

Proposals Mid Fife LW503

Objective 42. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Encouraging the development and use of renewable energy technologies such as biomass in commercial settings and combined heat and power (CHP) in large scale residential development.

3.69 A range of technologies for renewable energy generation are encouraged through Policy I1 (Renewable Energy). Fife Council now has supporting

heat mapping funded by the Government which can be used to assess potential opportunities for renewable energy. In addition, Fife Council has produced the Fife Renewable Energy Routemap which sets out how Fife is contributing to meeting the Government’s targets for carbon reduction and generation from renewables. It can be accessed at: http://tinyurl.com/cyv5gsk

3.70 Biomass is being investigated and developed in a number of commercial settings within Fife, such as Westfield (by Kinglassie), Tullis Russell (Glenrothes), Diageo, (Windygates) and in Rosyth.

3.71 CHP plants in large-scale residential areas are also being promoted within the three adopted local plans with land requiring to be reserved for CHP within the development framework requirements for a number of the large- scale strategic land allocations.

Policies and Proposals for Objective 42

Policies I1 – Renewable Energy.

Proposals Mid Fife KDY35 – Kirkcaldy East Strategic Land Allocation; and KDY36 – Kirkcaldy South West Strategic Land Allocation.

West Fife DUN085 – Dunfermline Strategic Land Allocation.

East Fife CUP01 – Cupar North Strategic Land Allocation; and STA01 – St Andrews West Strategic Land Allocation.

Biodiversity

Objective 43. (Fife wide - ongoing) - Encouraging local biodiversity consistent with the ‘Fife Local Biodiversity Action Plan 2009-11’ approved in March 2009.

3.72 Policies E22 (Local Biodiversity and Geodiversity Sites) and E23 (Protection of Biodiversity) provide policy protection to safeguard and encourage local biodiversity. In addition, the local plans contain designation maps which identify all sensitive areas of natural and built heritage and the Safeguarding and Improving the Environment policies provide policy protection for these areas (Policies E1 – E29).

Policies and Proposals for Objective 43

Policies E1 – E29 All Safeguarding and Improving the Environment policies, especially: E22 – Local Biodiversity and Geodiversity Sites; and E23 – Protection of Biodiversity.

Proposals -

47 Appendix 1 – Technical Papers Informing the Main Issues Report

1. Policy 2. Minerals 3. Housing Land 4. Affordable Housing, HMOs and Gypsies/Travellers and Travelling Showpeople 5. Design and Place 6. Education 7. Employment Land Supply 8. Renewables and Energy 9. Greenspace 10. Infrastructure Delivery 11. Flooding 12. Natural heritage 13. Retail 14. Tourism 15. Transport 16. Vacant and Derelict Land 17. Waste 18. Population 19. Broadband 20. Coastal Planning 21. Spatial Strategy

The mapping used in this document is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right (2012). All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100023385.

5.0 IMPACT OF POLICIES AND PROPOSALS WITHIN THE ADOPTED LOCAL PLANS

PROPOSALS 5.1 Action Programmes monitor the impact of proposals of the 3 local plans. The adopted Mid Fife Local Plan Action Programme Version M3 (2012) outlines the following progress:

Table 1 - Employment Land Allocations Area of Employment Land Area of Employment Land Area of Employment Land allocated (ha) with Planning permission (ha) Developed (ha) 287.4 129.3 (45%) 2.4 (0.8%)

Table 2 - Housing Land Allocations Number of Houses allocated Number of Houses with Number of Houses Planning permission completed 6,761 5,627 (83%) 2,431 (36%) (810 complete outwith local plan period)

Table 3 - Strategic Land Allocations Number of houses allocated Number of Strategic Land Number of Strategic Land to Strategic Land Allocations Allocation houses with Allocation houses completed Planning permission 9,364 54 (0.6%) 25 (0.3%)

Table 4 - Areas of Mixed Use Allocations Area of Areas of Mixed Use Area of Areas of Mixed Use Area of Areas of Mixed Use allocated (ha) with Planning permission (ha) Developed (ha) 167.8 4.8 (2.9%) -

Table 5 - Brownfield Opportunity Sites Area of Brownfield Area of Brownfield Area of Brownfield Opportunity Sites allocated Opportunity Sites with Opportunity Sites Developed (ha) Planning permission (ha) (ha) 54.9 0.8 (1.5%) -

Table 6 - Other Proposals Area of Other Proposals Area of Other Proposals with Area of Other Proposals allocated (ha) Planning permission (ha) Developed (ha) 557 55.5 (10%) 7.1 (1.3%)

Source: Mid Fife Local Plan Action Programme M3

The full action programme can be viewed here: http://tinyurl.com/cwz9pf2

5.2 The action programmes for the recently adopted St Andrews & East Fife and the Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plans are currently being prepared and will reflect the level of detail contained within the Mid Fife Action Programme version M3. The action programmes for the 3 adopted local plans will inform the preparation of the proposed plan.

49 POLICIES

Strategic Policy

5.3 Strategic policy for Fife is provided in the Fife Structure Plan and the strategic development plans of TAYplan and SESplan. The Fife Structure Plan was approved by the Scottish Government in 2009 and forms part of the development plan for Mid and West Fife. However, with the approval of TAYplan (see below) the Structure Plan no longer forms part of the development plan for north Fife as it has been superseded by TAYplan.

5.4 Turning to the strategic development plans, the Dundee, Perth, Angus and North Fife Strategic Planning Authority (TAYplan) was approved in June 2012 and the examination into the South East Scotland Strategic Development Planning Authority (SESplan) started in October 2012 with a programmed approval date of September 2013. Policy areas in these strategic plans have been analysed to identify those policy areas currently addressed within the Fife Structure Plan that are not covered in TAYplan and SESplan and therefore creating a policy gap when the structure plan is superseded. The full analysis can be found in appendix 2 but concludes that the following policy areas require addressed by the proposed plan and so will inform the policy preparation of the local development plan:

• Strategic land allocations; • Longer term allocations (2026); • Policy for guiding new development; • Development on brownfield land; • Developer contributions; • Employment land; • Town centres and retailing; • Housing land requirement; • Affordable housing; • Housing density; • Transport proposals; • Wind turbines; • Mineral extraction; • Construction aggregates; • Opencast coal operations; • Nature conservation; • Built environment; • Forestry; • Countryside and access; and • Flooding.

50 Local Plan Policy

5.5 As the three local plans have just been adopted in 2012, a full policy review has not yet been undertaken. The policies of local plans will be reviewed prior to the preparation of the proposed plan to identify where policy areas and specific policies require review. Therefore, at this early stage in the plan periods of the local plans it is premature to undertake a full policy review.

5.6 However, an early internal policy review of the current local plans has been undertaken to inform the monitoring statement and main issues report. It is contained within appendix 3. This has identified the following policy areas as potential areas to review in conjunction with relevant stakeholders. These may result in revised or new policies/supplementary planning guidance being prepared.

• Land Supply – Setting the housing land requirement; • Affordable housing; • Travellers’ sites; • Houses in multiple occupation; • Infrastructure funding; • Renewable energy, combined heat and power and heat mapping; • Minerals; • Tourism; • Employment land; • Town centres and shopping; • Built and natural heritage and the design of new development; • Green networks; • Development in the countryside; and • The coast and green belt.

5.7 Further, it is proposed in the future that planning appeal decisions in Fife will be reviewed to assess what policies are being challenged, the effectiveness of the policies and where review is required.

51 6.0 CONCLUSION

6.1 All three local plans were adopted in 2012 and are currently at the beginning of their implementation period. Before a more detailed assessment of the objectives, proposals and policies of the local plans can be undertaken the plans require time to bed in to allow their objectives to be realised. In addition, the preparation and publication of these plans coincided with the economic downturn which affected the development industry severely resulting in many proposals not being implemented within the timescales originally planned.

6.2 This monitoring statement has highlighted that while most of the objectives are still to be fully realised, the policy approach and development proposals of the local plans strive to address the objectives set. The implementation of these policies and proposals will go a long way to meeting these objectives. Progress will be monitored through the action programmes and will highlight any issues that the proposed plan requires to review or address, especially in relation to implementation of the local plan proposals.

6.3 The technical papers (appendix 1) have assessed a number of key subject areas and recorded changes to the principal physical, economic, social and environmental characteristics of Fife and issues which require to be addressed. These issues will be fed directly into the Main Issues Report.

6.4 Work on a policy review has already commenced with a review of strategic and local plan policies (appendices 2 and 3). The approval of TAYplan and future approval of SESplan create some policy gaps which the local development plan requires to address. In addition, looking at the current local plan policies, there a number of areas that have been highlighted as potential areas for review in the preparation of the proposed plan. These will potentially result in revised or new policies/supplementary planning guidance. This list may be supplemented in the future when planning appeal decisions are reviewed.

Appendix 1 – Technical Papers Informing the Main Issues Report

Fife LDP Technical Paper 1 POLICIES

Reader note: Technical papers are prepared to assist the preparation of the Fife Local development Plan and identify matters for inclusion in its Main Issues Report. These papers will be published online for information but not consultation documents.

POLICY REFERENCES

[List policy references relevant to the topic. E.g : NPF, Getting the best from our land - A land use strategy for Scotland, SPP, SDP, LDP policies. Include URLS rather than repeat the whole source reference ] http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/02/13153723/0 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/07/03153034/0

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Legislation/Guidance and specific relevance re policy development

Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006/ Circular 1/2009 Development Planning

Section 15 of the Act requires the LDP to contain a spatial strategy – including detailed statement of policies as to the development and use of land (and proposals).

Section 15 (4) allows the LDP to contain maps, diagrams, illustrations, descriptive material (but regulation 8 requires inclusion of proposals map to illustrate plan policies and proposals spatially)

Section 16 requires publication of monitoring statement including impact of the policies/proposals of existing plan.

Circular 4/2009 Development Management Procedures

Legislation requires decisions on planning applications to be made in accordance with the development plan (and, in the case of national developments, any statement in the National Planning Framework made under section 3A(5) of the 1997 Act) unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The House of Lord's judgement on City of Edinburgh Council v the Secretary of State for Scotland (1998) provided the interpretation that:

Page 1 of 4

If a proposal accords with the development plan and there are no material considerations indicating that it should be refused, permission should be granted. If the proposal does not accord with the development plan, it should be refused unless there are material considerations indicating that it should be granted.

The House of Lord's judgement also set out the following approach to deciding an application:

• Identify any provisions of the development plan which are relevant to the decision, • Interpret them carefully, looking at the aims and objectives of the plan as well as detailed wording of policies , • Consider whether or not the proposal accords with the development plan, • Identify and consider relevant material considerations for and against the proposal, and • Assess whether these considerations warrant a departure from the development plan.

Relevant that Council can also prepare supplementary guidance , including:

• Development briefs or master plans • Strategies or frameworks on specific issues • Detailed policy specific guidance

RISKS

Political

• The new Fife Council, in place since the 2012 local elections, will influence future policy direction and decision making.

Economic/Social/Environmental

• The Development Plan need to address the spatial implications of economic, social and environmental change in terms of development. The policies contained in the Plan are fundamental to achieving the Council’s aims and objectives and require to give clear guidance and a basis for decisions on proposed development.

Technical

• The effective formulation, implementation, monitoring, and review, of policies could be technically demanding and resource intensive.

Legal

Page 2 of 4

• Legislation, the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006, requires decisions on planning applications to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. It will be important that policies are robust, otherwise it may be that significant numbers of appeals to the FRB and DPEA will be allowed.

OPTIONS

Option 1 Do nothing/minor changes Make minor changes to the existing policy set to bring together the MFLP/STAEFLP/DWFLP policies.

Option 2 Amend policy set Prepare a new set of policies through some amendment/addition/deletion to the MFLP/STAEFLP/DWFLP policies BUT retaining a fairly standard/traditional approach to preparation/presentation/monitoring.

Option 3 New set of policies and ‘innovative’ approach Prepare a new set of policies – starting from basic principles AND use new approaches to constructing policies, presenting and accessing the policy information and tying it to related processes and procedures. Enhance clarity and interpretation of policies, usability and monitoring. Identify and use appropriate technology to bring policy preparation and policy use in LDP in line with the other advances in Plan preparation and use.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Development, Formulation, Implementation, Monitoring of Policies

In general terms a policy includes rules or statements with a specific direction, i.e. they govern the implementation of the policy, influencing decisions and actions (the WHY we do it)

Further processes turn policies into actions that achieve our intended result (the WHAT we do). The processes may contain, or follow, set procedures – the method and order for the activity (the HOW and WHEN we do it and WHO is involved).

The implementation of our policies could be more effectively/efficiently achieved through: • a coherent set of policies presented in a standardised user friendly format (considering opportunities to develop innovative approaches to presenting and using policies and accessing related information) • ensuring that the related processes and procedures are transparent (and tested) and properly communicated to those who are using the policies (development management, developers, consultees etc.) and that appropriate technology is used to achieve these outcomes.

The LDP is the opportunity to form a Fife wide policy set:

Page 3 of 4

Standing back from those that will be contained in the 3 Plans (and which have a long history of amendment etc.) Deciding what we need as policy i.e. what policy form/content addresses the development requirements of the LDP, what content should be contained within supplementary guidance and also separating policy from aspirations and administrative arrangements Clarifying where policies are about ‘promoting development’ and when they are ‘protecting resources/assets’ Clarifying where policies are ‘area based’ and where they are ‘theme/topic’ based Constructing policies using a systematic and standardised approach that provides for a ‘checklist’ to validate the policy and provide for its justification (potentially also assisting with SEA) Developing a innovative approach to presenting policy – removing wording, providing a more graphical representation, considering using map and web based approach to allow the users to link to GIS based info, topic information and other websites. Asking ‘users’ for their views on ‘user friendly’ policy – in terms of policy format and access to related process and procedures Engaging with key agencies and other stakeholders in the preparation of the content of a policy set and subsequent detailed policies

Specifically, What do we aim to achieve with the policy? What are the land use planning objective/purpose of the policy in achieving this aim – and can it be used to guide a decision on a planning application? o policy objectives should logically flow from the policy basis/aim and any related strategy document. The objectives should be very clear as the ultimate recommendation/decision must be capable of testing against the objective, i.e. the potential for the policy to be implemented relies on the objectives being achievable. o Any policy containing criteria or performance measures should ensure that the policy objectives are clear as an applicant may demonstrate that the objectives can be met without meeting with all, or any, of the criteria Is the proposed policy capable of implementation (and how will this be done)? How will monitoring of the policy be achieved to allow for review of effectiveness and outputs?

Page 4 of 4

Fife LDP Technical Paper 2

MINERALS

Reader note: Technical papers are prepared to assist the preparation of the Fife Local Development Plan and identify matters for inclusion in its Main Issues Report. These papers will be published online for information but will not be consultation documents.

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 paragraphs 69, 155 and 156 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs 225 - 247 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policies M1, M2 and M3 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan Policy 4 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Policy 3 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/FINAL%20Approved%20Plan%20June%202012%20low%20res.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

PAN 50 Controlling the Environmental Effect of Surface Mineral Workings http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1996/10/17729/23424

PAN 50 Annex A Control of Noise at Surface Mineral Workings http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1996/10/17728/23420

PAN 50 Annex B Control of Dust at Surface Mineral Workings http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1998/03/17873/23834

PAN 50 Annex C Control of Traffic at Surface Mineral Workings http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1998/12/pan50-annex-c

PAN 50 Annex D Control of Blasting at Surface Mineral Workings http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2000/02/pan50-annex-d

PAN 64 Reclamation of Surface Mineral Working http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/01/16122/16256

Brick Clay: Geology and Mineral Planning Factsheet for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/178889/0050912.pdf

Page 1 of 6

Building, Paving and Roofing Stone: Geology and Mineral Planning Factsheet for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/06/04121227/2

Igneous Rock:: Geology and Mineral Planning Factsheet for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/178897/0050914.pdf

Silica Sand: Geology and Mineral Planning Factsheet for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/178897/0050914.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Minerals are an important natural and national resource and their extraction is necessary to support sustainable economic growth including new housing, roads, and infrastructure projects. They are also a vital source of energy. In the winter of 2011/12 almost 50% of the UK’s electricity generation regularly came from coal. However, minerals can only be worked where they are found and their extraction can give rise to significant environmental effects on the natural and built heritage and on communities. Fife is extremely rich in minerals having resources of surface coal, hard rock, building stone, sand and gravel, silica sand and other minerals.

Fife also has reserves of onshore gas and there are 3 Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence (PEDL) areas in Fife. These sources of energy have the potential to contribute to meeting national energy needs if they are carried out in a sustainable and environmentally friendly way.

Fife has a number of different mineral extraction sites, reflecting its varied geology.

Mineral Sites in Fife

5 No 4

0 Surface Silica Sand Dimension Hard Rock Sand & Coal Stone Gravel Type

Page 2 of 6

Market areas do not follow local authority boundaries and so their occurrence, transportation and usage is both locally and regionally significant and of strategic importance. The cities of Dundee and Edinburgh consume large quantities of aggregates, especially sand and gravel, for example but do not have a commensurate amount of exploitable resources. Minerals are therefore transported not only within Fife but also to areas outwith Fife to other parts of these two city regions, as well as to other areas such as Clackmannanshire. Whilst the proximity principle is important it cannot be applied too rigidly to minerals, which can only worked where they occur.

Given their strategic significance therefore, mineral extraction is addressed by the two strategic development plans covering Fife: SESplan and TAYplan. Currently, the north of Fife is covered by TAYplan whilst south and mid Fife is still covered by the Fife Structure Plan. There is therefore a consequent policy need for a consistent pan Fife policy approach to minerals extraction. The policies of the new Local Development Plan, supported by Supplementary Guidance will replace the policies of the existing Fife Minerals Subject Local Plan which was adopted in 2002 and altered in 2011.

Scottish Planning Policy requires Development Plans to:

• Identify appropriate areas of search • Ensure a landbank of permitted reserves for construction aggregates of a minimum of 10 years extraction is available at all times in all market areas. • Safeguard relevant minerals • Minimise significant negative impacts from minerals on the amenity of local communities, the natural heritage, historic environment and important economic sectors. • Identify the factors that will be taken into account when deciding planning applications for wellheads and transmission infrastructure for inshore oil and gas • Identify broad areas where surface coal extraction may be acceptable and set out the criteria to be addressed when assessing individual proposals including mitigation of cumulative impacts. • Identify the factors that will be taken into account when deciding planning applications for onshore oil and gas extraction equipment.

Policy 4 of the SESplan Proposed Plan requires LDPs to: a. Review the need to identify areas of search for aggregate minerals and coal, or, where appropriate, specific sites, having regard to national guidance and other environmental objectives of the Strategic Development Plan; b. Set out the criteria to be addressed when assessing individual proposals, including restoration and enhancement; c. Safeguard mineral resources from sterilisation where the deposits are of a sufficient scale or quality to be of potential commercial

Page 3 of 6

interest and their extraction is technically feasible and may be be carried out in a way that is environmentally and socially acceptable. The need for safeguarding should be considered alongside the development strategy for the area; and d. Support and encourage the use of secondary and recycled aggregates.

Policy 3 of TAYplan requires LDPs to

• Safeguard minerals deposits of economic importance and land for a minimum of 10 years supply of aggregates.

The Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 contains 3 policies on minerals (M1 More Sustainable Mineral Extraction, M2 Construction Aggregates, and M3 Opencast Coal Operations). Policy M1 encourages extraction as close as possible to the market and also the use of secondary materials. Policy M2 addresses the need to maintain a 10 year landbank for construction aggregates. Policy M3 expresses support in principle for proposals to extract surface coal provided that they are located within Areas of Search. In doing so it sets out very limited and specific exceptions. It is important to recognise however that our knowledge of the geological resource is imperfect but continuously improving. As such boundaries of Areas of Search can only be indicative. Unacceptable levels of damage to communities and settlements must be avoided and clear benefits must be secured.

RISKS

Political

• Minerals extraction can be a controversial and contentious land use.

Economic

• Constraining minerals development can hinder or delay major infrastructure and strategic projects, in terms of lack of construction aggregates. It can also lead to unsustainable movement of material from other areas of Scotland or the UK or even importation of minerals such as coal from overseas.

• Constraining minerals development can adversely affect employment in rural areas.

• Inappropriate minerals extraction can adversely affect other industries such as tourism.

• Constraining minerals extraction can adversely affect energy supply.

Social:

Page 4 of 6

• Inappropriate minerals extraction can have an adverse effect on nearby communities.

Technical: • Minerals extraction, especially when it involves blasting has the potential to damage property and infrastructure. • Constraining surface coal extraction in areas of ground instability can prevent development coming forward. • Minerals extraction can result in damage to roads from heavy goods vehicles. • Our knowledge of the mineral resource, as identified in published geological maps, can only be an interpretation and as such is imperfect.

Legal: • None

Environment: • Minerals extraction can have adverse effects on the environment in terms of habitat loss, pollution, landscape, built heritage, and noise.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Review Areas of Search: areas of search have never been reviewed since they were first identified some 8 years ago in the Minerals Subject Local Plan. They have only been identified for surface coal. That said, the framework has been relatively successful in operational terms. However any review will have to be consistent in principle with the approach adopted by other SESplan and TAYplan authorities. The relatively new designation of Local landscape Areas will need to be taken into account in identifying these areas. Sand and gravel and coal would seem to be the priorities.

Landbank for Construction Aggregates: the Minerals Subject Local Plan originally contained a landbank calculation but the maintenance of this has proved very problematic due to lack of information. The 2010 Alteration, recognised this and deleted the actual figures whilst retaining a commitment to meeting the landbank. SESplan carried out a survey in 2011 but TAYplan has not undertaken any kind of similar exercise. From the limited information available from SESplan, it would appear that there is a shortage of consented sand and gravel resources.

OPTIONS

Areas of Search

Do Nothing: The most straightforward option would be to do nothing and simply roll forward the current Area of Search for Surface (opencast) coal and possibly adapt that for other relevant minerals. However this would be open to challenge, moreso if Areas of Search were to be limited to surface coal only. It would take no account of changing circumstances, in terms of economy, understanding of solid

Page 5 of 6

geology and strategic and national planning policy. Also, it would not provide clear policy advice on an important and sometimes controversial issue. As such it could be criticised as being out of date and not fit for purpose.

Review Areas of Search: national guidance has changed; our understanding of the solid geology has changed, economic circumstances have changed and the need for a consistent strategic SESplan / TAYplan wide approach has arisen. It would be prudent to use the existing Area of Search for opencast coal as a starting point and then assess it in terms of changes that had taken place since they were first identified. This approach could be extended to include sand and gravel. This should be done in conjunction with organisations such as the British Geological Survey, the Coal Authority, trade organisations and the industry. This is the preferred option.

Landbank for Construction Aggregates

Do Nothing: in effect this option would simply roll forward the current approach adopted in the 2010 Alteration to the Minerals Subject Local Plan in which there is a commitment to maintaining at least a 10 year landbank for construction aggregates. However, although such information can only ever be an estimate, it is essential in order to understand the minimum scale of the aggregates landbank that is required.

Update the Landbank calculation (the preferred option): due to confidentiality constraints, it is not possible to use the results of the comprehensive SESplan Minerals Survey which was carried out in 2010. No similar survey was carried out by TAYplan. To undertake a bespoke Fife wide calculation, it would be necessary to undertake a survey purely for Fife. This could be onerous in terms of time. In any event the Scottish Government is currently considering carrying out a nationwide survey to quantify the likely shortage of sand and gravel, which would avoid the need for regional surveys. Irrespective of the precise method of collecting information, it will be important to improve our knowledge of the landbank situation, in order to maintain a reliable and adequate supply of construction aggregates.

ISSUES

1 Amalgamating and distilling policies from the Minerals Subject Local Plan into the LDP and Supplementary Planning Guidance.

2 Review Area of Search for surface coal and other minerals, taking into account Local Landscape Areas and any other changing circumstances .

3 Address the aggregates landbank issue especially the national shortage of sand and gravel. A first step will be to estimate the landbank position.

Page 6 of 6

Fife Local Development Plan Technical Paper 3

Housing Land

i ii

1. Policy References

National Policy and Advice

National Planning Framework 2 (NPF2)

Scottish Planning Policy

PAN 2/2010: Affordable Housing and Housing Land Audits

2. Other References

Strategic and Local Policy

SESplan Proposed Plan

TAYplan Proposed Plan

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26

Fife’s three Area Local Plans

3. Assessment

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

3.1 In fully addressing all issues relating to housing need, demand and supply, the Local Development Plan must address the following topics:

Housing Land Requirements Housing Land Supply Components of the Housing Land Supply Flexibility and generosity of supply Allocation of Requirement and supply to Housing Market Areas (HMAs) Monitoring of the land supply Mechanisms for the release of further land

Fife and the Strategic Development Plan Areas

3.2 Fife is unique in Scotland in that it falls into 2 Strategic Development Plan Areas: TAYplan to the North and SESplan to the south as shown in Figure 1, overleaf.

Figure 1: Strategic Development Plan Areas

Housing Land Requirements

TAYplan 3.3 The Housing Land Requirement for TAYplan, which covers the area of the St Andrews and East Fife Local Plan, is explicit. The Plan allocates 210 houses per annum to the St Andrews and North East Fife Housing Market Area (HMA) and 110 houses per annum to the Cupar and North West Fife HMA. This is compared to the Fife Structure Plan Requirement in Table 1.

Table 1: Annualised Housing Land Requirements in TAYplan HMAs HMA/Plan St Andrews HMA Cupar HMA

Structure Plan 220 140

Finalised TAYplan 210 110

SESplan 3.4 SESplan takes a different approach in that its Proposed Plan does not identify an overall Local Authority based Requirement to allow the annualised Requirement to be calculated. SESplan has taken this approach due to the challenging economic circumstances currently facing the housing market and the development industry which has brought about challenges to the usual methods of identifying housing land requirements.

3.5 SESplan have recognised that it is important to identify a level of housing that matched the needs of the SESplan area. Therefore SESplan has made the decision to adopt an approach which utilised the 16 – 21 year supply that the area currently has allocated. Through these allocations and the assessments carried out as part of the Housing Land Audits, an indication is provided where land is allocated up to year 12 of the plan. This will encourage the continued implementation of housing and will accommodate future trends in housing demand in the short to medium term.

3.6 While Fife Council supports the approach taken by SESplan, there is a need to provide greater parity between the two approaches to housing land taken by the Strategic Development Plans to simplify the process of the delivery and monitoring of housing land across Fife through the Local Development Plan.

Housing Land Surplus/ Shortfall

3.7 Surplus/shortfall is the difference between the annualised Housing Land Requirement and the delivered or projected supply in any given year.

3.8 SESplan requires that Local Planning Authorities take account of surplus/shortfall from 2008 onwards when allocating land. TAYplan treats any surplus/shortfall occurring before 2012 as having been superseded by the TAYplan Housing Need and Demand Assessment and, therefore, no figures are carried forward into the new Local Development Plan.

3.9 A low level of completions in the SESplan Area meant that the number of houses built fell short of that anticipated in the Fife Structure Plan 2009. A.shortfall of 2,129 houses is taken account of in calculating the contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement in the SESplan area. Even though the TAYplan Area shows a delivery shortfall of 988 houses against the Structure Plan Requirement, this figure will not carry forward into the TAYplan area Requirement.

Components of the Housing Land Supply

3.10 The total housing allocated housing land supply, known as the established land supply, is made up of the effective supply and the non-effective, (constrained) supply. The effective land supply is assumed to make a contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement whereas the non-effective supply makes no such contribution.

3.11 The effective land supply is made up of a combination of:

Strategic Land Allocations; Local Development Plan Allocations; and Sites with Planning Consent.

3.12 In addition to the effective land supply, there are other, unallocated types of supply which may be assumed to make a contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement. These are:

Windfalls Small Sites Urban Capacity

Strategic Land Allocations

3.13 Strategic Land Allocations are a fundamental part of the Development Plan Strategy. The Council’s commitment to these sites remains and the Development Plan strategy looks to avoid competing development which would seriously undermine the ability of the Strategic Land Allocations to deliver housing along with other benefits. Along with other housing sites, the opportunity will exist through the Local Development Plan to revisit the programming of the Strategic Land Allocations from that included ib the Fife Structure Plan,

Local Plan Allocations

3.14 Local Development Plan Allocations are those sites which are allocated in the existing three Fife Local Plans and through the Local Plan process have been deemed suitable for housing development in order to meet local needs and to help to deliver the Housing Land Requirement. Again, in the current economic climate, not all sites will be developed in accordance with the timescales envisaged by the Development Plan and, indeed, some sites may never be developed and will therefore be removed through future reviews of the Local Development Plan. It will be the role of the Local Development Plan to augment these existing allocations to address the housing strategies of SESplan and TAYplan.

Sites with Planning Permission

3.15 Sites with planning permission have traditionally been included in the Development Plan as committed effective sites. However, the current economic climate has seriously affected such sites and they are not coming forward at anything like the rate they were pre-recession. While it is entirely appropriate to continue to assume these will form part of the effective supply it will be important to reassess sites with planning consent prior to their inclusion in the effective supply for the new Local Development Plan.

Council-owned Land

3.16 The Council must justify the inclusion of its own land within the Local Development Plan by either:

Planning to develop the land as Council housing; or Agreeing a plan for the disposal of such land through a Committee decision

Council-owned land which does not meet either of these criteria is part of the non- effective land supply but may be included as an opportunity site.

Urban Capacity 3.17 Fife Council has, in the past, produced an Urban Capacity Study, the last one published in 2007. Traditionally the aim of such studies is to provide a realistic estimate of the level of additional residential development that could potentially be expected to come forward in existing urban areas over and above the effective land supply. Other uses on urban capacity sites can also be considered. The Study has three main objectives:

To identify the locations where additional urban capacity is likely to come forward on previously developed land, through conversion of existing buildings and via longer term, greenfield urban sites; To establish how much additional housing can be accommodated on these sites along with indicative timescales for development; and To help promote development of the identified sites.

3.18 Urban Capacity Studies were carried out in 2009 to inform both SESplan and TAYplan. However care will need to be taken when considering these figures as there is a potential for overlap with the established land supply. The Urban Capacity study will be reassessed as part of the work for the Fife LDP Proposed Plan.

3.19 Urban Capacity sites include, but are not limited to:

Non-effective sites included in the Housing Land Audit; Local Plan opportunity sites; Local knowledge and knowledge gained by survey; Approaches from developers/landowners who have sites for housing development; Change of use and reuse of existing sites; and Demolition and replacement of hard to let housing stock.

3.20 There is potential for overlap between the Housing Land Audit, the Development Plan and the Urban Capacity Study and the Local Development Plan provides an opportunity to rationalise the treatment of urban capacity and set out a fixed methodology for addressing it. Sites in the Urban Capacity Study have, in the past, made an assumed contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement.

3.21 The preferred, method of dealing with urban capacity is to wholly subsume the topic into the Local Development Plan process. This has the advantage of dealing with the contribution paradox by assuming a contribution from all land assessed as suitable for housing.

Demolitions

3.22 Demolitions reduce the available housing stock and are, therefore, treated as a loss on the supply side of the housing equation. Demolitions in Fife are mainly limited to the Dunfermline and West Fife and Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes and Central Fife HMAs with negligible stock loss due to demolition in the St Andrews and North East Fife and Cupar and North West Fife HMAs.

Windfalls

3.23 Windfall sites are sites which are not allocated in the Development Plan and arise only as a result of the grant of planning permission. Indeed it is only upon the grant of planning permission that these sites can be considered to count towards the Housing Land Requirement in the Housing Land Audits.

3.24 However, windfall sites are recognised as a valid and significant portion of the housing land supply, having contributed 20% of the entire Structure Plan requirement over the first 5 years of its lifetime.

3.25 TAYplan does not set a windfall allowance or assume a specific contribution to housing land supply, choosing instead to leave this to the Local Development Plan to resolve. In SESplan a windfall allocation has already been taken into account in the housing calculations.

3.26 There is clear evidence from past experience that windfall sites are reliable contributors to the housing land supply across the area. To add windfall sites as ‘flexibility’ devalues the housing land calculations in the development plan as a major contributor to future supply would be discounted. Therefore windfall sites should remain as part of the Housing Land Requirement calculation in the Proposed Plan.

Small sites.

3.27 Small sites are those of less than 5 units in total and traditionally make up a significant proportion of all house completions in the St Andrews and North East Fife and Cupar and North West Fife HMAs. Within those two HMAs, small sites contribute towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement whereas in the Dunfermline and West Fife HMAs and the Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes and Central Fife HMAs small site completions are treated as additional flexibility and do not contribute towards meeting the requirement.

3.28 It would be resource-intensive to effectively allocate all likely small sites in the Development Plan. Even were this to happen, it is inevitable that a proportion of small site completions would take place on land which the Local Development Plan did not foresee coming forward and therefore did not allocate for development. Therefore it is proposed to continue to include an allowance for small sites in the housing land calculations,

Housing Market Areas

3.29. Fife currently contains four Housing Market Areas as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Existing Housing Market Areas

Cupar and North West Fife St Andrews and North East Fife

Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes and Central Fife

Dunfermline and West Fife

3.30 In the past the Housing Land Requirement has been split, according to the Development Plan strategy, between these Housing Market Areas. This is explicit in TAYplan with an average of 110 units per annum to be developed in the Cupar and North West Fife HMA and 210 units per annum in the St Andrews and North East Fife HMA.

3.31 SESplan does not allocate the requirement to the two HMAs in the Fife Forth Area and it is therefore incumbent on the Local Development Plan to do so. The split of housing numbers between the two SESplan HMAs will be based on the policy approach in the Fife Structure Plan.

3.32 SESplan does allocate two Strategic Development Areas, one of which, Ore/Upper Leven Valley, currently straddles the Dunfermline and West Fife and Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes and Central Fife HMAs.

Flexibility and Generosity

Flexibility

3.33 Flexibility can be defined as the ability of the unallocated part of the housing land supply, i.e. small sites, windfalls and urban capacity sites, to make a contribution towards meeting the Structure Plan Requirement or supply houses outwith the terms of the Requirement.

3.34 If allowances are set within the housing land supply for these unallocated sources of supply, there can be no flexibility other than that afforded by exceeding such allowances, i.e. flexibility would only result in windfall, small sites or urban capacity assumptions being set too low to reflect the position on the ground.

3.35 Should small site contributions be deemed as not making a contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement in the SESplan HMAs, small site completions would constitute flexibility albeit non-contributory.

3.36 Another form of flexibility is the ability to move housing provision between neighbouring Housing Market Areas where such HMAs are within the same Local Planning Authority and within the same Strategic Development Plan Area. This approach is permitted by TAYplan where growth in one HMA is heavily constrained by environmental capacity.

3.37 In SESplan, a further element of flexibility is given whereby Local Planning Authorities may re-phase allocations specified in the Strategic Development Areas in order to bring forward land to meet the 2019 – 2024 Requirement to the 2009 – 2019 period. The Local Development Plan will identify the relevant criteria whereby this re-phasing is permitted.

Generosity

3.38 Generosity can be defined as the allocation of an oversupply of land for housing in order than, should some sites not deliver housing as envisaged by the Development Plan, there are other sites which are available to replace these sites in order to meet the Housing Land Requirement and to avoid having to allocate more land in order to meet any shortfall. Neither policy nor advice indicate the level of generosity which may be deemed appropriate. However, it is incumbent on the Development Plan to set a suitable level of over-allocation of housing land in order to achieve a generous supply and to justify the level of over-allocation adopted. The use of windfalls to demonstrate generosity is discussed at paragraph 3.38.

Monitoring the Land Supply

3.39 The Government, through PAN 2/2010 commits Local Authorities to monitoring the housing land supply on an annual basis by the production of a Housing Land Audit. Fife Council’s Housing Land Audit gives a ’snapshot’ of the housing land supply as at 1st April each year. This will remain the Council’s primary method of monitoring housing delivery and the amount and status of housing land.

3.40 In addition, as part of the Local Development Plan suite of documents, the Council will also publish, on a biennial basis, an Action Programme. The Action Programme will set out:

3.41 A list of actions required to deliver each of the Plan’s policies and proposals; The name of the person or agency who is to carry out the action; and The timescale for carrying out each action.

The Action Programme will supplement and expand on the information contained within the Housing Land Audit.

Mechanisms for the release of further housing

3.42 Although it is anticipated that the Fife Housing Land Requirement will be set using an annual average, should the supply fail to deliver new housing at a rate which can meet the Requirement, it may become necessary to release more land to meet need and demand in the short and medium terms. Fife Council is committed to the production of Supplementary Planning Guidance on the subject of Maintaining an Effective 5 Year Housing Land Supply. The Local Development Plan will subsume the policy approach taken in this Supplementary Planning Guidance.

TAYplan

3.43 The TAYplan housing land requirement is set at 210 housing units per annum in the St Andrews and North East Fife Housing Market Area and 110 housing unit per annum in the Cupar and North West Fife Housing Market Area. This gives a total TAYplan housing land requirement of 320 housing units per annum. The supply, as at 31st March 2012, is sufficient to meet this requirement for the 10 years of the Local Development Plan. This situation will be reviewed annually by the Housing Land Audit.

TAYplan and HMAs Housing Land Requirement and Supply

450

400

350

300

250

Houses 200

150

100

0 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Year TAYplan supply TAYplan requirement St Andrews and North East Fife supply Cupar and North West Fife supply St Andrews and North East Fife requirement Cupar and North West Fife requirement Sources: Fife Housing Land Audit 2012; TAYplan Proposed Plan Note: The supply figures do not include any allowances for windfalls, demolitions, urban capacity or small sites.

SESplan

3.44 SESplan does not set a housing land requirement at local authority level. Consequently, it is for the authority to set the requirement. There are 3 options under consideration for the Local Development Plan:

An annualised figure of 1,000 houses per annum. This is based on the average of the last 4 years of housing completions of 867 houses with the further 133 houses representing growth (in the base year of 2012, 641 houses were completed in the SESplan area of Fife and this requirement would need an immediate 40% increase in housing completions in order to be met). This option places no impediment on more than 1,000 per annum being completed.

The number of houses required to deliver the SESplan Housing Needs and Demand Assessment figure plus a further 20% for flexibility and generosity. This option would require a 280% increase in house building over 2012 levels.

The allocation of 1,800 units over the Local Development Plan period in accordance with SESplan Table 4 and no further requirement being set, rather the existing supply being relied on to deliver housing at whatever level can be achieved.

SESplan and HMAs Housing Land Requirement and Supply – Option 1

1,200

1,000

800

600 Houses

400

200

0 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Year

SESplan supply SESplan requirement Dunfermline and West Fife supply Kirkcaldy Glenrothes and Central Fife supply Dunfermline and West Fife requirement Kirkcaldy Glenrothes and Central Fife requirement

Sources: Fife Housing Land Audit 2012 Note: The supply figures do not include any allowances for windfalls, demolitions or urban capacity as these elements are factored into the requirement.

SESplan Housing Land Requirement and Supply – Option 2

2,500

2,000

1,500 Houses

1,000

500

0 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Year

SESplan supply SESplan requirement Dunfermline and West Fife supply Dunfermline and West Fife requirement Kirkcaldy Glenrothes and Central Fife supply Kirkcaldy Glenrothes and Central Fife requirement

Sources: Fife Housing Land Audit 2012, SESplan MIR Note: The supply figures do not include any allowances for windfalls, demolitions or urban capacity as these elements will be considered separately.

SESplan Housing Land Requirement and Supply – Option 3

1,200

1,000

800

600 Houses

400

200

0 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Year

Sources: Fife Housing Land Audit 2012, SESplan proposed plan Note: The supply figures do not include any allowances for windfalls, demolitions or urban capacity as these elements will be considered separately.

Risk The 3 SESplan housing land requirements are risk assessed below. Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Political Government pressure for Government pressure for Government pressure for planning system planning system planning system to address to address to address shortage of shortage of shortage of housing. housing. housing. Level of housing land While the level of housing Level of housing land requirement may land may be requirement may not be viewed as viewed favourably not be viewed as sufficient by other by the sufficient by other interested parties. development interested parties. industry among others, such a high level may not gain local political support if this level of building cannot realistically be delivered. Economic The economic downturn The economic downturn The economic downturn continues to pose continues to pose continues to pose a serious risk to a serious risk to a serious risk to the delivery of the delivery of the delivery of

housing numbers housing numbers housing numbers in Fife and in Fife and in Fife and nationwide. nationwide. nationwide. There is no evidence to The supply would be suggest that an almost wholly increased dependent on the allocation of market delivery. housing land will increase the numbers of housing built.

Social Potential housing Such a high level of The low level of housing completions are expectation of requirement may reckoned to reflect new houses may limit choice to the appetite for flood the market move to or within new housing. which may restrict the area. the number of The level of new housing houses actually proposed may built as the restrict the level of industry is new affordable currently housing which can competition- be leveraged. averse. Technical A significant risk to the A significant risk to the A significant risk to the LDP process is LDP process is LDP process is the potential for the potential for the potential for alteration of the alteration of the alteration of the SESplan SDP SESplan SDP SESplan SDP through through through Examination by Examination by Examination by the Scottish the Scottish the Scottish Government. Government. Government. There is little chance of such a level of housing being delivered – this may lead to a constant shortfall in housing delivery as against the housing land requirement leading to speculative applications which would purport to make up the gap between supply and requirement.

Legal The non-delivery of the requirement may lead to an increased number of planning appeals.

Environment Provision of further significant amounts of housing land could result in take up of greenfield land with a potential negative environmental effect.

. Options

The SESplan housing land requirement is one of the options to be considered through the Main Issues Report. Fife Council considers the preferred option is to set the SESplan housing land requirement at 1,000 units per annum.

The other relates to the housing land calculation where the question is asked which allowances should be included. Fife Council considers the preferred option is to include windfall, urban capacity, small sites and demolition allowances.

Issues to be addressed through the MIR:

- Setting the SESplan housing land requirement

- Reassessment of the established land supply and replacement of those sites that, in the views of the Council and the development industry, are unlikely to come forward for housing development.

- Components of Housing Land Requirement – confirm which allowances will be used as part of the housing land requirement calculations.

Glossary of Terms

Demolitions: the loss of housing due to the demolition of existing stock deemed suitable for replacement.

Development Plan: the Strategic Development Plan(s) and Local Development Plan(s) for a defined area.

Effective Housing Land Supply: the part of the established housing land supply that is expected to be free of constraints in the 5-year period under consideration and will therefore be available for the construction of houses.

Established Housing Land Supply: the remaining capacity of sites under construction, sites with planning consent, sites in adopted and/or finalised local plans and, where appropriate, other buildings and land with agreed potential for housing development.

Flexibility: the ability of the unallocated part of the housing land supply, i.e. small sites, windfalls and urban capacity sites, to make a contribution towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement or supply houses outwith the terms of the Requirement.

Generosity: the allocation of an oversupply of land for housing so that, should some sites not deliver housing as envisaged by the Development Plan, there are other sites which are available to replace these sites in order to meet the Housing Land Requirement.

Housing Land Requirement: the outcome of an assessment of housing demand and need (expressed in housing houses) which reflects the planning strategy and environmental and infrastructural constraints of an area.

Housing Land Audit: a document setting out the housing land supply position as at 1st April each year.

Housing Market Area (HMA): a geographical area which is relatively self-contained in terms of reflecting people’s choice of location for a new home, i.e. a large percentage of people buying a home in the area will have sought a home solely in that area.

Housing Need and Demand Assessment (HNDA): An assessment providing a robust and credible evidence base to allow the definition of housing supply targets to inform housing land allocation through the Strategic Development Plans.

Local Development Plan (LDP): the part of the Development Plan setting out a detailed land use framework for a defined area.

Local Development Plan Allocations: those sites outwith the Strategic Land Allocations/Strategic Development Areas which are deemed suitable for housing development in order to meet local needs and to help deliver the Housing Land Requirement.

Non-effective Housing Land Supply: that part of the Established Housing Land Supply which is not expected to contribute towards meeting the Housing Land Requirement due to ownership, physical, contamination, deficit funding, marketability, infrastructure or land use constraints. Such sites may become effective if constraints are addressed.

SESplan: the Strategic Development Plan for Edinburgh and South East Scotland. It comprises the Council Areas of City of Edinburgh; East Lothian; Midlothian; Scottish Borders; and West Lothian and the southern part of Fife Council Area.

Small Sites: sites of fewer than 5 housing houses.

Strategic Land Allocation (SLA): an area defined by its general location for mixed-use development with a minimum of 300 houses.

Strategic Development Area (SDA): an area defined in SESplan as a primary location for growth and investment.

Strategic Development Plan (SDP): the part of the Development Plan setting out a broad strategic framework for a defined area.

TAYplan: the Strategic Development Plan for the Dundee City region. It comprises the Council Areas of Angus; Dundee City; and Perth and Kinross and the northern part of Fife Council.

Urban Capacity Study: a study which provides a realistic estimate of the level of additional residential development that can be expected to come forward in urban areas over and above the effective land supply.

Windfall Site: a site not specifically allocated for development in the Development Plan but for which planning permission for housing development is granted.

Fife LDP Technical Paper 4

AFFORDABLE HOUSING, HMOS AND GYPSIES/TRAVELLERS AND TRAVELLING SHOWPEOPLE

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 paragraphs 53, 78 and 189 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs 86 - 89 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policy H4 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

TAYplan approved Strategic Development Plan http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/FINAL%20Approved%20Plan%20June%202012%20low%20res.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan paragraph 116 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Planning Advice Note 2/2010 Affordable Housing and Housing Land Audits http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212607/0103970.pdf

Fife Council Supplementary Guidance on Affordable Housing http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_AffordableHousingSPG 1.pdf

Fife Council Supplementary Planning Guidance: Houses in Multiple Occupation (St. Andrews Central Conservation Area) http://fish.fife/subjects/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&pageid=F9E42805- C47A-ECDB-E99CDF8F4A41924E&subjectid=7462D75B-1CC4-E06A- 5243391D96E6762F

Fife Local Housing Strategy 2010 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/LHS%203%20- %20Local%20Housing%20Strategy%20Final%20(Revised%2005.11.10).pdf

Fife Housing Need and Demand Assessment 2010

Page 1 of 9

http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/LHS%207%20- %20Fife%20Housing%20Need%20and%20Demand%20Assessment%202010.pdf

TAYplan Housing Need and Demand Assessment http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/HNDA%20full%20document%20WEB%20VERSION%20- %20update%20feb11.pdf

Fife Council Co-operation Policy: http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Appendix2- DraftGYPSYTravellersCo-operationpolicy11.doc[CompatibilityMode].pdf

Local Housing Strategy: http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/LHS%201%20- %20Fife%20LHS%20Update%202011.pdf

Policy H4 – Gypsy Travellers and Travelling Showpeople (Mid Fife, St Andrews & East Fife and Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plans): http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_MFLPasintendtoadopt- Policiesv1.pdf

Housing & Communities Committee Report (23/08/11): http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Item04- GypsyTravellerStopoverSitesComplete.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Affordable Housing

Addressing the shortage of affordable housing is one of the key issues facing the Local Development Plan. It is the basic right of every household to have a warm, secure and well built home. The recent and very deep recession and continuing challenging economic climate have only served to exacerbate the shortage of affordable homes. In the interests of social inclusion, Fife Council is fully committed to creating mixed and inclusive communities and ensuring that the needs of those communities who cannot compete in the open housing market are met.

Traditionally, affordable housing was provided to a large extent, by local authorities, but decreasing public sector finance in the current economic climate, has significantly cut the monies available from central government. The planning system is expected to play a role, although it can only make a contribution; it cannot meet the challenge in its entirety. The current percentage requirements applying in Fife were informed by the 2005 Fife Housing Needs and Affordability Assessment.

Page 2 of 9

Scottish Planning Policy states that where the Housing Need and Demand Assessment (HNDA) and Local Housing Strategy identify a shortage of affordable housing, it should be addressed in the Development Plan as part of the housing land allocation. Where authorities believe that the planning system has a role to play in the provision of affordable housing the development plan should be clear on the scale and distribution of the affordable housing requirement for the area and should outline what is expected from prospective developers. Detailed policies should be set out in supplementary guidance.

Authorities may seek a percentage affordable housing contribution from developers of new housing developments where this is justified by the HNDA and is included in the Local Housing Strategy and Development Plan. The benchmark figure is that each site should contribute 25% of the total number of housing units as affordable housing. Different percentages can be sought but only if justified by the HNDA, Local Housing Strategy and the Development Plan.

Planning Advice Note 2/2010 addresses the issue in detail, including providing advice on developer contributions, off site provision, commuted sums, and development management. Affordable housing covers many different tenures, both subsidised and unsubsidised. In line with national advice, Fife Council recognises a range of tenures as being affordable, although social rented housing remains a priority. Contributions may be on site, off site or in the form of commuted sums.

Mid Market Rent

Shared Ownersh ip Discounted sale

Shared Social Equity Rented

Page 3 of 9

Fife Council’s Local Housing Strategy 2010 identifies a need for 561 new affordable homes per annum based on the results of the Fife Housing Need and Demand Assessment 2010.

The SESplan Proposed Plan does not contain any policy on affordable housing but does reaffirm that the SPP benchmark figure will be sought on each site, subject to locally justified variations. LDPs will set out appropriate approaches to the provision of affordable housing based on evidence from local waiting lists and HNDA evidence.

The TAYplan Proposed Plan, in Policy 5, requires LDPs to ensure the mix of housing type, size and tenure meets the aspirations of a range of different households throughout their lives, including the provision of an appropriate level of affordable housing based on defined local needs. LDPs (where applicable) will need to set affordable housing requirements for or within each Housing Market Area.

The Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 identifies affordable housing as being a key challenge and contains a policy, H4, which addresses the provision of affordable housing. This sets varying percentage requirements across Fife ranging from 5% in parts of Mid Fife to 30% in the St Andrews and North East Fife HMA. Separate thresholds are set out for rural and urban sites. This approach is mirrored in the three Local Plans. The percentage requirements are set out below.

HMA Sub Area Dunfermline & West Fife 25% Kelty 5% Benarty 5% Lochgelly 5% Cowdenbeath 5% Cupar & NW Fife 20% St Andrews & NE Fife 30% Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes & Central Fife 10% Methil 5% Buckhaven 5% Kirkcaldy 15%

Fife Council’s updated Supplementary Planning Guidance on Affordable Housing was published in September 2011. This provides more detail on the mechanisms to facilitate provision of affordable housing through the planning system. Housing developments of 4 units and below are no longer required to provide affordable housing contributions. Due to the severe impact of the recent deep recession, it was decided not to review percentage requirements at that time, but these will need to be reviewed once the economic climate improves. To date recovery has been slow and protracted. Levels of commuted sum payments are updated regularly, usually on an annual basis. This was last done in March 2012. A basic premise of the current approach is that the need for affordable housing should be met, where possible, in the housing market area in which it arises.

Page 4 of 9

Given the long lead in times associated with Development Plans, the original policy which was approved in 2005, was beginning to produce results in 2008, when the economic recession began. In reviewing the policy it will necessary ensure that it facilitates the provision of affordable housing where it is needed without placing an onerous burden on housebuilders.

Fife Council’s Executive Committee in August 2012 agreed a target to deliver 2,700 new affordable homes for rent between 2012 and 2017. This will present a challenge given reducing levels of central government funding. A number of objectives have been set to achieve this outcome of 2,700 new affordable homes. Those relevant to development planning are to: • identify sites and appropriate infrastructure; • review housing type, size and location priorities; • identify design and construction requirements; and • identify policy requirements to support delivery. The planning system will have a role to play in contributing to meeting this new target, although new means of delivery will have to be explored.

Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO)

Scottish Planning Policy indicates that Development Plans should address the housing needs of specific sections of the communicy and consider the need for houses in multiple occupation as part of the housing requirement of the area. Houses in Multiple Occupation can provide accommodation for several groups of occupants including students, migrant workers and young professionals. Where HMOs are concentrated in particular areas they can cause physical, social, cultural and economic changes within a community which will have a range of impacts on related communities. This may include increased competition for housing with reduced availability for non HMO residents, increased demand for services and infrastructure including parking provision, physical deterioration of properties due to absentee landlords. Certain impacts, including the behaviour of residents, are not planning related matters. However, planning authorities may adopt policies to control the degree of concentration of HMO occupants where the residential amenity of a community is already adversely affected by a high concentration of HMOs or in areas where there is a likelihood of this in the future.

Circular 2/2012 provides guidance on the provision and management of HMO through the planning system and its relationship with the HMO licensing scheme. This Circular takes into account the Private Rented Housing (Scotland) Act 2011 that enables local authorities to consider overprovision as an issue in determining HMO applications.

There is varying demand for HMO accommodation throughout Fife, Since early 2005 there has been ongoing and extensive discussion with Members, stakeholders and officers on the topic of housing in multiple occupation, focused primarily on St. Andrews, and resulting in the following policy position at this time: • Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG): Houses in Multiple Occupation (Central St. Andrews Conservation Area) (2011) is a material consideration in

Page 5 of 9

the determination of an application for planning permission for an HMO in the St Andrews Conservation Area. (to be reviewed after 2 years) • Policy relating to the control of Houses in Multiple Occupation included in the Mid Fife Local Plan, St. Andrews & East Fife Local Plan and Draft Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plan.

This policy and related guidance is now being implemented across Fife, with review of the SPG due 2 years from its date of approval. In reviewing the policy and SPG it will be important to effectively assess the impacts of this relatively new policy approach, taking into account the outcome of relevant decisions of appeal bodies when considering the Council’s decisions on HMO proposals. It will also be important to develop the opportunity to develop links between planning control and licensing of HMO properties.

Gypsies/Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

Currently there are 3 permanent Fife Council run Gypsy Traveller sites in Fife. However there are no stopover sites allocated to where we can move unauthorised encampments. The provision of stopover sites will also minimise the current costs of legal action and cleaning/removal of waste. It will also make the panning process smoother when considering applications for stopover sites.

The Council’s Co-operation Policy commits to provide between 6-8 stopover sites across Fife, providing temporary sites where Gypsies/Travellers and Travelling Showpeople moving through Fife can park with permission from the Council. Following on from The Council’s Co-operation Policy, Housing and Neighbourhood Service have Committee approval from Housing and Communities Committee (23/08/11) to set up a network of stopover sites throughout Fife to help deal with the issue of unauthorised encampments. Ideally they would like to see 6-8 stopover sites in Fife.

RISKS

Political: • Pressure for planning system to address shortage of affordable housing. • Unrealistic expectations of what planning system can achieve. • Local objections to affordable housing development. • Local pressure to address the issue of HMO accommodation in St. Andrews • Pressure to create stopover site network to deal with illegal encampments and the cost to the council to deal with these sites. • Location of sites will bring political pressure depending on local objections.

Economic: • Council unable to fund as many developments as it would hope for. • Financial cost to the council of disposing of sites to Housing Associations at nil or minimal cost.

Page 6 of 9

• High percentage requirements can render some housing developments uneconomic, particularly where other forms of developer contributions are involved. • Concentration of HMO accommodation may impact on the economy of the local area, including tourism and the housing market. • Financial cost to the council with regards to clean up of illegal encampments. • Cost of legal action to address unauthorised stopover sites.

Social: • If the shortage of affordable housing is not addressed, social problems such as homelessness will not be tackled and may even worsen. • Given decreasing levels of central government subsidy, less social rented housing than desired will be built. • The demand for HMO accommodation, particularly in relation to St. Andrews, needs to be addressed to ensure that there is a balance between competing demands for accommodation and that mixed and balanced communities are maintained. • Location of sites could bring social problems depending on local objections. • Cultural differences between the Gypsy travelling groups could create issues if different families are located near each other or on the same potential stopover sites.

Technical: • Affordable Housing - None. • HMO – the effective monitoring and review of HMO policy could be technically demanding and resource intensive.

Legal: • Retention of housing as being affordable. • Discretionary links between licensing/planning are now allowed under the Private Rented Housing (Scotland) Act 2011. • Having a network of stopover sites gives Fife Council more legal powers to move illegal encampments on straight away to sites provided. Current legal powers are quite limited.

Environment: • Provision of significant amounts of affordable housing could result in take up of greenfield land with a consequent negative environmental effect. • Provision of affordable housing could help to reuse and rehabilitate brownfield land • Concentration of HMO accommodation may have impacts on aspects of the built environment. • Clean up of illegal encampments can have environmental issues depending on the nature objects left behind.

Page 7 of 9

OPTIONS

1 Continue with current policy approach: the current approach to affordable housing is relatively up to date, having been approved by Fife Council in the autumn of 2011. It will however, require time to settle down. Maintaining the current policy approach to HMOs is not an option, given that the SPG requires to reviewed in 2013.

2 Monitor and amend the current policy approach (the preferred option): the current policy approach to affordable housing is relatively up to date but the housebuilding industry is still struggling to recover in the current economic climate and may find contributions onerous. HNDA figures on housing need do need to be factored into the calculation but there is a real risk that percentage requirements could increase in some areas beyond the level that developments could sustain. Lessons can be learnt from the updating of the Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) and 3 recent Local Plan Examinations. The target of 2,700 new homes for rent by 2017 should be taken into account. Although the current policy approach to HMO accommodation is relatively up to date it requires to be reviewed, in terms of assessing the impact of the SPG, in St. Andrews, and address any emerging Fife wide issues.

3 Discontinue implementation of the policy: in terms of affordable housing, this would ease the financial burden for housebuilders (sites of under 5 units are exempt from making contributions) and perhaps encourage more housebuilding. However one of the key issues for the Council would not be addressed. In terms of addressing HMO provision, it is likely that there would be an unacceptable political risk with this option.

4 Allocate stopover sites in Local Development Plan – The provision of stopover sites will enable the Council to deal more effectively with unauthorised encampments and minimise the current costs of legal action and cleaning/removal of waste. This will also make the planning process smoother when applications are submitted for stopover sites. At this stage there is only one potential stopover site progressing towards planning application stage.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1 Preferred Option for the MIR should be to update our Development Plan approach in line with the latest information from the current SPG and Local Plan Examinations.

2 Explore how the planning system can be used to meet the target of 2,700 new affordable homes for rent by 2017.

Page 8 of 9

3 Identify sites and appropriate infrastructure; review housing type, size and locational priorities; and identify design and construction requirements.

4 Review the implementation and efficacy of the current policy and SPG re HMOs in terms of the intended aim of achieving a balanced and sustainable community.

5 Explore how the planning system can contribute to the appropriate and effective provision of housing for multiple occupancy through liaison with the licensing authority, interest groups and, specifically, the University of St. Andrews, in relation to the town. However, there is also varying demand for HMO accommodation elsewhere in Fife.

6 Need to zone any potential stopover sites in the LDP to give these sites planning status or have a form of words stating that potential stopover sites will be investigated through the lifetime of the LDP. Also zoning the permanent Gypsy Traveller sites on the proposals map might help as this will show the public where these sites are.

7 Policy H4 needs to be to include reference to stopover sites in the first sentence and in the reasoning as well as permanent sites.

Page 9 of 9

Fife LDP Technical Paper 5 DESIGN AND PLACE

POLICY REFERENCES

National

National Planning Framework 2 paragraphs: 13, 14, 23, 50, 78, 80, 82, 85 and 137. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs: 14, 37, 39, 40, 42, 44, 57, 60, 77-79, 83, 110- 117, 122, 159, 169, 255 and 256. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Designing Places http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212607/0099824.pdf

Designing Streets http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/307126/0096540.pdf

Regional

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policies SS1, H6, T1, ENV5 and paragraphs 1.21, 1.22, 3.59 and 4.1. http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

Tayplan policies 2 and 6 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

Sesplan Proposed Plan Policies 1B, 8, and 15. Paragraphs 17 and 127 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

Supplementary

Creating a Better Fife: Fife Urban Design Guide http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_udg.pdf

Public Art

Page 1 of 15

OTHER REFERENCES

Planning Advice Notes

PAN67: Housing Quality http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/47032/0026427.pdf

PAN68: Design Statements http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/47133/0026407.pdf

PAN77: Designing Safer Places http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/95658/0023159.pdf

PAN78: Inclusive Design http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/95636/0023150.pdf

PAN83: Masterplanning http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/244134/0068213.pdf

Other

Green Infrastructure: Design and Placemaking http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/362219/0122541.pdf

Polnoon: Residential Streets Project http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/296766/0092264.pdf

Delivering Better Places in Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/336587/0110158.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Planning is important in determining how places look, how it feels to live and work in them, and how we use them. ‘Places’ can be whole towns or small neighbourhood areas. Poor design or quality of a place damages public perception of planning and, more importantly, can be harmful to the quality of life of those who stay in and use those places. Design is therefore a high priority for development planning as it affects society, the economy, and the environment.

Current Status

The role of design in the creation of successful and sustainable places was first set out in national policy by Designing Places in 2001. The policy targeted attitudes, expectations and practices across a broad range of delivery mechanism and those aimed at development planning have been incorporated within Fife’s adopted and emerging Development Plans and guidance.

Page 2 of 15

Designing Places made the design of a development a material consideration in determining planning applications.

The document provided a framework for incorporating design in Development Plans through:

• Establishing effective policies on design and the physical form of new development; • Establish how the planning process can address design by specifying when spatial frameworks are required, the level of detail they contain and expected outcomes; • Setting out Supplementary Planning Guidance that reflects local priorities and a distinctive vision for each area.

The current suite of adopted and emerging Local Plans includes the following in relation to design and place: • Identifying areas where additional design guidance is required; • Development frameworks for substantial areas of growth; • Policies on development quality encompassing design and environmental impact; and • Policies to protect built heritage and cultural assets.

The Local Plans directly reference design with policies E3 and E4 but many others influence the location and form of new developments.

Local Plan Policy E3 (Development Quality – Environmental Impact) references a broad range of expectations that can be addressed by spatial design (layout, siting, orientation) and built form (water, energy, waste).

Local Plan Policy E4 (Development Quality – Design) references a broad range of considerations for spatial design (layout, open spaces, existing features, routes), built form (form, scale, details, materials) and outcomes (protects amenity, enhance community safety.

The Fife Urban Design Guide (2005) sets out additional design principles.

Reason for assessment

During the production of the new Local Plans, the Scottish Government has published a second national policy Designing Streets (2010) and a range of design-related Planning Advice Notes. In addition, a new focus on development delivery in the context of design-led approaches to public engagement and planning is emerging. More recently, the Scottish Government has announced a review of Scottish Planning policy that will emphasise place making and focus the revised policy on sustainable economic growth.

Page 3 of 15

Collaboration

The Scottish Government has led initiatives in recent years that have moved towards more practical guidance on creating better places and these include the Scottish Sustainable Communities Initiative, Charrette Mainstreaming Programme, Scotland’s Housing Expo, Polnoon and the Delivering Better Places in Scotland guide. This work has been supported by Architecture and Design Scotland, mainly through the Urbanism programme. We now understand that a more collaborative approach to creating our plans increases the chances of achieving sustainable development that supports Fife’s communities.

Fife Council has participated or led a number of pilot projects that have tested and explored new ways of achieving better designed development which is also economically viable and so can happen in a recessionary climate; the Council can use this experience to reflect upon the best approach to use in Fife.

Climate Change

There have been advances in understanding how Development Planning can moderate the impact of development on climate change and how it can support the creation of a low carbon future in Scotland. Scottish Government research has culminated in the launch of SPACE (Spatial Planning Assessment of Climate Emissions) and this identifies the importance of an understanding of development form (size, scale, etc) within Development Planning. This new tool is still in the early stages but we do know that by showing as much detail as possible within development proposals, as early as possible, it enables a more accurate assessment of a developments impact on climate change.

The Fife Sustainability Checklist aims to achieve more sustainable developments by influencing their design but having this separate to design guidance could be leading to confusion on Fife’s aspirations for new development. A more concise policy related to the physical outcomes of development (building, streets and spaces) may provide the framework for better considering complex issues.

Development Delivery

Recent Scottish Government reports on development delivery and viability have identified that integrating business planning within the design and planning process may increase the chances of securing investment for important infrastructure whilst ensuring planned development takes place. They have also identified that a ‘measured model’ approach to development charges linked to a spatial framework (setting out buildings, streets and spaces) is most likely to support delivery.

A clearer method of identifying the priorities of a particular place (town, neighbourhood, etc) in a more visual way can support public and stakeholder engagement, which in turn can allow better decision making.

The Local Development Plan has the potential to include ‘broad moves’ within settlement strategies to provide a vision more closely linked to delivery e.g. school locations are fixed (within parameters) with finance understood.

Page 4 of 15

A particular outcome from the Delivering Better Places in Scotland guide for Development Planning was a better appreciation of the public sector role in helping the private sector to deliver development, focus investment and increase certainty by:

• controlling the spatial development framework; and • achieving fast and co-ordinated regulatory approvals

Providing more clarity on place priorities (settlements) through the LDP could support Fife Council to focus on delivering the most important changes

Design policies

There is now a better understanding of the design process’s role at all scales of development (region, town, neighbourhood) in creating, shaping and delivering successful places. Of particular relevance for the Local Development Plan is a clearer understanding of the relationship between:

• settlement strategies (as set out in the Local Development Plan); • the influence of core policies on the location, type (houses, shops, businesses, etc) and form (size, appearance, etc) of new development; • the role of content of design-related Supplementary Planning Guidance policies e.g. Fife Urban Design Guide; and • spatial frameworks and place-specific design policies.

RISK

Political • There is a risk that new approaches for creating and delivering new development are not sufficiently understood and not supported publicly or politically.

Economic • The positive impacts of investment in infrastructure and new development in Fife may not be fully exploited due to the low number of ‘frameworks’ that coordinate settlement planning. • Longer term benefits of new development for people are not supported due to recessionary pressure to support development’s more immediate, shorter term and limited economic benefits; • The economic value of better designed places is perhaps not well understood despite being set out in publications such as The Value Handbook (CABE, 2006) • Long term costs of not designing to mitigate or accommodate climate change begin to impact on Council services and expenditure.

Page 5 of 15

Social • Poor quality places are understood to have negative impacts on the health, education and job prospects of the people who live in them. Well conceived planning and design proposals can contribute to the Scottish Governments desired shift towards taking preventative action.

Technical • There an ongoing need to improve the technical ability, effectiveness and confidence of officers and members engaged in design and place matters to ensure Fife delivers the most suitable development • Development Planning design guidance (settlement plan, core policies, supplementary planning guidance, etc) does not necessarily establish clear priorities for customers and investors in Fife.

Environmental • Current Development Planning policy does not clearly establish the specific design-related policy actions required by new development to address climate change and how they relate to Building Regulations. • Impacts on the built environment of poor design plus the long term impacts on the natural environment of unsustainable development.

OPTIONS

Option 1 – Do nothing

The current local plans include two core policies directly referencing design: E3 and E4.

Other policies affecting the location and form of a development (place shaping) continue to be considered in parallel to design e.g. E5 Housing and Open Space, T2 traffic safety in New Development.

The principles within the Fife Urban Design Guide (Supplementary Planning Guidance) elaborate slightly on the core policies without providing much additional guidance for planning applications.

The Fife Masterplans Handbook remains as non-statutory guidance. Whilst this document provides some useful guidance, ‘Planning Advice Note 83 Masterplanning’ is considered more up to date but elements of this are also now superceded.

Designing Streets (National Planning Policy) is not currently represented within Fife’s planning policy guidance.

The Local Development Plan continues to identify broad ‘development concepts’ for key areas of growth e.g. Strategic Land Allocations. The creation and adoption of Development Frameworks for key development sites (urban extensions, employment, mixed use, etc) to guide land use, infrastructure and phasing

Page 6 of 15

decisions is inconsistent. Development frameworks and masterplans of different scales are adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance on an adhoc basis without consistent triggers for production

The current process of design is represented in Figure 1. This explains the process of setting out new development generally begins with a site allocation within the Local Development Plan. Two routes are then available:

1. A Development Brief (led by the Council or Developer) creates more certainty over the likely ‘form’ (buildings, streets, spaces) to inform a subsequent planning application : or 2. An application is submitted and Fife Council apply design related policies to the proposal

Page 7 of 15

Figure 1: Option 1 – current process

Option 2

Page 8 of 15

Option 2

Core policy

The proposed approach to rationalising core policies within the Local Development Plan is expected to focus on three themes:

• Place: Mitigate climate change and create sustainable development; • People: Support healthy lifestyles and education; and • Economy: Support sustainable economic growth and jobs

To support this approach a consolidation and updating of design-related policies could be undertaken so they better relate to the planning process.

1. Site Location 2. Site Assessment 3. Development Proposal 4. Development Evaluation

Policy E3 and E4 and the Fife Urban Design Guide would be deleted and replaced by a single core policy called ‘New Development’. This policy would set out the overarching design principles and process for all new development drawn from Designing Places, Designing Streets and Scottish Planning Policy. This approach could focus polices on the outcome of the planning system: new development.

Site Location

All new development proposals in Fife could follow the same planning and design process no matter where they are located. The only aspect that changes at the beginning of the Development Planning process is ‘Site Location’ e.g. coastal, town centre, conservation area, urban extension, etc.

The core policies currently addressing ’location’ could be grouped together to more clearly establish their relationship to a Place e.g. neighbourhood, whole town, regional:

1. Development in the countryside (E15 & E16) 2. Development on the coast (E27) 3. Outwith settlement envelopes (E1) 4. Allocated development sites 5. Areas of mixed use (B4) 6. Within settlement envelopes e.g. town centre, windfall(E2)

At this early stage in the Development Planning Process, ‘connections’ could be considered the most important aspect of new development. This includes access to Fife’s Core Path network, countryside, existing streets, existing spaces and community facilities such as schools and shops. The most sustainable new developments are likely to be those where people can readily access leisure opportunities, job locations and friends without using the car.

Page 9 of 15

Using ‘Development outwith settlements envelopes’ as an example (see figure 2), this stage:

• does concern if new residents / employees access can existing open spaces and core paths to support their use; • does not concern how spaces within the development are designed; • does concern if the development can easily connect with existing streets, cycle routes, core paths, footpaths; • does not concern how the developments street network is laid out

This stage could be a suitable point to determine whether Supplementary Planning Guidance is required in the form of a Development Framework.

Page 10 of 15

Figure 2: example of site context Site Assessment, Development Proposal and Development Evaluation

Page 11 of 15

The ‘New Development’ core policy would establish overall design principles and establish how a particular development should consider its ‘location’.

The detail of how ‘New Development’ should be taken forward within the site boundary (Form) would be set out within a ‘New Development’ supplementary planning guidance that consolidates, simplifies and replaces existing policies and guidance.

The ‘New Development’ SPG could be structured as follows:

• Site Assessment (Context & Capacity): having previously established a proposed developments ‘connections’ to its ‘Place’ ( neighbourhood, town) a site assessment would be carried out to build upon information set out within the LDP candidate site assessment process and Strategic Environmental Assessment if allocated for development. The assessment stage would identify the policy context to establish whether natural or built environment assets require protection and the ability of the land to be developed. This stage could be undertaken by an applicant as part of a planning application or addressed as the first stage in a Development Framework. This section could consolidate the following core policies and related guidance:

• Natural: E19 Local Landscape Areas, Trees on Development Sites (E25) Tree Presentation Orders (E24), Local biodiversity (E22) Protection of biodiversity (E23), E21 European Protected Species, E20 Water Environment. • Built: E7 Conservation Area, E8 Listed Buildings, E9 Demolition of a Listed Building E10 Protection of Orchard and Riggs, E11 Historic Gardens, E12 Ancient Monuments & Archaeological Sites • Physical: E6 Contamination, I3 Water and sewerage, flooding and water quality (I4)

• Development Proposals. This section could establish a clear policy structure to focus on the common components of new development: buildings, streets and spaces. Expectations on the level of information expected could be aligned with the two levels of planning application:

• Planning Permission in Principle – establish key parameters such as open space and street hierarchy, water strategy, energy strategy, phasing, etc (similar parameters to a Development Framework); and • Full Application: - establish detailed arrangements of individual buildings, street layout and multifunction open spaces.

This section could replace the following core policies under a number of key headings:

• Spaces & Green Infrastructure : This could address open space hierarchy (hard and soft), street trees, surface water and has the potential to bring together the following policies:-

Page 12 of 15

Housing development and open space (E5), new tree planting (E26), Allotments (C6), open space & urban parks (C4), public open space (C5), Suds (i5)

• Streets and blocks : This would translate the principles of Designing Streets and replace the current Transportation interim statement. Transportation Development Guidelines could be reviewed and updated to reflect the introduction of the subject in its new status as a National Planning Policy. This could replace Traffic Safety in New Development (T2), street furniture (E13). Aspects of block layout can be included, the transport network (T1) can be addressed here and through the site assessment process.

• Buildings : this would set out key considerations for that new developments would be expected to address at and would replace the Sustainability Checklist.

• Public Art : a theme that can be applied to buildings, streets or spaces (using current SPG and replacing core policy E14)

• Energy : an overall strategy for a development is required

• Assessing Proposals : a ‘Design and Access Statements’ approach would establish the evaluation tool for assessing new developments against the development requirements. This would broadly follow the evaluation questions set out in PAN 68 Design Statements and Pan 83 Masterplanning:

Page 13 of 15

The ‘New Development’ SPG detail would delete and replace:

• The Fife Urban Design Guide • The Fife Masterplans Handbook • Transportation interim Guidance on Designing Streets. • Sustainability Checklist • Relevant Development Management Guides

Page 14 of 15

Option 3

In addition to Option 2, key development principles would be established for key LDP allocations during the Proposed Plan preparation period using the Candidate Site Assessment information. These principles would set key parameters and aspirations within the LDP to establish the ‘outline brief’ for a more detailed development framework or directly inform a planning application.

The development principles would set out elements that are considered important in a particular location whilst not being over prescriptive (allowing for flexibility of future uses). This work could be carried out in house and the principles could be developed through workshops with the promoters of the sites (as done for the Lochgelly SPTG). It is anticipated that a number of such sites might be identified across Fife to develop these development principles (the Area of Mixed Use at Invertiel would be an example of one such site). If successful then this option could be considered for mainstreaming within future Local Development Plans

To support the understanding of local built and natural characteristics, a programme of local design guides could be developed to support applicants prepare development proposals that exhibit local characteristics.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The development planning process can provide more certainty on the expectations of new development in terms of their relationship to delivering strategic outcomes such as health, climate change, education and employment. There are some issues to address;

1. How to rationalise current design related local plan policies and prepare new supplementary guidance and still provide sufficient safeguards to development quality. 2. How to address the energy strategy issue which is a matter beyond the scope of the development plan. 3. Finding a means to collaborate with the development community and communities to assess design – for example, through a design forum and the Fife LDP Exchange. 4. Should the LDP concentrate on identifying locations for new development and leave the detail or form and layout to supplementary guidance such as masterplans, and design frameworks? Or should the LDP identify key elements that provide the basis of form e.g. streets and development blocks, land uses, etc

The aim of this approach is to create a decision making process that enables easy identification of barriers preventing development delivery and meeting policy outcomes. There would be no separation between sustainable development, good development and average development. Decision making would be better able to identify whether development had achieve the desired aims of a particular site.

Page 15 of 15

Fife LDP Technical Paper 6 Education

POLICY REFERENCES

There is no policy guidance relating to planning and education in terms of a National Planning Framework or Scottish Planning Policy.

SESplan Proposed Plan November 2011; Para. 18 Spatial Strategy, Page 9 – Figure 2 Strategic Infrastructure, Policy 1A Development Locations, Policy 5 Housing Land, Policy 9(c) Infrastructure (Developer Contributions) http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan; Page 6 Vision & Objectives, Policy 4 Strategic Development Areas, Policy 5 Housing, Policy 8 Delivering the Strategic Development Plan http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Para. 9 The Vision, Policy SDA1 Strategic Development Areas, Proposal PDC1 Developer Requirements http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES Planning Circular 1/2010 - this circular provides guidance on the processes for determining the need for, and negotiation of, planning agreements.

Statutory Duty of Fife Council Education Service In Fife, the Education Authority discharges its duty by operating a “catchment” system to enable parents/carers to comply with their duty to secure education for their children. Postcodes for each address in Fife are associated to a denominational and a non-denominational primary and secondary school known as catchment schools.

Future provision Future education provision is analysed each year to ensure there are sufficient places for future demand.

School roll projections are the arithmetic result of applying historical trends and future assumptions to current pupil numbers and school catchment areas. These trends and assumptions are supported by information of varying currency which is

Page 1 of 4

reviewed and updated as necessary and when new information becomes available.

The following information is used to inform the roll projection model - Pre-school children from the Community Health Index (CHI), pupil movement from pre-school to P1, school rolls based on published census data, school capacities, new housing development included in the published Housing Land Audit, pupil distribution factor P1-P7 and S1-S4, staying on rate S5/S6, adjustment and external constraints (National Records Scotland (NRS) figures) and class organisation model of how primary stages are structured.

Catchment areas (at August 2012)

There are 17 non-denominational secondary catchment areas and 2 denominational secondary catchment areas which divides all postcodes in Fife.

There are 128 non-denominational primary school catchments and 14 non- denominational primary school catchment areas.

For information on school catchment areas, please visit www.fifedirect.org.uk/catchment checker and choose from the left hand column either non-denominational or denominational (faith) schools.

Fife Council Priorities

Fife Council’s Education Service is currently undertaking a review of the conditions and use of the school estate.

School Estates Strategy

The Education Service has an approved strategy, dated August 2009, to remove all modular hutted accommodation within the estate to ensure that pupils are under one roof.

Whilst responding to planning applications to assess the likely impact on catchment schools, the Service considers whether the permanent capacity will be exceeded by the construction of new housing developments.

Modular accommodation is not taken into consideration when responding to planning applications following the approval of the strategic policy in 2009. Modular accommodation will be removed:

• when they are surplus to requirements and replacement accommodation will not be reinstated; • within specified time scales once a predicted school rolls falls; and • when the service will construct permanent extensions to existing buildings.

Page 2 of 4

Strategic Review of Education Provision

The Education Service will continue to review accommodation requirements in line with the emerging demand for pupil places in Fife.

Priorities to ensure new schools are equipped with sustainable features which link to the ECO Schools strategy, Curriculum for Excellence and the overall Councils strategy to reduce the carbon footprint are included in the new Education Service Plan. The carbon footprint for the service will be improved where possible, in partnership with Property Services’ Energy Management Team, the planned maintenance and capital budgets.

Funding models for Investment

The 10 year capital programme for school investment is prioritised in line with the Scottish Government core facts information (ie. condition, suitability, and sufficiency). The capital programme includes the Building Fife's Future programme which has delivered a new Carnegie Primary School in August 2011. Replacement schools are under construction for: Dunfermline High School, and Auchmuty High School. Replacement schools are also planned at Madras College, Burntisland Primary School, a new secondary school located in the east of Kirkcaldy.

Investment themes to deliver individual projects in line with the capital programme are as follows:

• School Replacement and Refurbishments • Environmental Improvements • Safer Schools • Curriculum Enhancements • Under One Roof • Wind and Watertight Inclusion • Fire • Structural • Information Communications Technology

Planning Obligations Contributions

Planning obligations will only be used to offset impacts of new development activity and not to address deficiencies in or the running of the existing school estate. The Financial Frameworks for the St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan, the Mid Fife Plan, and the Dunfermline & West Fife Plan, provides current guidance and sets out the basis of Fife Council’s approach to implementing Structure Plan Policy DC1.

Currently Fife Council is updating this approach and Fife wide supplementary guidance on planning obligations is being published with the Main Issues Report. This supplementary guidance provides further detail on the methodology for

Page 3 of 4

securing contributions to the school estate and develops the potential concept of further business planning towards the establishment of the Fife Infrastructure Investment Framework.

Risks

Political

• School rolls capacity, catchment, and school conditions remain high on the political/community agendas. Planning has a role in helping to reconcile/mitigate issues.

Economic

• The cost to the council and development sector of providing new schools and their impact on capital budgets and development viability

Social

• Schools are important element in forming the basis of social and community life in both established and new communities

Legal

• The planning system cannot address all matters as some are better dealt with through other legislation

Environmental

• The design of new and replacement schools can influence the environment and urban design.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

It will be important for the Council’s Education Service to continue to be closely involved in discussions on the impact of new developments on the school estate.

Policy on Safe routes to school - masterplans should address the issue of routes. Schools should work with communities and developers to work up travel plans and establish safe routes.

Page 4 of 4

Fife LDP Technical Paper 7 Employment Land

POLICY REFERENCES Scottish Government:

National Planning Framework 2 (NPF2) - June 25 2009 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/National-Planning- Policy/npf Government Economic Strategy 2011 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/357756/0120893.pdf Scottish Planning Policy 2010 (Feb 2010) http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Council: Development Plan

Fife Structure Plan 2009 Specific reference to Proposal PE1

TAYPlan Strategic Development Plan 2012

Relevant current Local Plan Policies:

D1 Developer Contributions B1 Established Employment Areas - Safeguarding B2 Protecting Existing Employment/Tourism/Local Community Facilities B3 Working From Home B4 Areas of Mixed Use T1 The Transport Network T2 Traffic Safety in New Development

OTHER REFERENCES Fife Employment Land Strategy 2006 – 2015 Mid Term Review 2012 (weblink) Fife Employment Land Audit 2011 (Feb 2012) (weblink) Growing Fifes Future – Economic Strategy 2009-2020 (weblink)

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Background The Scottish Government’s primary aim, through its own economic strategy and planning policy at subsequent levels, is to create sustainable economic growth.

Page 1 of 10

In order to ensure Fife contributes to this aim, securing an effective supply of available land for employment use is one of Fife Council’s primary economic development functions. In Fife, this role is vital in supporting business requirements, job security and job creation and in assisting the expansion and diversification of the economy.

Without an adequate employment land supply, businesses stagnate and investment opportunities are lost. Not only is this provision important in terms of the quantity of land available, but also it is essential that the supply provides for a wide range of quality offering a breadth of choice, and that it is located in the right places to meet the needs of employers and communities alike (SPP 2010).

Policy and Strategy Fife Structure Plan 2006-2026 (2009) (FSP) and TayPlan Strategic Development Plan (2012) constitute current strategic planning policy for Fife. FSP “seeks to maintain a supply and range of sites that allow flexibility to meet the uncertainty of market needs and safeguard sites for employment use.” (Fife Structure Plan 2009,

pg 28.) A key policy requirement of FSP is the provision of both strategic employment land and a 7-year supply of employment land throughout the 20 key settlements of Fife in order to support sustainable economic growth. The Structure Plan specifies strategic sites in Proposal PE1 (above) and requires identification of sites to meet the 7 year land supply as part of the Local Plan process. Specifically, Policy E1: New Employment Land, stipulates that Local Plans will identify specific employment sites for:

Page 2 of 10

• New strategic sites in Proposal PE1; • A 7-year supply in settlements above 5,000 population and in clusters within rural areas; • Class 4 office use in the sub-regional and district centres; and • Hotels throughout Fife to further assist in growing the economy and tourism sector.

These sites will be safeguarded from prejudicial development . (Fife Structure Plan 2009, pg 29)

Whilst TayPlan is now formally approved, SesPlan is at examination stage, with approval anticipated during 2013. Both SDP’s have differing approaches to the provision of employment land and both differ from the currently approved Structure Plan. The Structure Plan context is covered above, TayPlan requires a 5 year employment land supply while SesPlan requires an adequate supply with strategic sites safeguarded. The strategic sites which are safeguarded match those in the Structure Plan.

The Fife Employment Land Strategy 2006 – 2015 (FELS) highlights the most appropriate interventions needed to make the most significant improvements in available employment land supply across Fife. FELS was produced in light of the strategic planning policy position at the time and is therefore based on the FSP requirement to secure strategic and local supply in the form of 1) strategic sites based on Proposal PE1 and 2) a 7 year land supply across 20 key settlements. The Class 4 provision in centres has been considered separately on a case by case basis and the hotel sector developments are subject to separate scrutiny and support from the tourism specialists within the service and are therefore not being considered within this paper.

The Fife Employment Land Audit 2011 (Jan 2012), informs the strategy (FELS) monitoring the availability and take up of employment land across Fife. The audit categorises available land supply using a traffic light approach. Red implying no or virtually no supply, amber settlements have a partial supply and green settlements are considered to have an adequate 7 year land supply providing a variety of choice to meet demand.

In the latest audit 12 settlements were categorised as being ‘red’, having no immediately available employment land supply. Four settlements are amber, and four are green, having a selection of sites suitable for classes 4, 5 & 6.

In the interests of providing baseline information the latest audit position is provided in the table below:

Page 3 of 10

Settlement Immediately 7 Year Gap in Supply RAG Status Available at Supply 2011 Demand Ballingry/Lochore 0 2.5 -2.5 Red Buckhaven/Methil 2.40 6.5 -4.1 Green Burntisland 0 2.5 -2.5 Red Cardenden/Bowhill 0 2 -2.0 Red Cowdenbeath 0.47 4.5 -4.03 Amber Cupar 0.08 3.5 -3.4 Red Dalgety Bay 0.05 4 -3.95 Red Dunfermline 10.92 18.5 -7.6 Amber East Neuk 0 4 -4.0 Red Glenrothes 3.09 15.5 -12.4 Green Inverkeithing 0 2 -2.0 Red Kelty 0 2.5 -2.5 Amber Kennoway/Windygates 0 2.5 -2.5 Red Kirkcaldy/Dysart 15.90 19 -3.1 Green Leven 0 3.5 -3.5 Red Lochgelly 0 2.5 -2.5 Amber Rosyth 13.34 5 +8.34 Green St Andrews 0 6.5 -6.5 Red Tayport/Newport 0 3.5 -3.5 Red West Villages Fife 0 5.5 -5.5 Red Total Within Key 46.25 116 69.75 - Settlements

Source: Fife Employment Land Audit 2011 (Feb 2012)

It is necessary for the Council to protect both existing and proposed industrial / business parks to prevent the loss of needed employment land and also to prevent unjustified changes of use which could undermine the strategy and lead to an undesirable precedent. It is important for the planning and economic development functions of the Council to work together to ensure that landowner aspiration for higher land/ use values do not strip communities of the need to maintain an adequate supply of class 4, 5 and 6 land needed to provide scope and potential for:

• Local manufacturing which requires a skilled workforce and boosts the potential for supply chain spin off employment; • Business and office space which encourages enterprise and innovation; • Storage and distribution uses which need industrial areas due to amenity issues associated with traffic movements and noise; • Wealth generating employment, requiring a skilled workforce and providing economic equality and stability in our communities.

On the basis that employment uses are set apart from other commercial and leisure uses and specifically referenced in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 and given the unique qualities as specified in the bullets above which relate to employment uses, it needs to be clear to applicants/developers that other job creating uses such as retail, do not off-set the need for employment uses to be accommodated. Other uses such as retail/commercial and residential will be accommodated within the plan and

Page 4 of 10

allocated accordingly to meet the particular needs of communities, taking account of population expansion and retail capacity. Therefore it is important to recognise that job creation alone will not create an automatic economic justification to allow a change of use on established, allocated or protected employment land/property.

Protecting Employment Sites and Allocations The need to provide, improve and maintain an adequate supply of employment land across Fife for business growth, investment and job creation and security is clearly defined and justified in policy through national and Fife wide strategies.

Ensuring an adequate supply relies on a number of factors:

1. Protecting existing established employment areas i.e. industrial estates and business parks and individual facilities which make a positive contribution to the economy of a settlement from inappropriate changes of use which would undermine supply for classes 4, 5 & 6 uses; 2. Promoting new employment land allocations for uses within classes 4,5 & 6 and protecting them from inappropriate changes of use and; 3. Where necessary and based on service priorities , direct intervention by the Council (where budget and resources allow) to support the delivery of employment land within Fife. This direct intervention may include using statutory powers including Compulsory Purchase Orders.

The obsolescence of Fifes business and industrial property portfolio is of increasing concern and it is recognised that priorities need to be aligned when protecting these areas from changes of use that the regeneration benefits of brownfield redevelopment are fully considered. It is therefore considered appropriate that when considering new, or reviewing, allocations for employment use that priority is given to redevelopment of established estates. This approach will not be without its challenges, however, established employment areas and estates have a number of advantages over Greenfield development as they are: • Serviced by roads, drainage and utilities – which is essential and the cost of provision is very difficult for a business to absorb when extending, relocating or investing in their business; • Are already recognised as employment areas and are known locally/ regionally to the business community; • Have established uses understood within communities by neighbours, business providers and potential customers/clients; • Redundant buildings do not necessarily sterilise a site/ plot or estate. Once cleared of redundant buildings, the sites can readily be re-used for employment use; • In terms of redevelopment, the potential exists to make a positive contribution to communities through redevelopment priorities, improving the environment both physically and socially. However with those advantages in mind there is a need to have regard to land and development economics which will play an integral part in determining the form of development and/or redevelopment in order to make proposals deliverable.

Page 5 of 10

Delivering Employment Land

Promoting and securing new allocations for employment can only be sustained if existing supply is also protected. However it is accepted that there will be exceptions where loss of employment land will be necessary and justifiable particularly where obsolescence is a recognised issue. In circumstances where obsolescence is a factor, and/or where the development viability of any (re-) development is questionable, cross subsidy from higher land uses may be appropriate to consider. Where higher value uses such as retail and residential can be combined, as part of a mixed use scheme, with employment land provision, it is expected that the higher value uses will enable and cross fund provision and servicing of the employment land. This approach has a dual purpose as it supports the creation of sustainable communities by providing local and accessible employment whilst recognising that the delivery of serviced employment land in isolation can struggle to be commercially viable. Therefore this approach of requiring higher value uses to cross fund the otherwise marginal employment element can equalise the viability of the overall development. A phased approach to the overall delivery of mixed use developments will be agreed at the planning application stage or earlier if possible taking into account development viability.

In these cases, supporting evidence will be needed to secure changes of use but alternative methods of delivery may be considered.

Options may include but are not restricted to: • Cross subsidy from mixed use development where higher value land uses will subsidise the provision of serviced employment land – evidence and justification will be required to determine the appropriate level of cross subsidy needed; • Alternative site provision within settlements – subject to the usual policy considerations; • Commuted sum payments payable to the Council equivalent to the land value of serviced employment land within the settlement, of the same area to be lost, using the District Valuer or other RICS qualified surveyor as agreed with parties to negotiate the relevant value; • Joint venture delivery.

In all cases where the loss of employment land and/or property is proposed it is suggested that local development plan policy reflects the need to seek protection of those areas most important to the economy of Fife.

Capital Investment

In addition to policy, audit and strategy documents the Economic Development Team also has a capital investment plan aimed at delivering the Fife Employment Land Strategy (FELS) and includes a modest allocation for land acquisition and site servicing aimed at improving the employment land supply position across Fife by increasing the number of ‘green’ settlements (FELA 2011). In certain cases, usually where market failure persists, direct intervention by the Council may be the only viable solution to ensuring an adequate supply is achieved and maintained. The Council are happy to consider working with 3 rd parties to achieve results

Page 6 of 10

through joint ventures, direct land acquisition and site servicing. In all cases where the Council become involved in the delivery of employment land, it is the intention that all land transactions will be concluded by negotiation, however in certain circumstances where this is not possible and the delivery of employment land is considered a priority, the Council will consider using its statutory powers to compulsorily acquire land to secure delivery. All of the above is consistent with the approach advocated by the Scottish Government advice in Scottish Planning Policy (2010)(para48,pg 10).

The Emerging Local Development Plan For a number of reasons, the Economic Development Team consider that there is an opportunity when drafting the new local development plan to reconsider the current approach to ensure an adequate employment land supply across Fife. The current factors leading to this recommendation are: • The changing policy position at the strategic development plan level and the associated lack of a consistent approach across the whole of Fife. This creates a lack of clarity for landowners, developers, businesses and planners alike and therefore the LDP can provide the clarity needed to streamline requirements; • The fragility of the current economic environment needs a flexible and conscientious approach to optimise the delivery of an adequate employment land supply; • Constraints on budgets and resources within the service necessitates a more focussed approach to delivering essential employment land in those settlements most able to make a positive contribution, particularly in relation to Fife Council direct intervention priorities; • An ever increasing concern over the continued obsolescence of Fifes existing industrial and business estates; • Recent liaison with private sector land agents has raised concerns over our current approach which is recognised by those representing the business community and land owners as being overly ambitious in relation to the spread of the employment land supply across 20 settlements. Advice to date suggests that our priorities should be concentrated within the main towns with a more local supply to meet indigenous market requirements in smaller settlements.

A full review is suggested of all existing allocated and established employment sites across the 3 existing local plans as part of the LDP preparation. Where it is likely that the delivery of the employment land will not be deliverable, allocations whether stand alone or as part of mixed use allocations will be de-allocated from Development Plan iterations and alternative locations or land uses promoted.

As part of this revised approach it is suggested that as a starting point the LDP will include all strategic sites allocated in the Structure Plan/TayPlan and consider inclusion of those sites in the current 3 local plans (including 2 draft plans) for Fife and those sites included in the FELS Action Plan. Additionally candidate sites will be required in those settlements where sites are considered undeliverable or the supply has been exhausted since the last round of allocations was considered. In formulating a strategy in this regard it is suggested that consideration is given to making 3 tiers of employment land provision:

Page 7 of 10

Tier 1: Specialist Sites – those explicitly required for specialist use e.g. Mossmorran/Energy Park Fife. These areas will have the highest level of protection.

Tier 2 : Strategic Employment Land – those sites set out in Structure and Strategic Development Plans and sites considered to have regional importance or providing a more strategic function in the larger towns of Fife. These sites will provide the largest supply of land for employment across Fife and allocations will include short, medium and longer term supply creating opportunities which are able to respond to market demands when they arise. Strategic sites will include major development opportunities; provide sites for inward investment and larger scale company growth. These sites will include those large land allocations set aside in strategic land allocations. It should be recognised that strategic land will need to be protected for longer term delivery;

Tier 3: General Employment Land – those sites serving a more immediate, localised general employment need. General employment land will help to support and create sustainable, accessible employment at a community level. The highest provision of general employment land will require to be focussed on the larger towns with smaller provision reflected proportionately to the size of settlement and relative to the level of demand. It should however be made clear that latent demand can be an important factor and past take-up alone is insufficient to justify the need, or lack of need, for employment land in a given location.

Supply must offer quality as well as quantity and on the basis of the current constraints to the Fife employment land bank, site servicing should be considered as a necessary minimum to be implemented by the developer or landowner as an integral part of any proposed scheme. This approach is necessary to support the delivery of sustainable communities where employment supply offers choice and certainty. By setting out a variety and choice of sites, with a focus on delivery in the development plan, this approach maximises the outcome potential for economic and business growth and investment across Fife which is responsive to the market.

RISKS

Political:

• Revised priorities of the current administration may not align with the employment land strategy; • Suggested revised strategy to reduce the number of key settlements for focus of employment land delivery may not be supported by the current administration.

Economic:

• The FELS approach may not fit with market preferences and Fife Council interventions may be misdirected resulting in low demand and low commercial return on investment.

Page 8 of 10

• Focus on brownfield redevelopment may impact on development viability.

Social:

• Employment allocations may impact on noise sensitive neighbouring uses and properties • By concentrating the majority of employment provision in fewer settlements, access to employment will less localised, reducing local opportunities for job creation and investment

Technical:

• Ground investigations, access arrangements, topography, drainage and utility availability all have an influence on the delivery of employment land.

Environmental:

• The allocation or use of land for employment activity may create environmental consequences. • The allocation of new Greenfield sites for employment use can impact on existing habitats and ecology. • Concentration of employment in core settlements will result in more traffic movements increasing the likelihood of private car usage of employees as well as movement of goods.

OPTIONS

1) Do nothing: retaining the existing approach outlined in FELS focusing on 20 key settlements Fife wide and a 7 year supply of employment land based entirely on a methodology of 1ha per 2500 population. No strategy for obsolescence of existing employment areas. Equal priority of requirement for employment across 20 key settlements in Fife does not take account of areas of highest demand.

2) Re-focussing of provision of employment land across Fife. This would see the methodology of the employment land designations refocused on a higher provision in fewer core settlements where there is clear evidence of continuing demand. These core settlements benefit from good accessibility, good public transport links and have a proportionately higher population and therefore workforce. The option exists to recalculate the indicators for employment land supply from 1ha for 2500 population taking account of a 3 tiered approach to include specialist, strategic and general supply.

General provision will be proportionately provided across Fife with a reduced supply required in smaller settlements reflecting an indigenous demand. This more localised supply will support sustainable living patterns and provide opportunities for local job creation reducing the need to travel to work.

Both strategic and general supply will include a regeneration focus in areas of existing employment activity suffering from obsolescence.

Page 9 of 10

ISSUES

• The need to consolidate the methodology for the provision of employment land in line with SDP approach. • The need for a 3 tier approach to employment land provision across Fife defining safeguarded, strategic and general employment areas. • The need for appropriate policies to protect employment areas which balance regeneration priorities in areas of obsolescence i.e. protection v’s viability • Consideration is needed of the level of protection necessary for the 3 tiers (ref Dundee LDP) • Revision of FELS is necessary to align with the LDP approach. Therefore FELS will need consolidated as a SPG in advance of the LDP publication. • The need to ensure servicing of employment land as a minimum requirement in LDP allocations • The need for commuted sum payments , where delivery is not possible on site, or in instances where it is agreed that the loss of employment land is justified, will be stated in LDP policy based on serviced employment land value on a site by site basis. This will ensure the payment of commuted sums as replacement value in order to provide alternative, or improve existing employment land supply within Fife. • Through monitoring, where there is lack of delivery and land is allocated for employment purposes, the Council will support and encourage development and if necessary use its statutory compulsory purchase powers to ensure implementation .

Page 10 of 10

Fife LDP Technical Paper 8 Renewables & Energy

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 (NPF2) paragraphs 16-20, 25-26, 122-124, 144- 164 and Maps 7 & 8. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs 34-44 and 182-195 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

National Renewables Infrastructure Plan (N-RIP) (Stages 1 and 2) http://www.scottish- enterprise.com/~/media/SE/Resources/Documents/Sectors/Energy/energy- renewables-reports/National-renewables-infrastructure-plan.ashx

http://www.scottish- enterprise.com/~/media/SE/Resources/Documents/Sectors/Energy/energy- renewables- reports/National%20Renewables%20Infrastructure%20Plan%20Stage%202.ashx

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policy R1- Wind Turbines http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan Policy 10 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Plan Policy 6 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

Fife’s three new Local Plans- Policies I1 and I2 http://www.fifedirect.org.uk/topics/index.cfm?fuseaction=service.display&p2sid=34 AB545C-B5F0-2DEF-269567183AA62D09&themeid=2B482E89-1CC4-E06A- 52FBA69F838F4D24

Fife Minerals Subject Local Plan (Alteration) - Policies MIN1, MIN2 and MIN 2B http://fish.fife/uploadfiles/Publications/Adopted%20Alteration%202011.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/climatechange/scotlands- action/climatechangeact

Page 1 of 18

Scottish Government online renewables resource http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/National-Planning- Policy/themes/renewables

2020 Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/917/0118802.pdf

Renewable Heat Action Plan for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/11/04154534/0

Planning for Micro Renewables Annex to PAN 45 Renewable Energy Technologies http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/10/03093936

Blue Seas - Green Energy A Sectoral Marine Plan for Offshore Wind Energy in Scottish Territorial Waters Part A The Plan http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/346375/0115264.pdf

Securing the Benefits of Scotland's Next Energy Revolution http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/332551/0108218.pdf

PAN 1/2011- Planning and Noise http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/02/28153945/0

Scottish Natural Heritage guidance on wind energy http://www.snh.gov.uk/planning-and-development/renewable-energy/

Fife Council Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance 2011 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_WindEnergyfinal1.pdf

Fife Sustainability Checklist September 2010 - Creating Sustainable Communities and Buildings Supplementary Planning Guidance http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_SustainabilityChecklist. PDF

Fife Council Renewable Energy Customer Guidance http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Renewableenergyguide forFD.pdf

Fife Council Domestic Micro Generation Customer Guidance http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Domesticmicro_generat ionOct11.pdf

Fife Council Community Benefit for Renewable Energy Proposals Guidance Note http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_CommunityBenefitforRe newableEnergyProposalsGuidanceNote.pdf

Fife Council Renewable Energy Routemap- Fife Delivering Scotland’s 2020 Targets (2012)

Page 2 of 18

http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Item4RenewableEnergy Routemap.pdf

ASH Design & Assessment- Identifying Areas of Search for Groupings of Wind Turbines in Fife http://www.fifedirect.org.uk/topics/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&p2sid=9172 CAFB-9AE5-0D3D-166B4C4D6BC0FE15&themeid=2B482E89-1CC4-E06A- 52FBA69F838F4D24

Fife Draft Forestry Strategy- Para- Biomass and Renewable Fuel Sources

ASSESSMENT

The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, which came into force in June 2009, sets a target of reducing emissions, including those from international aviation and shipping, by 80 per cent by 2050. It also sets a world-leading interim target for a 42% cut in emissions by 2020.

Section 72 of the Climate Change Act places obligations on Local Authorities through the introduction of Section 3F of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Specifically Section 3F states that planning authorities, in any local development plan prepared by them, must include policies requiring all developments in the local development plan area to be designed so as to ensure that all new buildings avoid a specified and rising proportion of the projected greenhouse gas emissions from their use, calculated on the basis of the approved design and plans for the specific development, through the installation and operation of low and zero-carbon generating technologies.

The latest and most comprehensive Scottish policy document covering renewable energy targets is the 2020 Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland. Produced by the Scottish Government in June 2011, the Routemap is an update and extension to the Scottish Renewables Action Plan 2009 and is expanded to reflect four key targets:

1. 42% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 2. 100% electricity demand equivalent from renewables by 2020 3. 11% heat demand from renewables by 2020 4. 30% of overall energy demand from renewables by 2020

The commitment to increase the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources is seen by the Scottish Government as a vital part of the response to climate change. Renewable energy generation will contribute to more secure and diverse energy supplies and support sustainable economic growth.

Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) recognises that hydro-electric and onshore wind power are currently the main sources of renewable energy supplies and this is expected to continue but in the medium to longer term will increasingly be part of a wider renewables mix as other technologies become commercially viable. Other technologies which are likely to contribute include biomass, solar, energy from

Page 3 of 18

waste and landfill gas and offshore wind, wave and tidal power generation. Production of heat and electricity from renewable sources will also make an important contribution both at a domestic scale and through decentralised energy and heat supply systems including district heating and biomass heating plants for businesses, public buildings and community/housing schemes.

SPP requires planning authorities to support the development of a diverse range of renewable energy technologies, guide development to appropriate locations and provide clarity on issues that will be taken into account when specific proposals are assessed. Development plans should support all scales of development associated with the generation of energy and heat from renewable sources, ensuring that an area's renewable energy potential is realised and optimised in a way that takes account of relevant economic, social, environmental and transport issues and maximises benefits. Development plans should support the wider application of medium and smaller scale renewable technologies such as decentralised energy supply systems, community and household projects. Development plans should also encourage microgeneration projects including those associated with or fitted to existing buildings.

Development plans and/or supplementary guidance should clearly explain the factors that will be taken into account in decision making on all renewable energy generation developments. Factors relevant to the consideration of applications will depend on the scale of the development and its relationship with the surrounding area, but are likely to include impact on the landscape, historic environment, natural heritage and water environment, amenity and communities, and any cumulative impacts that are likely to arise.

Fife Council has recently published a Renewable Energy Routemap which sets the current benchmark for renewable energy generation in Fife by identifying the potential generating capacity of consented and operational renewable energy developments. At presented the type of renewable energy technology with the largest output in Fife is biomass. Onshore wind is the next largest renewable generator. Table 1 identifies the breakdown of generating capacity from renewable developments in Fife.

The Renewable Energy Routemap also sets a benchmark for Fife’s current progress on reducing carbon emissions and provides an indication of how Government targets will be met in the area; this is set out in Figure 1. Figure 2 gives an indication of how Fife could meet Government targets for electricity demand over time.

Page 4 of 18

Table 1- Energy Consumption in Fife and Renewable Energy Output Total (GWh) Fife’s Total Electricity Consumption (2005) 1,927 Fife’s Annual Household Electricity Consumption (2005) 743

Fife’s Onshore Wind (101 kW+ rated) Developments 171 Fife Council’s Renewable Energy Developments 28 Fife’s Biomass Developments 533 Fife’s Micro-renewables Developments 7 Fife’s Total Renewable Energy Developments* 739 Source: DECC & Fife Council Enterprise, Planning & Protective Services

*Note: includes only developments that are already generating, those that are under construction and those that have received planning permission as at 30 January 2012.

Figure 1: Fife - Progress Towards a 42% Reduction in Carbon Emissions Zero Carbon Emissions 4,000,000 80% Long Term 3,500,000 Target

3,000,000

2,500,000 42% Interim 2,000,000 25% Target CO2 Emissions 1,500,000 14% Reductions CO2 Emissions Anticipated 1,000,000 Reductions

Fife's Emissions CO2 (2005) Achieved 500,000

0 2012 2014 2020 2050 ?

Source: DECC & Fife Council Enterprise, Planning & Protective Services

Figure 2: 100% Electricity Demand Equivalent from Renewable Sources

100% Electricity Generation Target 2000 1,927 GWh

1800

1600

1400 38% 1200 Potential Electricity Generation 1000 (Already Generating + Applications Permitted) 32% 739 GWh 800 Applications Permitted 619 GWh 600 Renewable ElectricityRenewable Generation ) (GWh 400 6% Already Generating 200 120 GWh

0 2012 2014 2014 2020 Source: Department for Energy & Climate Change (DECC) & Fife Council Enterprise, Planning & Protective Services

Page 5 of 18

In 2009 natural gas was recorded as the largest consumed energy source meeting demand in Fife, followed by petroleum products; this is identified in Figure 3. Clearly if Fife is to meet the Government’s ambitious targets then this situation will have to change within the next 8 years by reducing Fife’s dependency on using fossil fuel sources for energy.

Figure 3: Consumption by Energy Type in Fife, 2009

Renewable Energy & Waste Coal Manufactured 1.5% 8.2% Fuels Electricity 0.5% 16.2%

Petroleum Products 27.1%

Natural Gas 46.5%

Source: Department for Energy & Climate Change (DECC)

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Energy generation and climate change are key issues on the Government’s agenda. Renewable energy in particular is a fast moving sector as new technologies begin to emerge, specifically marine renewables. National guidance on renewables is regularly being updated and the Council’s policies must react to this and be flexible enough to accommodate a variety of energy generation facilities and technologies. At the same time the differences in technologies and the very different planning issues that they raise must have appropriate policy cover to ensure they are planned in a sensible and sustainable way.

It is also important to note that whilst renewable energy is becoming more established and important in the planning arena, there will still be requirements for other forms of energy generation. Particularly in relation to the non-nuclear baseloads as are referenced in the National Planning Framework (NPF)2 where Longannet Power Station is one of a number of large power stations designated as a national priority for replacement or upgrade. Other technologies including hydraulic fracturing, coal bed methane extraction and coal bed gasification are also emerging as sources of energy that remain reliant on alternative forms of fossil fuel extraction (refer to Technical Note 3 Minerals). It is expected that the move towards a low carbon economy will feature as a key theme in future iterations of the NPF and may establish, with the support of the Government’s renewables

Page 6 of 18

routemap, how the creation of a mix of renewable and more traditional energy generation technologies will be achieved at the National level. In order to achieve the Scottish Heat targets there may be a requirement for parts of national energy generation to be moved from the larger traditional power station model to more localised delivery models utilising district heat and energy networks.

Figure 4- NPF2 Electricity Transmission System Diagram

In order to establish a modernised national energy grid the Government has also identified “electricity grid reinforcements” setting out upgrade requirements for power transmission lines; the Beauly to Denny power line upgrade being one such example. As is identified in Figure 5, at present Fife does not prominently feature in the National grid upgrade requirements, however this could change in the future as technologies change and more renewable technologies begin generating. There is

Page 7 of 18

also specific reference to proposals for the development of Sub-Sea grids to assist in meeting UK and Scottish energy needs but also to allow export of electricity to other mainland European countries that would benefit the Scottish Economy. This sub-sea network would link proposed Marine Energy renewables to the wider grid allowing them to contribute to meeting the country’s energy requirements.

Figure 5- NPF2 Transmission System Reinforcements Diagram

A Draft Plan for Offshore Wind Energy in Scottish Territorial Waters was produced by Marine Scotland in 2010. This document has been consulted upon however no finalised version of the plan has been published yet. This document identifies the locations of proposed offshore wind farms around Scotland’s coast including within the East region (Forth/Tay) of Scotland (refer to Technical Note 25- Coastal Planning). It is expected that offshore/marine renewables will make a significant contribution as future energy generation sources.

Page 8 of 18

At present policy R1 in the Fife Structure Plan is the principal policy for wind energy developments. This policy sets out planning policy and spatial strategy requirements to guide the local plans, while also setting out development management policy considerations for assessing planning applications for all scales of wind turbine developments. Policy 6 in the approved TAYplan SDP replaces Policy R1 for the northeast area of Fife. Policy 10 in the SESplan proposed plan will provide strategic context for the remaining parts of Fife once approved, replacing Policy R1 in its entirety.

Policies I1 and I2 in the new Local Plans cover all forms of renewable energy technologies and proposed district heating networks without being overly specific about each of the differing technologies or models for implementation.

There are no planning policies that specifically cover the more traditional forms of energy generation; for example if a proposal came forward for a gas power station, or for replacing Longannet power station with an equivalent coal or oil powered plant (development’s below S36/S37 Electricity Act size thresholds). The Scottish Government has identified a requirement to maintain a non-nuclear baseload capacity of energy generation which will necessitate some more traditional forms of energy generation to be maintained. Technologies such as carbon capture and the use of clean coal and gas plants are being explored to ensure carbon emissions are minimised. There is also some encouragement for alternative forms of energy including coal-bed methane and onshore oil extraction therefore appropriate policy coverage must be developed to manage any proposals that might come forward. Furthermore there are no planning policies covering grid infrastructure developments such as pylons and transmission lines, transformers or sub-stations. Such proposals are currently assessed using other policies such as policy E1 development outwith settlement envelopes.

Fife’s Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) was produced originally in 2008, and was updated in 2011. This provides the most detailed guidance for assessing wind energy proposals and does set out a spatial strategy and policies for wind turbines. This document is now aligned with the requirements set out in SPP as is set out below, but will require to be updated as more wind energy developments are approved in Fife to address cumulative impacts, landscape capacity and any other relevant issues. This is particularly relevant to the identified areas of search which will need to be revised as schemes are approved and become operational. As the pressure to develop renewable energy technologies increases a number of developers are applying for wind turbines outwith the approved area of search and continue to challenge the Council’s policies and guidance. Policy R2 in the document sets out guidance for wind energy shoreline landfall installations providing support for such developments subject to meeting criteria that seeks protection of communities, biodiversity and the local environment from any potential adverse effects. Policy R3 in the guidance specifically covers offshore activities providing general support for offshore renewable energy development provided that it does not have significant adverse effects.

Page 9 of 18

The document sets out considerations that must be taken into account when planning for wind energy which includes identifying and defining constraints on wind energy development using the Government’s three-stage assessment process. It defines a spatial strategy for wind energy development based on the conclusions of the three-stage assessment and is supported by the ASH Landscape Capacity Assessment. Stage 1 and 2 constraints on wind energy development, as defined in Government guidance, are identified on Figure 6. Stage 1 constraints are coloured dark red, stage 2 constraints are coloured in pink or by symbols representing site specific constraints. One constraint that the Council has had more limited information on to be able to fully define spatially are areas where cumulative impact have, or are being reached. As developments are approved and landscape change occurs it is appropriate to consider any changes to constraints as they develop. It is also appropriate to consider what the limits to landscape change should be to ensure such effects are limited in nature.

Figure 6- Stage 1 & 2 Constraints on Wind Energy Development in Fife

Areas identified as white in Figure 6 are reviewed under stage 3 of the process including establishing the landscape capacity in these areas for possible development. To date Fife Council has been unable to establish areas of search for the development of 20MW+ wind farms. The reason being for this is the numerous overlapping constraints in the area which make it extremely difficult to give certainty of acceptability or to provide definitive solutions for development in the absence of detailed site specific information. The ASH Landscape Capacity Assessment reached similar conclusions on the scale of development appropriate in Fife as the complexity of smaller landscape character areas combined with a high number of receptors makes larger scale development difficult to achieve

Page 10 of 18

without there being significant and potentially unacceptable effects. However while being unable to define areas of search for larger wind farms the Council has defined a spatial strategy for smaller scale wind energy developments in order to positively plan and assist in achieving the Government’s targets. The current approved area of search in Fife is shown at Figure 7.

Figure 7- Existing Fife Wind Energy Area of Search

A review is now taking place on the Council’s wind energy policies and guidance. The recent call for a moratorium on determining wind energy applications in Fife until current guidance, policies and the spatial strategy for onshore wind are reviewed and updated accordingly was not given Government support. Any review is to be undertaken following extensive consultation with local communities. The Scottish Government has recently stipulated that spatial frameworks for onshore wind turbines are to be developed through the formal development plan process, either forming part of Strategic Development Plans (SDP) or Local Development Plans (LDP) rather than interim SPG.

In reaction to these issues the following actions have been progressed in the short term by the Development Plan team. A report went before the Council’s planning committee in August 2012 which will set out how a review of onshore wind turbine planning policies and guidance will be carried out and how it will consult with communities on onshore wind energy issues. It was agreed that any such review and consultation should be done as part of the formal preparation of the LDP to allow for all issues to be addressed rather than wind energy in isolation. An external planning and landscape consultancy were appointed by the Council who have completed a detailed study on cumulative impacts and landscape capacity in Fife for onshore wind turbines. An interactive GIS layer has also been developed

Page 11 of 18

identifying the locations of approved onshore wind turbines and planning applications for wind turbines. This will be made publicly available on FifeDirect to assist developers and members of the public.

Customer guidance was produced in 2008 for all other forms of renewable energy, but this is now ageing and will eventually require updating to ensure that any new issues or technologies are identified and therefore robust planning guidance is put in place to address these. Guidance on micro-generation assists in setting out when planning permission is not required for smaller scale renewables, i.e. when development falls within permitted development rights.

The Scottish Government provided funding for Fife Council and Perth and Kinross Council to develop heat maps. The aim is to use a range of data to provide a proxy heat for properties. All information has been aggregated to provide a GIS grid level estimate of demand. The map will be valuable for future heat planning and can assist the Council when planning expansion areas and development sites where there may be an opportunity to explore potential for creating local or district scale heating systems and/or on-site renewable energy generation technologies. The heat map can also assist in the future preparation of the LDP and potentially the SDPs, identifying earlier in the process, opportunities for exploiting heat demand. A further benefit could be to potentially use the map information for monitoring purposes, for example demonstrating that the local authority area is meeting its Government energy efficiency targets over a timeframe as part of the SEA or action plan process. Fife Council is considering options for further development, including bringing all forms of energy information together to create a Fife energy map.

RISKS

Political: • The Scottish Government is highly supportive of renewable energy • Local Authorities must support the delivery of projects where technologies can operate efficiently and environmental and cumulative effects can be satisfactorily addressed. • There is increasing support for locally generated and owned energy, including heat generation. • Planning for energy facilities of all kinds is an extremely controversial area of planning. Technology differences offer their own unique differences in the issues that must be addressed. Such developments often fall into the category of “bad neighbour development”. • Wind energy has seen the biggest polarisation of views and is frequently featured in newspaper articles, largely reacting to the views of anti-wind campaigners, elected members and the development industry. • There is currently local opposition to the provision of onshore wind turbines which is resulting in a number of planning applications being refused.

Economic: • There are a number of positive benefits on Fife’s economy by supporting the development of energy generation facilities, particularly including Local

Page 12 of 18

employment opportunities and supporting Fife’s aim to be a centre for renewable energy skills, training and education • The introduction of the Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) can provide an income stream to local landowners. • Community benefits can be gained from projects in the form of a financial or other economic or social benefit.

Social: • Energy facilities, if inappropriately located have the potential to have adverse effects on communities. • The extraction of fossil fuel sources for energy generation such as onshore coal, oil or gas extraction can have significant impacts upon communities. • There are social benefits in supporting forms of localised energy generation including district heating systems or community wind turbine projects. • Locally cited and even owned energy generation may be a powerful tool in changing the attitudes toward energy use that facilitates the move toward a low carbon Scotland.

Technical: • All energy generation technologies present their own technical challenges resulting from the differences in the way that they operate. Issues range from pollution/emissions, noise, vibration, transport and visual impact. Each technology presents differing levels of impact on the natural environment, landscape setting and communities. Such issues often require specialist technical assessment input from key agencies such as SNH and SEPA or specialist skill sets such as those associated with environmental health. • The assessment of wind energy developments is highly technical due to variables in the sitting and the design of wind turbines. A number of detailed landscape and visual considerations must be taken into account as well as noise, shadow flicker and wildlife surveys. These issues require technical expertise from landscape architects, noise specialists and natural heritage experts and in some cases the use of external bodies or consultants is required to assist in the process. • There are significant challenges in planning for new or emerging energy technologies where there is less of a track record of proven operation. This creates uncertainties at all levels on how to assess risk impacts and to establish the financial viability and reliability of using new technologies.

Legal: • The Climate Change (Scotland) Act places a series of statutory obligations on the Scottish Government and Local Authorities to use their powers to reduce carbon emissions and to support the development of renewable energy technologies in order to achieve the targets set out. • The pre-planning and development of renewables places significant upfront financial burden on developers and is therefore becoming a “high stakes” area of planning. Inappropriate decisions can result in legal challenges from developers and/or communities.

Page 13 of 18

Environment: • Renewable energy generation is one intervention that can assist in reducing carbon and other harmful fossil fuel emissions. • If renewable energy developments are not properly planned they can have adverse significant impacts on the natural environment. • There is some concern about the sustainability of fuel sources for biomass generation and the loss of agricultural land currently used for food cultivation for this purpose. • The extraction of fossil fuel sources for energy generation such as onshore coal, oil or gas extraction can have significant impacts upon the environment.

Options

Do nothing- The principal issues when planning for renewables and other energy projects is already covered by the approved policies which are consistent with national policies. At present there is no evidence to suggest that the existing policies are failing to accommodate renewables developments or to provide adequate protection from inappropriate development. Nor is there evidence to suggest that Fife’s landscape or communities have been unacceptably impacted by approved renewable energy developments. However, there may be more minor secondary issues to address in order to fine tune the policy approach.

One issue to consider will be the replacement of the Structure Plan with the emerging SDPs. Would this result in a policy gap for wind energy once the SDPs are adopted? Policy R1 is included within the wind energy SPG, but this will not carry the same weight as a structure plan policy if the structure plan were to be superseded. The emerging SDP policies for energy generation require LDPs to set out appropriate policies.

There are cumulative issues emerging as more onshore wind turbines are being approved. There is also concern about remaining landscape capacity in areas with approved wind turbines. These issues would only become increasingly exacerbated if the areas of search were not reviewed and strategic cumulative issues fully explored.

There is evidence that the ASH study and the areas of search as are currently defined in the SPG, are open to misinterpretation by developers, elected members and members of the public. Whilst every effort has been made to make wind energy diagrams as legible and clear as possible it is likely these misinterpretations would continue unless other formats are explored. It is likely that current concerns from members of the public are unlikely to be fully addressed if at least a review of existing guidance, policies and areas of search takes place.

There is potential to miss opportunities to exploit the potential of district heating systems and on-site renewable energy generation technologies at an earlier stage in the development process.

Page 14 of 18

Update planning policies and guidance for renewable energy - Consideration could be made for an in-depth review and potential overhaul of the existing planning policies for renewables. There is a need to undertake a gap analysis to assess what issues are not adequately covered by existing policy, including issues such as heat generation. There is concern that undertaking a full review would not make best use of existing limited resources, as there is no evidence to suggest that planning policies for renewables have been responsible for any significant failures in the process of planning for renewables. The existing policies are entirely compliant with national policy. The emerging SDPs require appropriate policy coverage in the LDP and consideration should be given to necessary policy coverage requirements.

At present the current renewables policy in the Local Plans acts as a general “one size fits all policy” by grouping issues to be considered for a variety of technologies. Further consideration could be given to recognising the differences in issues for the differing renewable energy technologies needs. For example a combustion plant will have very different issues to a wind turbine. Equally a hydro plant or an offshore technology would have very different planning considerations. There is a requirement to ensure that any differing adverse impacts are appropriately addressed by policy or through SPG.

Review of planning policies, guidance and areas of search for onshore wind turbines –Concerns relating to wind turbines have developed as a national issue in recent years, largely focussed on the cumulative and landscape impacts of development. In response to this the Council has committed itself to reviewing its spatial strategy, policies, and guidance for onshore wind turbines. The principal element of this review involves a commissioned study of the strategic cumulative impact of land based wind turbines assessment in Fife. This seeks to address concerns raised in relation to cumulative impact and landscape capacity.

The outcome of this study is a report which establishes a methodology for assessing the cumulative landscape impact of wind turbines in Fife which the Council can use to assess and manage future development proposals. The report provides a proposed strategy for onshore wind energy in Fife by setting out recommendations for appropriate scales of development and setting out proposed limits of change in landscape character areas to accommodate wind turbines.

The report, titled “Onshore Wind Energy Strategy for Fife, Cumulative Impact Assessment” carried out by Ironside Farrar, referred to hereafter as ‘the consultant’s report’, has been published alongside this technical paper. It is proposed to replace the 2006 ASH landscape capacity study; used, in part, to define the present area of search for wind turbines in Fife and that assisted in defining existing policies and guidance, with the consultant's report.

The conclusions and recommendations raised in the consultant’s report suggest that there is some further capacity in Fife for wind energy development, but that this should be limited to appropriate scales and be developed in appropriate locations. The report sets out recommendations on what the expected appropriate scales of development are and sets out proposed limits of change in landscape character areas to accommodate wind turbines.

Page 15 of 18

The report concludes that the Mid Fife area has seen the greatest level of onshore wind energy development and is an area where cumulative impact is limiting further development capacity. Two other parts of Fife are also considered nearing limits for further development. The consultant’s report is the principal consideration in the review of the spatial framework and constraints on wind energy development in Fife but it must be considered in the context of a wide range of issues that are addressed in the existing wind energy supplementary planning guidance. The consultant’s report will heavily inform the preparation of future updates to the supplementary planning guidance and the review of the spatial strategy for wind turbines as part of the LDP process.

It is proposed that the recommendations and maps within the consultant’s report will constitute the principal updates to the supplementary planning guidance and the spatial strategy for wind turbines. It is expected that most of the content of the existing approved Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance 2011 will remain as it currently is. However at this stage it is proposed to modify the existing SPG as follows:

• Include reference to TAYplan Policy 6, SESplan Policy 10 and Policy I1 from Fife’s three recently adopted local plans as policy considerations in section 4 (page 13) of the SPG.; • Update and part-replace sections 5 and 6 (particularly sub-sections 5.1.3 and 5.3.1) of the existing SPG (pages 14-32 and Diagrams 1, 2, 5 and 6) to factor in the recommendations and conclusions from the consultant’s report- particularly to include tables 6.1 (pages 22 to 26) and 6.2 (page 31) and include the maps named Figures 3.5a, 3.5b, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 from the consultant’s report; • Replace Diagram 7 in the existing wind energy SPG (page 33) with Figure 6.4 from the consultant’s report as an interim update to the area of search in advance of publicising the proposed local development plan; • Update sections 5, 6 and 8 of the existing SPG to incorporate any recent changes made by SNH and other key agencies to their guidance on onshore wind turbines; • Include reference to updates made in the Scottish Government’s online renewable energy resource; • Delete Proposals WE1 and WE2 of the existing SPG (pages 26 and 36) as these have been implemented; • It is proposed to update section 8.2 of the existing wind energy SPG (pages 38-40) to include the cumulative methodology as set out in section 2 of the consultant’s report; • It is proposed to delete section 8.5 (on page 41) of the existing SPG following recent Government DPEA Reporters conclusions to the appeal for two turbines at South Cassingray; • Update page 53 of the existing SPG to factor in any new background papers; • Update Appendix 1 of the existing SPG to ensure consultation details are up to date;

Page 16 of 18

• Include new maps that identify Met Office and primary & secondary radar zones, MOD low fly zones and civil aviation aerodromes with areas of influence; • Ensure all hyperlinks used in the document are up to date.

The consultant's report will be consulted upon alongside the Main Issues Report with representations received to it ultimately shaping the proposed updates to the existing supplementary planning guidance. This will take place in advance of the publication of the Proposed Local Development Plan later in 2013. Once the proposed plan is published and then adopted further amendments can be considered and new Supplementary Guidance produced. This option presents the best opportunity to manage future onshore wind energy development in Fife

Consider links between onshore and offshore planning policies- the exceptional circumstances surrounding the development of offshore wind farms, including the proposed scale, in terms of turbine heights and numbers, suggests there are likely to be some implications for onshore locations, including visual impact, setting of built heritage assets and natural heritage- including bird migrations. The nature of such development proposals creates some challenge in assessing it against a number of Fife’s development plan policies which have largely been designed for onshore land-use development activities. Whilst some aspects of onshore planning policies will be relevant in any assessment by the Council some consideration could as to how offshore energy development would impact on the onshore elements of planning and how this should be addressed.

Use of heat maps to identify opportunities for district heating- This could potentially identify opportunities to exploit the potential of district heating systems and on-site renewable energy generation technologies at an earlier stage in the development process. This would allow additional considerations to be made when developing new policies and land-use designations in the emerging LDP and to assess any possible requirements for supplementary planning guidance to be provided on district heating.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1. Transition from Structure Plan to SDPs and potential policy implications; 2. Differences in issues for the differing renewable energy technologies could be acknowledged by policy as opposed to adopting a simplistic one size fits all policy; 3. Policy consideration may be required for the provision of any possible future grid infrastructure upgrades or developments; 4. Proposals for what the future national approach to energy mix will be, including replacing or upgrading Longannet, as defined in NPF2, and the national energy role of local district energy generation, may require to be addressed; 5. The Scottish Government has identified a requirement to maintain a non- nuclear baseload capacity of energy generation which will necessitate some more traditional forms of energy generation and alternative fossil fuel technologies to be developed.

Page 17 of 18

6. The consultant’s report “Onshore Wind Energy Strategy for Fife- Cumulative Impact Assessment” will inform the preparation of future updates to the supplementary planning guidance and the review of the spatial strategy for wind turbines as part of the LDP process. Any potential revisions to policies and the area of search require to be consistent with SPP and have to be undertaken through the formal LDP process requiring a robust evidence base in order to justify them; 7. Policy consideration may be required for the provision of biomass fuel sources; 8. Links with marine planning and the emergence of offshore renewables will have to be considered. 9. Heat mapping could be used as part of the LDP process to assist in identifying opportunities to exploit the potential of district heating systems and on-site renewable energy generation technologies at an earlier stage in the development process.

Page 18 of 18

Fife LDP Technical Paper 9 Green Infrastructure

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 paragraphs 95, 202, and pages 138-139 (Central Scotland Green Network) http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs: 14, 37, 39, 57, 149-159 and 164. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policy ENV7 and paragraph 4.16. http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

TAYplan Policy 2 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan Policies 1B, 11 and 12 paragraphs 17, 67, 125 -127. http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

Designing Streets http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/307126/0096540.pdf

Getting the best from our land - A land use strategy for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/345946/0115155.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

PAN65: Planning and Open Space http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/225179/0060935.pdf

Green Infrastructure – Design and Placemaking http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/362219/0122541.pdf

Circular 7/2007: Consultation on and notification of planning applications for outdoor sports facilities and open space. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/203310/0054148.pdf

Fife Greenspace Strategy 2011 – 2016 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_FifeGreenspaceStrateg y2011-2016.pdf

Page 1 of 5

Green Networks in Development Planning SNH information note http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/B1041551.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Good quality green infrastructure is widely recognised as providing social, economic and environmental benefits for the areas around them. It can also aid in the delivery of many national and local priorities helping to improve people’s health and well being, mitigate climate change, attracting investment and providing economic and educational opportunities.

There is a strong focus at national level on the creation and enhancement of green networks these include habitats, formal and informal greenspaces and active travel routes. Scottish Planning Policy states that wherever possible, planning authorities and developers should identify opportunities to create and enhance networks between open spaces and avoid fragmentation. This is reflected in SESplan which looks for development plans to identify opportunities to contribute to the development and extension of the green network and mechanisms through which they can be delivered. The promotion and protection of wider green networks is not addressed in Fife’s current suite of adopted and emerging Local Plans - options as to how the networks of formal and informal greenspaces and active travel routes could be incorporated into the LDP are set out below and on an associated green networks paper. Options regarding habitat networks are considered on the natural heritage technical paper.

Scottish Planning Policy sets out a requirement that local authorities should carry out an audit of the open space in their area. The Fife Greenspace Audit has been completed and its findings used to develop the Fife Greenspace Strategy 2011. This strategy sets out the vision of increasing access to life enhancing greenspace in Fife and highlights greenspace priorities for different settlements, area action plans have been developed to aid the delivery of the greenspace strategy.

Scottish Planning Policy states that spaces which are identified in the open space audit and strategy should be identified and protected in the development plan and that open space which is not identified in the strategy but which is valued and functional or contributes to local amenity or biodiversity should also be protected. The current Local Plans identify and protect key areas of open space (but not all the greenspace audit sites), policy C4 also protects other areas which serve a valuable amenity, wildlife or recreational purpose from development, in line with Scottish Planning Policy also states that playing fields including those in education establishments which are required to meet existing or future needs should be identified in the development plan. The current Local Plans designate most (although potentially not all) playing fields as open space except those in educational establishments which will have a school or educational campus designation, there is the potential to have a separate playing field designation however it is unclear what benefit there would be from this additional designation. Scottish Planning Policy also looks for playing fields to be protected from

Page 2 of 5

development unless certain criteria are met; existing Local Plan Policy C2 provides this protection. The Fife Council pitches strategy identifies that there is a need for more pitches in South West Fife and Levenmouth; this should be reflected in the LDP.

PAN 65 on planning and open space identifies two key functions of the planning system in relation to open space; protecting areas that are valuable and valued as described above and ensuring the provision of appropriate quality in or within easy reach of new development. PAN 65 states that development plans should indicate the circumstances in which new green or civic spaces will be required as part of new developments and how these may differ depending on the requirements of the community. Current Local Plans include policy E4 which sets out open space requirements for housing developments and includes requirements for maintenance arrangements to be established. The policy has a standard approach to new open space provision which could now be refined to reflect settlement priorities from the Fife Greenspace Strategy.

SESplan and TAYplan include requirements for the LDP to mitigate the impact of climate change with Tayplan specifically referring to reducing surface run off through sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). Green infrastructure has a role to play in helping to absorb CO2 and reducing flood risk. Local Plan policy I5 requires development with surface run-off to include SUDS or similar measures to be put in place, how this might relate to green infrastructure will be addressed through the Green Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Risks

Political • Any loss of green infrastructure, open spaces and playing fields tends to be controversial.

Economic • Wider economic benefits from good quality green infrastructure will not be of benefit to the developer of the land, it is therefore important that the planning authority ensures that green infrastructure is well located, well designed, attractive and well maintained, to maximise the potential economic benefits. • Poorly designed green and open spaces can have significant maintenance and policing costs and can reduce the economic prospects of an area by making it less attractive to investors and customers.

Social • Poor quality and poorly maintained places have significant negative impacts on the lives of the people who live near them. • Poorly designed green and open spaces can create problems with antisocial behaviour.

Technical

Page 3 of 5

• There an ongoing need to improve the design skills and confidence in placemaking matters of planning officers and elected members to ensure that this agenda is fully realised. • It is unclear if the resources are available to undertake wider assessment process as part of the allocation of new sites in the LDP or as part of the planning application process.

Legal • There is a legal requirement to consult with Sportscotland on any planning applications that would lead to the loss of an existing outdoor sports facility under circular 7/2007.

Environmental • Poorly located, designed and maintained green/open space is unlikely to enhance green networks and will not help to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

Options

Option 1: Do nothing – leave the policies and designations as identified in the current suite of adopted and emerging local plans.

These cover the requirement for the development plan to protect areas that are valuable and include a requirement for additional replacement land from new housing development. They also give protection to existing outdoor sports facilities. However they do not address the green network agenda and do not reflect settlement priorities identified by the Fife Greenspace Strategy.

Option 2 : Include text and mapping in the LDP to reflect settlement priorities that have been identified through the Fife Greenspace Strategy.

Option 3: include option 2 and address the green network agenda following the methodology set out in the associated Green Networks methodology paper.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Settlement priorities identified in the Fife Greenspace Strategy, Fife Council Pitches Strategy and active travel routes should be identified in the LDP.

Requirements for new open space should relate to the context of new development (is there existing green space nearby, could it link through to existing green networks etc.) and the greenspace priorities of the settlement. This would include a revision of policy E5. More guidance would also be included in the Green Infrastructure SPG.

LDP Proposals should contain more information on the green infrastructure requirements of a particular proposal (to include important functions that should be accommodated such as play areas, kickabout areas, habitats, active travel routes etc). There is the potential to include information on the proposals plans which

Page 4 of 5

show the preferred location for open space on identified development sites based on green network linkages as part of the development requirement information.

Existing Green Networks should be mapped and opportunities to enhance networks should be identified in the LDP. A new policy relating to green networks should be included in the LDP.

Leisure and Cultural Services have requested that a financial bond should be required for recreation space and public planting on new developments with more than 25 houses. The cost of the bond will be based on the bill of quantities of the recreation space and public planting. Fife Council will inspect the works before issuing a certificate to release the bond. Leisure and Cultural Services will work up a procedure for this that will be reflected in a revision of policy E5.

Page 5 of 5

Fife LDP Technical Paper 10 Infrastructure Delivery Model & Implementation Plans

POLICY REFERENCES

Fife Council: Development Plan Policies D1 Developer Contributions D2 Local Employment Agreements

R1 Retail Centres R2 Convenience Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres R3 Comparison Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres R4 Factory Shops

Scottish Government • Infrastructure Investment Plan - December 2011 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/12/05141922/0

• Planning Circular 1/2010: Planning Agreements - February 2010 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/01/27103054/0

• Planning Circular 1/2010: Planning Agreements. Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/02/21110750/0

• Scottish Planning Policy - February 04, 2010 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0

• The Potential of Development Charges in The Scottish Planning System http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/06/29082709/0

• A Guide to Development Viability August 2009 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212607/0109620.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Fife Council: Financial Framework – Mid Fife Local Plan (October 2009) Financial Framework – St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan (October 2009) Financial Framework – Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plan (October 2009)

Benchmarking – Scottish Authorities

Page 1 of 5

Various West Lothian, Perth, Highland Council, Stirling, Aberdeenshire, Cairngorms National Park, Scottish Government Development Charging, Halcrow Group 2008 Planning requirements Study - Fife Council, GVA Consulting : Infrastructure Delivery Modelling 2011 – Fife Council

ASSESSMENT

The single planning obligations framework will provide rules and principles from which development proposals do not generally deviate. Exemptions will be limited to proposals that include local and minor brownfield sites and employment land. Affordable housing provision is also assumed and unchanged. In this spirit the planning obligations framework must be read alongside Development Plan policy and separate supplementary planning guidance available on affordable housing, employment land, public art and greenspace.

The planning obligations SPG considers transport; education and community needs and will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications received by Fife Council. It will be kept under regular review in line with land use planning policy changes, intervention cost estimates and market conditions. It will also be a basis on which the Fife Council can establish general principles relating to commuted sums and the pooling of financial contributions

Reason/s: • Unlocking strategic development areas proposed within Structure Plan • Accommodating population growth or altered household size • Assisting development industry in line with Scottish Infrastructure Investment Plan (2011) • Align private and public sector investment to co-ordinate growth. • Confirm Fife as a region ‘open for business’ whilst remaining mindful of ensuring no net detriment from proposed development.

This framework is prepared as a component part of the Fife Development Plan albeit at a time when the strategic context for land use planning is evolving with the approval of TAYPlan Strategic Development Plan and the progression of SESPlan to examination stage. Future iterations of this Supplementary Planning Guidance will be prepared periodically and will continue to reflect these Strategic Development Plans further including any revisions to respective housing land requirements or locational strategies. .

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Basis of Development Obligations

Fife Structure Plan and respective Local Plan policy state the importance of developments taking place with no net detriment to existing or local infrastructure and service provision. Key to this is investment in the road, public transport, drainage and community infrastructure networks serving the wider area. Planning obligations will accordingly be sought for differing types of development proposals dependent on the scale, location and particular circumstances of the proposal

Page 2 of 5

(Figure 1). In all cases obligation levels will be proportionate to the impact and proximity of proposed development to existing infrastructure.

Obligations Transport Education Community Affordable Greenspace Public Art Employment Housing Land Development Type Residential (5 • • • • • • (C) units >) Retail • • • Commercial • • • (C) Leisure Key: (C) = Contribution Figure 1 – Planning Obligation Categories and Development Types

This approach is consistent with the purpose of this SPG to broaden the receipt of planning obligations across higher value development types and land uses. Caveats will apply should mitigating circumstances or individual site characteristics demand. This is likely however to only be in scenarios where proposed land uses include minor and local brownfield development proposals, affordable housing or employment uses in addition to town centre redevelopment. In these cases obligations will be generally limited to local infrastructure needs.

Developer Requirements

The Local Development Plan should consider reappraising development contributions set out within the requirements column of the settlement plans. Differentiation should specifically be made between strategic and local requirements, the former referencing planning obligation themes proposed within the planning obligations framework SPG.

Where the Local Development Plan provides an indicative figure for proposed housing sites and the Council has associated this with infrastructure provision, any additional houses proposed should be accompanied by a commensurate increase in the expected contribution for any additional capacity requirements arising. If there is a reduction in the number of houses and corresponding requirements then the Council will consider a similar reduction of the required contribution.

New sites that come forward through the planning process and give rise to infrastructure/facilities and associated requirements over and above that planned for in the development plan will be assessed by the Council for contributions in line with the tests of reasonableness set out in Circular 1/2010. These must include viability assessment at the earliest possible stage and only those sites proven to be realistic, effective and therefore deliverable allocated.

RISKS

Page 3 of 5

Political

• The accumulation of developer contributions is for specific capital investment, not revenue items. Investment in infrastructure should be related and evident against political priorities. Without both aspects risk exists that contributions and therein infrastructure improvements will be diluted and underutilised.

Economic

• Securing developer contributions in today’s altered financial climate demands appropriate amounts and timing of monies sought. Cashflow considerations must be made for development schemes with consideration given to the secondary benefit/s of infrastructure improvements.

Social

• It is assumed that affordable housing provision at agreed percentage levels across Fife remains thereby ensuring that provision on site or off is unaffected by obligation levies. This should ensure a continuous tenure mix and availability of discounted housing.

Technical

• Predicating development obligations on cause or effect from proposed development will require the completion of assessments including transport flows, educational capacity, developable site areas and assessment of abnormal ground conditions. Without this information incorrect assumptions may jeopardise levies sought.

Legal

• Planning obligations remain subject to compliance with national policy including SPP and Circular 1/2010. Challenges of reasonableness and claw back therefore remain. Consultation underway via Scot Govt on development charging may assist however this is unlikely to culminate earlier than 2013/14.

Environmental

• Whilst SEA if not required for the financial frameworks proper (Scottish Government S.E.A Gateway 26/7/12), assessment and approval of the interventions mooted will be necessary by virtue of them being included within the development plan or alternatively being included within any application for planning permission. This will ensure no net detriment.

Options

Page 4 of 5

1. Retain responsibility of the development industry to deliver infrastructure on and off site through direct provision or through commuted payments under section 75 planning agreements, in addition to investment by the Council through its Capital Programme. 2. Increase capital funding expenditure by the Council to mitigate for development industry slow down. 3. Implement Prudential Borrowing, Tax Increment Financing, Infrastructure Funds, Municipal Bonds, Local Asset Backed Vehicles, Loan Guarantee schemes to assist infrastructure delivery. 4. Broaden development contribution base by seeking development contributions from non residential land uses including retail and commercial leisure development.

Page 5 of 5

Fife LDP Technical Paper 11 Flooding

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 (paragraphs 177-179): www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy (paragraphs 196-211): www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 (Policy SS1): publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

Fife Shoreline Management Plan 2011 www.fifedirect.org.uk/shoreline

Scotland River Basin Management Plan 2009-15 www.sepa.org.uk/water/river_basin_planning.aspx

Local Plan Policies I3: Water and Sewerage, I4: Flooding and Water Quality, I5: Sustainable Urban Drainage www.fife.gov.uk/localplan

OTHER REFERENCES

Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act (2009): www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Water/Flooding/FRMAct

The National Flood Risk Assessment (SEPA, 2011) www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk_management/national_flood_risk_assessmen t.aspx

Strategic Flood Risk Assessment – SEPA technical guidance to support Development Planning http://www.sepa.org.uk/planning/flood_risk/planning_authorities/sfra.aspx

Page 1 of 12

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Flooding Flooding can result from a variety of sources – coastal, fluvial (water course), pluvial (surface water), groundwater, sewers and blocked culverts. It is a natural process which cannot be prevented entirely, but it can be managed to reduce its social and economic consequences.

All land is to some degree susceptible to flooding. Even in areas generally free from flooding, local conditions and exceptional rainfall can lead to flooding. Some locations are susceptible to intermittent flooding and climate change is expected to worsen the situation. Flood plains store and convey flood water during times of flood. Development on flood plains can not only be at risk itself, but can add to the risk of flooding elsewhere.

Information about areas with a history of flooding or at potential risk of flooding is held by Fife Council and The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). SEPA holds publicly viewable maps of areas at risk of flooding from rivers or the sea, highlighting those areas which have a greater than 0.5% chance of flooding in any year. However, this does not cover the water courses with a catchment of less than 3km 2, the effect of flood defences or other structures. Until 2009 Fife Council produced a Flood Alleviation Report every 2 years, although in future these will be replaced by flood risk management plans which are not based on local authority boundaries.

In Fife, most watercourses are small and fast flowing and flooding is usually caused by short duration intense rainfall with most problems occurring at physical restrictions to the flow. Of the two larger rivers in Fife, the Leven and Eden, the latter is historically subject to significant flooding from long duration rainfall, however the Leven shows little tendency to flood due to the controlling influence of Loch Leven from which it flows.

Tidal flooding can also occur, and with a coastline 112 miles long including the Forth and Tay estuaries this is particularly relevant to Fife. The Esplanade at Kirkcaldy is one example of the danger of coastal flooding, as the sea wall is overtopped causing flooding of the road and properties from time to time.

Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 sets in place a statutory framework for delivering a sustainable and risk-based approach to managing flooding. This includes the preparation of assessments of the likelihood and impacts of flooding, and catchment focused plans to address these impacts. By 2015 flood risk management plans will be in place across Scotland which should then be taken into account when development plans are prepared.

Although ultimate responsibility for avoiding or managing flood risk still lies with land and property owners, certain public bodies are expected to take a proactive role in managing and, where achievable, lowering overall flood risk. The Flood Risk

Page 2 of 12

Management (Scotland) Act 2009 places a duty on Scottish Ministers, SEPA, local authorities, Scottish Water and other responsible authorities to exercise their functions with a view to managing and reducing overall flood risk, to promote sustainable flood risk management, and act in the way best calculated to manage flood risk in a sustainable way. The main elements of flood risk management relevant to the planning system are assessing flood risks and subsequent avoidance of development in areas known to be at risk of flooding from any source, as well as structural and non-structural flood management measures.

Existing Local Plan Policy The current suite of emerging and adopted Local Plans contains policy (Policy I4: Flooding and Water Quality) on flooding. Development that would increase the risk of flooding or be at risk of flooding will not be supported. Policy on Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems or SUDS (Policy I5: Sustainable Urban Drainage) makes SUDS a requirement for all development proposals involving surface run-off. There is also a policy on water and sewerage (Policy I3: Water and Sewerage) which discourages private sewerage systems in areas served by public sewerage systems to reduce the potential for pollution and environmental hazard.

Scottish Planning Policy Planning authorities must take the probability of flooding into account when preparing development plans. Development which would have a significant likelihood of leading to flooding problems should not be permitted, and developers and planning authorities should take a precautionary approach in taking decisions when flood risk is an issue. Built development should only take place on flood plains where it will not affect the ability of the flood plain to store and convey water, where the development will not be at risk of flooding and where the development will not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

To provide a basis for decision making relating to flood risk, Scottish Planning Policy includes a risk framework (see Appendix 1) which divides flood risk into three categories and outlines an appropriate planning response for each level of risk. In applying the risk framework, site characteristics and formal flood prevention measures should also be taken into account.

The settlement strategy set out in development plans should take account of the potential risks from flooding. Local development plans should: • identify sites or areas constrained by flood risk, • safeguard the flood storage and capacity of flood plains, • indicate circumstances where a freeboard 1 allowance should apply, • indicate when a drainage assessment will be required because of flood risk, • indicate when water resistant materials/form of construction should be used.

Local development plans can also identify where the promotion of managed coastal realignment or other measures could contribute to more a sustainable

1 Freeboard is the difference between the flood defence level and the design flood level. It can also be the difference between the design flood level and the finished floor levels of any development. A minimum freeboard of 500 mm to 600 mm is recommended by SEPA. Freeboard is required to account for uncertainties involved in flood design and other factors such as post-construction settlement and wave action.

Page 3 of 12

approach to flood management. Development should not take place on land that could otherwise contribute to managing flood risk, for instance through managed coastal realignment, washland creation or as part of a scheme to manage flood risk.

The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 require all surface water from new development to be treated by a sustainable drainage system (SUDS) before it is discharged into the water environment, except for single houses or where the discharge will be into coastal water. Local development plans should incorporate the legal requirement for SUDS, promote a coordinated approach to SUDS between new developments and set out expectations in relation to the long term maintenance of SUDS.

For large scale development proposals in areas where drainage is constrained or otherwise problematic or if there would be off-site effects, a comprehensive drainage assessment will be required.

Culverts are a frequent cause of local flooding, particularly if design or maintenance is inadequate. Watercourses should not be culverted as part of a new development unless there is no practical alternative. Existing culverts should be opened whenever possible. If culverts are unavoidable, they should be designed to maintain or improve existing flow conditions and aquatic life. A culvert may be acceptable as part of a scheme to manage flood risk or where it is used to carry a watercourse under a road or railway.

National Flood Risk Assessment

The National Flood Risk Assessment, produced by SEPA, is the first step in delivering a new risk-based approach to flood management. The assessment covers flooding from rivers, groundwater and the sea, as well as flooding caused when heavy rainfall cannot enter the drainage system or the river network. The likelihood of flooding is considered alongside the estimated impact on people, the economy and the environment. This combined understanding of where flooding is likely to occur and the impact when it does, allows Scotland to target its effort in managing the future risks to people and property.

Page 4 of 12

National Flood Risk Assessment approach to dealing with flood risk

The National Flood Risk Assessment will be used to identify areas for more detailed assessments of hazards and impacts, and the subsequent identification of actions within Flood Risk Management Plans.

Based on the National Flood Risk Assessment, SEPA has identified Potentially Vulnerable Areas where the potential impact is sufficient to justify further assessment and appraisal of flood risk management actions.

Page 5 of 12

Potentially Vulnerable Areas identified by SEPA

The setting of objectives and actions within the Potentially Vulnerable Areas will form the basis on which local authorities, Scottish Water and SEPA develop long- term and sustainable Flood Risk Management Plans.

Flood Risk Management Strategies prepared by SEPA will set objectives for reducing risk and identify the best combination of actions to achieve this. Local Flood Risk Management Plans, produced by the lead local authority for each ‘Local Plan District’, will take the objectives and actions and set out what actions will be taken and how they will be implemented and funded in each cycle. The first cycle of flood risk management plans will run from 2015 to 2021. Fife is covered by four of SEPA’s Local Plan Districts – Forth Estuary , Forth, Tay Estuary , and Tay . Each District contains datasheets for Potentially Vulnerable Areas identified within that area.

Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

In June 2012 SEPA released technical guidance to support development planning with regard to Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA). SFRA is designed to inform the development plan process, to avoid increasing overall flood risk. It should apply a risk based approach to the identification of land for development and for the development of policies for flood risk management, including surface water management. Planning authorities should prepare SFRA in consultation with SEPA and other stakeholders.

SFRA should provide an evidence base to inform the Local Development Plan and strategic environmental assessment, assisting the exploration of proposals and alternatives and the strategic assessment of their environmental effects.

Page 6 of 12

Key elements of SFRA should include: • information on all potential sources of flooding; • information on climate change impacts; information on existing flood defences and flood risk management infrastructure; • identification of the functional flood plain (including built up areas and undeveloped/sparsely developed areas); identification of relevant drainage issues; and, • identification of sites or areas constrained by flood risk.

Fife Shoreline Management Plan

The second generation Fife Shoreline Management Plan was completed in December 2011 and sets out Fife Council’s policies for managing 179km of the Fife Coastline. The plan identifies preferred defence options along the coast. The Shoreline Management Plan is a non-statutory, high level plan which sets Fife Council’s policies for coastal defence having considered coastal processes, tidal behaviour, land use and the effects of sea level rise as a result of climate change. The plan should be used to inform strategic planning.

The Shoreline Management Plan includes maps of areas potentially at risk of inundation. It identifies 1,206 properties and many areas of low lying land which are at risk of tidal inundation over the next 20 years, rising to 2,822 properties by 2110 as a result of sea level rise.

Page 7 of 12

Fife Shoreline Management Plan Policy Unit Option Overview 0-20 years

Over the lifetime of the Local Development Plan, in most areas, maintaining the existing line/defence or not actively intervening has been identified as the favoured option. However there are also some parts of Fife’s Coast where managed realignment could be considered as a feasible option. Such an approach may be considered for reasons relating to flood storage capacity, sediment transport, economic viability or environmental reasons, including working towards climate change adaptation.

Developments on the coast requiring a Flood Risk Assessment should refer to the Coastal Flood Boundary projections (produced by Environment Agency/SEPA) which give extreme water levels around the coast.

River Basin Management Plan The first river basin management plans for Scotland have been approved, adopted and published. Most of Scotland, including Fife, is within the ‘Scotland’ river basin district, which is covered by the Scotland river basin management plan. The river basin management plan identifies the condition of surface and groundwater across the plan area, and gives objectives and measures for achieving targets for specific areas with timescales for meeting these targets.

Page 8 of 12

Objectives for improving surface water condition up to 2027

Risks

Political • May be pressure for particular areas at risk of flooding to be addressed.

Economic • Cost of damage caused by flooding. Fife Council as a responsible authority could be held liable. • Sites allocated through the Local Development Plan may be unviable if located on an area known to flood as developers may be unable to sell

Page 9 of 12

finished properties as insurance and mortgage companies are less likely to provide cover in known flood risk areas.

Social • Frequent flooding events could lead to abandonment of affected properties which could have harmful social impacts.

Legal • The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 places a duty on Scottish Ministers, SEPA, local authorities, Scottish Water and other responsible authorities to exercise their functions with a view to managing and reducing flood risk and to promote sustainable flood risk management. • Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003 places a duty on responsible authorities (which include local authorities) to promote sustainable flood management.

Environmental • Increased flooding could lead to reduced water quality which may have a negative impact on the environment.

Options

Do nothing: If the Local Development Plan does not include measures to manage and reduce flood risk then Fife Council will fail to meet the duty placed on it by the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. It would be likely to lead to an increase in flooding events which could have significant economic costs.

Comply with legal requirements and national policy: The Local development plan will: • identify sites or areas constrained by flood risk from any source, • safeguard the flood storage and capacity of flood plains, • indicate circumstances where a freeboard 2 allowance should apply, • indicate when a drainage assessment will be required because of flood risk, • indicate when water resistant materials and forms of construction will be appropriate.

The identification of areas at risk of flooding from any source and the subsequent avoidance of further development in these areas is essential to work towards sustainable flood management and climate change adaptation.

The Local Development Plan includes policy requiring the use of sustainable drainage systems in new development.

2 Freeboard is the difference between the flood defence level and the design flood level. It can also be the difference between the design flood level and the finished floor levels of any development. A minimum freeboard of 500 mm to 600 mm is recommended by SEPA. Freeboard is required to account for uncertainties involved in flood design and other factors such as post-construction settlement and wave action.

Page 10 of 12

Additional measures above legal and policy requirements The local development plans could identify where the promotion of managed coastal realignment or other measures could contribute to more a sustainable approach to flood management and aid climate change adaptation. Fife’s Shoreline Management Plan includes options for where managed coastal realignment should be considered.

Provide guidance and policy coverage as to how redevelopment of sites within areas known to flood could be achieved in the context of reducing overall flood risk.

The consultation on the Local Development Plan could be used as an additional source of information from which to gain an increased understanding of potential flooding issues across Fife.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Fife Council has a duty under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 to manage and reduce flood risk and to promote sustainable flood risk management.

The Local Development Plan can be used to gain an increased understanding of potential flooding issues.

Page 11 of 12

Appendix 1: Scottish Planning Policy Flooding Risk Framework

Page 12 of 12

Fife LDP Technical Paper 12 Natural Heritage

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 paragraphs 28, 30, 44, 49, 53, 55, 92 – 102, 179, 202, 210 plus pages 15 (map 2) 31 (map 4), 138 – 139 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs: 33, 37, 39, 77, 92, 97, 98, 100-103, 124–148, 164, 187, 189, 190, 232, 242 and 255. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policies SS1, R1, ENV2, ENV3, ENV4, ENV6, ENV7 and paragraphs 1.28, 4.1, 4.8, 4.13, 4.14 and 4.16. http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

Tayplan Policies 2, 3 and 6 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

Sesplan Proposed Plan Policies 1B, 11, 12, 13 and 15. Paragraphs 124 -127 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

Getting the best from our land - A land use strategy for Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/345946/0115155.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2004/6/contents

Fife Local Biodiversity Action Plan 2009 – 2011 http://www.fifecoastandcountrysidetrust.co.uk/userfiles/file/Biodiversity%20Booklet %20complete.pdf

Scottish Forestry strategy 2006 http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/SFS2006fcfc101.pdf/$FILE/SFS2006fcfc101.pdf

Draft Fife Forestry and Woodland Strategy 2012

Page 1 of 6

Fife Core Paths Plan Jan 2012 http://www.fifedirect.org.uk/topics/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&p2sid=761E 9492-F944-73B9-9C6A0D824E096DCA&themeid=98A56687-9A34-4494-A43C- 68E07CCAE64E

Scotland’s Biodiversity: It’s in your hands http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/25954/0014583.pdf

The Scottish Biodiversity List http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/RuralPriorities/Packages/Su pportBiodiversity/PrioritySpeciesHabitats

Applying an ecosystems approach to land use: Information note http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/03/16083740/1

Scottish Natural Heritage guidance notes on renewable energy http://www.snh.gov.uk/planning-and-development/renewable-energy/

Green Networks in Development Planning SNH information note http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/B1041551.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

All public bodies in Scotland have a legal duty to protect wildlife, biodiversity and natural habitats. This requirement is reflected in NPF2, SPP Tayplan and Sesplan. The existing adopted and emerging Local Plans already include a number of policies that protect the natural environment and sites with natural heritage designations: E20: Water Environment E21: European Protected Species E22: Local Biodiversity and Geodiversity sites E23: Protection of Biodiversity The Local Plans also map areas with national or international importance for natural heritage which are protected by other legislation.

National and regional policies also require landscape and environmental quality to be protected. Current Local Plan policy E19 protects designated local landscape areas from unsympathetic development and policy E27 protects the undeveloped coast from development. Protection is also given to trees on development sites through policy E25 while Policy E24 relates to Tree Preservation Orders.

The Land Use Strategy for Scotland promotes greater consideration of ecologically coherent networks in decision making and includes a proposal to demonstrate how ecological systems will be taken into account in relevant decisions made by public bodies. This reflects objectives set out in the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy which flows from obligations set by the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

Page 2 of 6

agreement. Scottish Government has published a note on applying an ecosystems approach to land use planning and will publish further guidance later in 2012. This agenda links into the sustainable management of natural heritage and the ability of natural assets to help mitigate the impact of climate change which are highlighted in national and regional plans and policies. The draft Fife Forestry and Woodland strategy (FFWS) includes seeking opportunities for woodland to help mitigate the impacts of climate change and the use of native riparian woodland to help alleviate flooding problems as key priorities. The ability of natural systems to mitigate the impact of climate change is not reflected in any significant way in the current suite of local plans but policy E23 on biodiversity could be revised to address this omission to some extent.

There is a strong focus at national level on the identification and enhancement of green networks which include habitats, formal and informal greenspaces and active travel routes. SPP states that wherever possible, planning authorities and developers should identify opportunities to create and enhance networks between open spaces and avoid fragmentation. This is reflected in Sesplan which looks for development plans to identify opportunities to contribute to the development and extension of the green network and mechanisms through which they can be delivered. In addition the draft FFWS has the creation of an interconnecting network of woodland as a priority. The promotion and protection of wider green networks is not addressed in any significant way in the current suite of adopted and emerging Local Plans although Policy E3 does set out that new development will be expected to link to existing landscape features and provide biodiversity enhancement and policy E26 promotes new tree planting as an integral part of new development. Options as to how the networks of habitats could be incorporated into the LDP are set out below, options regarding the formal and informal greenspaces and active travel routes green networks are considered on the green infrastructure technical paper.

The draft FFWS has the expansion of productive woodland and semi natural woodland as key priorities in particular where this planting can contribute to the appearance and diversity of agricultural landscapes. The strategy includes mapping of preferred and potential areas where new woodland could be planted (map 5) which could be included as a designation map in the LDP. The strategy also has the safeguarding of habitat for deer and connections between these areas as a priority. These areas are not mapped in the strategy so could not included in the LDP. The Scottish Forestry Strategy promotes rural diversification to support fragile rural communities; this is reflected in the draft FFWS which has the expansion of mixed woodland on farms to complement farming activities encourage diversification including the creation of woodland related businesses as a key priority. Policy E15 on development in the countryside supports farm diversification and the policy could be amended to refer to woodland creation.

SPP includes a requirement that development plans should provide a clear indication of the potential for wind farms in their area, taking into account the landscape and visual impact and effects on the natural heritage. Tayplan reflects this requirement and extends it to cover all energy and waste/resource infrastructure. Sesplan also highlights that location, landscape and environmental quality need to be considered for all onshore low carbon and renewable energy

Page 3 of 6

developments. The current local plans include a designation map showing areas of search for windfarms; however these are not ideal as they reflect a summary of information from the ASH Landscape Assessment that was carried out for Fife Council.

Policy I1 on renewable energy includes criteria that support renewable energy developments as long as there is no significant impact on the natural environment. In addition Fife Council has also developed Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance. Policy R1 of this guidance requires LDP’s to afford significant protection from large scale wind farms to areas with national or international natural heritage designations and requires that their integrity is not compromised. Whilst in areas which have regional or local natural heritage designations any proposals for wind turbines must address the impact of the proposal on the interest that the designation is intended to protect. However the regional or local natural heritage designation should not unreasonably restrict the development of wind energy proposals. The wind energy SPG also includes policies R2 and R3 which relate to wind energy proposals on the shore line (R2) and off shore (R3). Both of these policies only support proposals that will not have a significant impact on the natural environment. Scottish Natural Heritage have published a range of guidance notes on renewable energy and their potential impacts on nature and landscapes which consider this issue in greater depth. It is not necessary for the LDP to provide greater detail on this although policy E27 on the coast could make reference to wind energy proposals - technical paper 25: Coastal Planning will cover this issue.

Risks

Political • Development which threatens nature and landscapes tends to be controversial.

Economic • It is difficult to quantify the value of natural heritage and quality landscapes in attracting tourism and investment to the region. • There is a risk that pressure from development could lead to loss of natural heritage assets and a reduction in the quality of particular landscapes. • The ability of natural systems and processes to help mitigate the impact of climate change is currently not being promoted as an alternative to man made mitigation measures in the LDP.

Social • The natural environment has many positive benefits for people including health and well being, community pride and sense of identity. Failure to protect these assets or to maximise the opportunities they present for the communities around them are likely to have a detrimental effect on people and communities in Fife.

Technical • Responding to the green networks and ecosystems agendas will require considerable input from colleagues with natural heritage expertise, it is

Page 4 of 6

unclear if the current resource available could accommodate additional assessment processes.

Legal • Fife Council has a statutory duty to protect wildlife, biodiversity and natural habitats, failure to do so could lead to a legal challenge.

Environmental • Failure to provide adequate protection for the natural environment would lead to a loss in habitat, reduction in species numbers and a degrading of the landscape of Fife. • Lack of appreciation of the impact of development on ecosystems can lead to problems occurring away from the development site such as new areas being at risk from flooding; and can contribute towards climate change rather than mitigating against it. The LDP does not currently refer to ecological networks and the impact of new development on them in any significant way.

Options

Option 1 – Do nothing The current suite of local plans provide protection for designated sites, protected species and sensitive landscapes including the undeveloped coast and they seek to minimise the impact of renewable energy developments on the natural heritage of Fife. The Local Plan also promotes the inclusion of measures to enhance biodiversity and new tree planting. However, the current local plans do not fully address the green networks or ecological systems agendas and the areas of search for windfarms are at times misleading

Option 2. Incorporate changes to mapping, policy and processes that are designed to promote green networks following the methodology set out in the associated Green Networks methodology paper.

The strategy should highlight the ecosystems approach and it should be reflected through revisions to policies B23: Protection of biodiversity, I4: Flooding and water quality, I5 Sustainable Urban Drainage and Policy E26 on tree planting (which should flag up the benefits of trees for carbon capture).

Option 3. Include the measures outlined in option 2 and identify key features and views that should be protected from visual intrusion from renewable energy proposals, this will require an assessment study to be undertaken.

ISSUES

The LDP provides a good level of protection for designated sites across Fife but the protection of habitats that are not designated and the assessment of their relative value as part of a network of habitats is not really covered by the existing

Page 5 of 6

polices in the Local Plans. Proposals for green networks and revisions to policy E23: Protection of Biodiversity will help to address this.

Existing Green Networks should be mapped and opportunities to enhance networks should be identified in the LDP. Policy E15 should be amended to promote new woodland as part of farm diversification.

The ecosystems agenda is still developing in Scotland and is not reflected in current Local Plans. There is an opportunity for the LDP to highlight the agenda in the strategy and amend some existing policies to promote the approach.

Page 6 of 6

Fife LDP Technical Paper 13

RETAIL AND TOWN CENTRES

POLICY REFERENCES

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs 52 - 65 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policies S1, S2 and S3 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan Policy 3 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Policy 7 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

PAN 52: Planning in Small Towns http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1997/04/pan52

Pan 59: Improving Town Centres http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/10/pan59-root/pan59

Fife Retail Capacity Study 2011 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_FifeRetailCapacityStudy Dec2011.pdf

Fife Household Survey http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_220909FifeHouseholdS urveyReport.pdf

Town Centre Perception Study 2009 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_TownCentrePerception Study20091.pdf

Support for Fife’s Town Centres (report to Fife Council, Environment, Enterprise & Transportation Committee November 2011)

Page 1 of 8

http://fish.fife/uploadfiles/Publications/Item%2008%20Updated%20Appendix%20S upport%20for%20Fifes%20Town%20Centres%20-%20final1.doc

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Town centres are the focus for our communities’ civic activities and a key driver of the economy. They are centres of employment and provide a diverse range of services including leisure, culture and commercial activities and most importantly shopping. In particular, retailing is fundamental to the concentration of other activities located in town centres. Town centres are however only one element of a network of centres, which also includes retail parks.

Retailing is a dynamic issue and in recent years it has changed significantly. The economic recession in recent years has resulted in a contraction of traditional shopping areas with an increase in the number of vacant premises. Many retailers are reducing their property portfolios in terms of size, and reconfiguring their location and format. A graph showing the scale of town centre vacancy rates is shown below.

Figure 1: Town Vacancy Rates

40.00% 35.00% 30.00% Apr-09 25.00% Apr-10 20.00% Apr-11 15.00% Apr-12 10.00%

Vacancy Percentage 5.00% 0.00%

g r lly s n y a e e ld p ws g u ven e ther h oth ca island e u c r rk C ermline L r o n rkeithi i f enbeath L e e K n d Gl v u Burnt Anst Kincardine In D St Andr Cow Tow n Centre / Year

Source: Experian GOAD

The big four supermarket operators have expanded their network of superstores and with it the range and amount of non food goods.

Internet shopping, both for food and non food goods, has taken off in recent years and this trend is continuing. It is now a common feature of households’ shopping habits. The graph below shows the growth of internet sales in the 3 year period May 2009 – May 2012.

Page 2 of 8

Fig 2: Growth of Internet Sales

% 6

0 09 -10 1 -10 11 -11 12 b-10 b- ay May- Aug-09 Nov-09 Fe M Aug- Nov Feb-11 May-11 Aug- Nov Fe May-12 Date

Source: ONS Statistical Bulletin Retail Sales

The growth of out of town retail parks and a shift away from bulky goods has impacted markedly on the traditional high street. Decline in town centre retailing also has a knock on effect on other uses such as Class 2 1 services; restaurants, cafes, and pubs; and offices. Retailing alone cannot support and sustain town centres. Decreased footfall affects a range of land uses, not just retailing. Overall it is unlikely that town centres will ever fully regain their lost trade. It should also be acknowledged that local authorities cannot influence modern tastes and trends.

With the pace of change in retailing, it has become apparent that a number of retail developers have planning permissions for edge of town centre, or out-of-town centre stores but have not developed them. This can lead to a situation in which the existence of a planning permission for a retail store may soak up the available retail capacity in a catchment area and so prevent alternative developers obtaining planning permission elsewhere in the community, including sites which, in terms of planning policy, may be better located to support town centres.

Scottish Planning Policy clearly favours town centres as preferred locations for new retail and leisure investment and strong support is given to maintain and enhance their vitality and viability. Development Plans are expected to identify a network of centres, which could include town centres, neighbourhood centres and commercial centres, and to explain the role of each centre within that network. This provides the context to assess development proposals. SPP sets out a sequential approach to manage this process which prioritises development within town centres in the first instance. Where development in a town centre cannot be accommodated, edge of centre areas followed by established local centres or commercial centres should be considered.

1 Class 2 refers to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) order 1997. It includes financial, professional or any other service expected in shopping areas e.g. betting office, lawyers,

Page 3 of 8

accountants, estate agents, health centres, surgeries of dentists, doctors and vets (where the principal visitors are members of the public)

TOWN EDGE OF CENTRE Commercial Out of Centre CENTRES SITES Centres locations If none if none if none

Development Plans should indicate whether retail development may be appropriate outwith existing town centres, identifying any preferred locations. Retail Impact Assessments (RIA) should be undertaken in instances where a retail development over 2,500 square metres gross floorspace 2 is proposed outwith a defined town centre and is not in accordance with the Development Plan.

Policy 3 of the Proposed SESplan states that Local Development Plans will:

• Identify town centres and commercial centres, clearly defining their roles; • Support and promote the role of the network of centres in the order, Edinburgh city centre, strategic town centres including Kirkcaldy, Dunfermline and Glenrothes; other town centres to be identified in Local Development Plans; and commercial centres to be identified in Local Development Plans and identify measures to protect these centres • Promote a sequential approach to the selection of locations for retail and commercial leisure proposals.

Policy 7 of the approved TAYplan Strategic Development Plan focuses comparison retail development on identified town centres and commercial centres to protect their vitality and viability. Local Development Plans should identify specific boundaries for a hierarchy of identified comparison centres (Regional, sub regional, larger and smaller). Cupar and St Andrews are identified as larger town centres whilst Anstruther and Newburgh are identified as smaller town centres. Roles should be identified for other service centres, including commercial centres and local centres, beneath the regional hierarchy. Planning decisions should be based on the hierarchy set out in the policy, the sequential approach and local considerations.

The Fife Structure Plan 2006-26, which is strongly supportive of town centres and the sequential approach, contains 3 policies on town centres and retailing. Policy S1 directs retail and leisure development to the sub regional town centres of Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy and then to the district centres of Glenrothes, Leven and Cowdenbeath. Policy S2 sets out criteria against which proposals for new retail development will be assessed. It focuses on supporting town centres and the sequential approach. Policy S3 takes a similar approach and seeks to limit the amount of comparison floorspace outwith town centres.

Given the importance of town centres both to our communities and in policy terms, it can be argued that Fife’s planning policies should shift their emphasis away from supporting retailing in its wider sense to focusing on town centres.

In response to mounting concern about our town centres, the Council organised in June 2012, two retails seminars in Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy. Many useful ideas

Page 4 of 8

were discussed at these events but the key ones were dissatisfaction with access/car parking and signage and the desire for a wider range and higher quality of shops.

Our town centres have experienced massive and long term structural change in the past few years. A key challenge for the Local Development Plan will be to devise a radical approach to not just protecting them but to enhance them. This should however recognise that their roles will have to change irreversibly.

It will be important to improve the overall visitor experience to town centres and perhaps rather than aim to provide the complete range of traditional town centre functions concentrate on particular uses in specific locations. Accessibility will be vital and there should a wider acceptance that that includes the private car.

Risks

Political: • Promise of employment in out of town centre locations versus town centre protection

Economic: • Deterring much needed inward investment albeit from inappropriate locations, by refusing planning consents that are contrary to policy. • Approval of out of town centre proposals can harm town centres • Lack of retail floorspace can increase leakage to centres outwith Fife • Long-term adjustment in the value of town centre properties is taking place and the premium attached to town centre locations is being eroded. Enforcing the sequential approach in a period of downward adjustment is particularly challenging • Fife’s large number of smaller discrete settlements with their own centres is one of a number of risks to the viability of the main existing town centres

Social: • An overly restrictive approach to granting new consents can limit consumer choice. • Too many out of centre developments can fundamentally undermine wider social and community roles of town centres. • Many town centres are facing very high vacancy levels as a result of fundamental changes to the role of town centres. The risk of long-term vacancies are increased where town centres are not compact, attractive and distinctive • Consumer habits have established out of centre retailing as a favourite form of shopping

Legal: • Retailing is a “high stakes” area of planning and inappropriate or contentious decisions can result in legal challenges.

Environment:

Page 5 of 8

• Continued out of town retail expansion will impact negatively on the environmental sustainability of town centres?

Options

Radical refocusing on town centres: there are major issues that require to be addressed in the LDP in terms of town centres and retailing. The single most important issue is active support for town centres. This is a main feature of national planning policy, the two emerging Strategic Development Plans and the approved Fife Structure Plan. Such an approach however will have to be radical; such is the scale and nature of change facing our town centres. In view of the permanently changing nature of town centres, there is a case for their boundaries be redrawn to accept and reflect a declining retail presence on their peripheries and concentrate instead on core areas.

Do nothing i.e. roll forward the current approach of actively supporting town centres. This would be entirely consistent with national and strategic policy. However to date this approach has not proved wholly effective in the face of major challenges, which have affected town centres the length and breadth of Britain.

Minor adjustment of policy: There are minor secondary issues to address in order to fine tune the policy approach. These might include reviewing and clarifying the threshold for Retail Impact Assessments (RIAs) and reviewing the approach to cumulative floorspace changes in out of town centre locations. There is also another issue which occurred as part of the St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan Examination. This relates to the situation whereby the Plan allocates a site for local retailing. In such instances it is not necessary to require a sequential approach to be undertaken providing that the intended catchment is local and the floorspace is commensurate with that. In such circumstances should a Retail Impact Assessment be limited to proposals which are out scale and character with Development Plan policy? These would have the effect of making the main policy thrust more effective.

The preferred approach however is to radically refocus on town centres. More minor changes and adjustments can also be addressed however.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1 Widening the policy focus in development plans from retailing in general to a greater range of land uses to support our town centres.

2 Identifying the elements and functions of town centres that are most important to protect.

3 In terms of retail capacity, should minimum percentage targets for new convenience floorspace in town centres be set? For example 20% of a town’s convenience floorspace be located in the town centre. Care would need to be taken however to ensure that modest levels of new provision were encouraged outwith town centres to serve local catchments and communities.

Page 6 of 8

4 Good access to town centres is critical to their success. Do we need to improve access by private vehicle as this is seen to be an advantage of out of centre retailing.

5 Town centre boundaries could be redrawn more tightly to reflect a declining retail offer on their peripheries.

6 Address the incremental change of use issue, where large retail units convert bulky good floorspace to open class 1 3.

7 Clarification is required where the Local Development Plan allocates land for retailing. Should the sequential approach only be used where a proposal in inconsistent in terms of character or scale with the Development plan.

8 The current development plan sets out a hierarchy of town centres based on sub regional and district centres. There is a view that this is an outdated and artificial approach. This approach now be discontinued in favour of allowing the market to direct investment to town centres of its choice.

9 Planning policies could be more aggressive in resisting out of town centre retail and leisure and recreation development that could undermine town centres.

10 Currently planning conditions are placed on out of town centre retail developments as part of consents to limit the range of goods that can be sold. These conditions could be regularised and subsumed into the Local Development Plan.

11 Centre roles: these are currently set out in tabular form in the 3 Local Plans, however there is scope to add more detail which would in turn provide additional clarity.

12 Kirkcaldy High Street is performing poorly due in part to out of centre developments. It is worth examining how we could protect town centres further from out of town developments.

13 The development of the 4 th quadrant of Fife Central Retail Park could be delayed until such time as Kirkcaldy town centre’s performance improves significantly in order to protect the town centre and encourage investment. A moratorium on further unrestricted class 1 sales at Fife Central Retail Park could be introduced and future development in the 4th quadrant could be restricted to bulky goods only.

14 As part of the supplementary guidance on planning obligations it is proposed to introduce a requirement for major retail and commercial leisure development to make contributions to providing infrastructure

Page 7 of 8

proportional to their impact. This is a similar approach to that currently applying to new housing development

3 Class 1 refers to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) order 1997. It includes shops and post offices, travel agents, hairdressers, laundrettes, dry cleaners, etc.

Page 8 of 8

Fife LDP Technical Paper 14 Tourism

POLICY REFERENCES

SESplan http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Policy 3 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/FINAL%20Approved%20Plan%20June%202012%20low%20res.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Fife Hotel Demand Study, Richard Gerard Associates, March 2012;

Pilgrims Way A Feasibility Study for the Fife Coast and Countryside Trust, Bell Ingram, May 2007 http://www.scottishresources.com/Projects/FifeEarth/default.aspx

Fife Tourism Strategy 2010 to 2020, Fife Tourism Partnership, June 2010

Fife Core Paths Plan

ASSESSMENT

Tourism in Fife is diverse; therefore the needs from within the sector can be different depending upon their location and type of business. In the hotel sector for instance St Andrews is demonstrating good volume with an opportunity for hotel investment in a couple of area. However, St Andrews and the rest of Fife suffers from seasonality, demonstrating high peaks of occupancy during the main summer season but with depleting occupancy between the months of October and March. This is a greater problem in St Andrews than the rest of Fife, but the yield from St Andrews is higher.

Hotel sites from across Fife have been identified through the Fife Hotel Demand Study. The area for increased investment is Dunfermline which is demonstrating all the demand generators to be attractive to an investor, in contrast Kirkcaldy which has more sites available, does not have enough demand generators. A mix of approaches will be needed if all areas of Fife are to attract the level of hotel investment needed.

Page 1 of 3

The current economic climate is proving challenging across the accommodation sector and we are now seeing a number of hotels and caravan sites applying to change their use to residential. The long term impact of this is that Fife will be less attractive to visitors as accommodation provision is not available. The lack of investment in hotels is also proving difficult at this time.

Fife is a rural destination and as such it boasts a strong outdoor offer to visitors and locals alike. In order to increase the potential of this asset the Fife Tourism Strategy has set out a number of key themes to take advantage and grow this area of tourism. There are three emerging projects that need to be taken into account here, The Fife Pilgrims Way , a new promotion which will link up the towns of Culross, Dunfermline, Falkland, Cupar and St Andrews and which in a second phase could see a south to north route, largely following the Core Path Network, will provide the opportunity for new tourism businesses to emerge, from accommodation to cafes and other retail outlets. The Iconic Scottish World at Kelty will celebrate the international connections that Scotland has from across the world, but the site will eventually provide an outdoor asset covering many miles. This site will need new transportation links, potentially permissions for ancillary businesses and allocation for accommodation.

The new Forth Crossing will put Fife on the map in terms of industrial excellence and heritage; the new road will no doubt attract new investment. The Hotel demand study has identified this area as potential too. If the Forth Ferry crossings get the go-ahead then policy needs to be in place to protect current accommodation sites in areas such as Burntisland as they will be needed to support demand.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

• Seasonality across the tourism sector will drive down demand • Caravans and hotels being presented for change of use • Not all areas of Fife will attract new tourism investment without further intervention in retail and other infrastructure e.g. Kirkcaldy • Economic Climate creating low yield for some tourism businesses • Land ownership issues may occur as the Fife Pilgrims Way develops so routes may need to change • The Scottish World site will require new transportation links and other infrastructure in the coming years • The new Forth Ferry Crossing is being held up by Edinburgh Council, holding back potential

RISKS

Economic

• Economic initiatives assist in increasing value and return. If they are not pursued this can constrain economic benefit.

Page 2 of 3

• Seasonality if a feature of tourism in Fife. If initiatives are not progressed then this will continue to affect the industry.

Environmental

• New tourism development can have an adverse impact on the environment

OPTIONS THAT COULD BE ADOPTED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

• Local Planning Policy needs to be able to protect accommodation from change of use is certain areas (case by case basis through an assessment) • Support tourism development identified within The Fife Hotel Demand Study Support for investment through retail in town centres as this will help to increase demand generators for hotels (i.e. Kirkcaldy) • Support through the Local Plan towards new development coming forward as a result of the Fife Pilgrim’s Way initiative but taking into account the agreements through the Core Path Network • Support, not withstanding other policies in relation to new land developments within and around the Scottish World site at Kelty • Continue to support the development of Ferry crossing between Fife and Edinburgh

Page 3 of 3

Fife LDP Technical Paper 15 Transport Area Transport Plans /Local Transport Strategies

POLICY REFERENCES

SPP – (Page 34): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Development Planning and Management Transport Appraisal Guidance: http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/documents/reports/j184585/j184585.pdf

Local Transport Strategy (2006 – 2026): http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_LTSTextSummary.pdf

Central Area Transport Plan (2005 – 2010) – current but under review

East Area Transport Plan (2005 – 2010) – current but under review

West Area Transport Plan (2005 – 2010) – current but under review

Policies T1 – The Transport Network & Policy T2 – Traffic Safety in New Development (Mid Fife, St Andrews & East Fife and Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plans): http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_MFLPasintendto adopt-Policiesv1.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

Designing Streets: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/307126/0096540.pdf

Transport Development Guidelines: http://www.fifedirect.org.uk/topics/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&p2sid=07B1 8383-0D16-1064-E8DE641D0026DAEC&themeid=81E299FB-1BCF-4994-8C8A- 233463B738F6

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Development Planning and Management Transport Appraisal Guidance:

This document provides guidance on Transport Appraisal to inform the preparation of development plans. All development relies on transport and issues related as road, rail, and parking are regularly included in consultations. It is important to be

Page 1 of 4

aware of the wider effects of transport planning decisions and to recognise that proposals for major road improvements, new park and ride facilities, railway infrastructure improvements can contribute to allowing new development to occur.

The purpose of the guidance is to show how Transport Appraisal can be carried out at an early stage of the development plan process, where it can be most effective in helping to shape the spatial strategy and the way in which the spatial strategy will be delivered.

Through engagement with the Planning Authorities, Transport Scotland seeks to: • support the aspirations of Planning Authorities for the future development of their area and to promote sustainable economic growth • continue to deliver a safe, efficient, cost-effective and sustainable Strategic Transport System that meets the needs of all the people of Scotland • continue to ensure that the Strategic Transport Network performs its function of improving connections across Scotland

Through engaging with Planning Authorities in the preparation of main issues reports and proposed plans, Transport Scotland will endeavour to indicate what level of support can be attributed to emerging plans. This level of support will also be expressed within the overall Scottish Government response on the main issues report or proposed plan as appropriate.

In order to secure the greatest level of support for an emerging plan, the Transport Appraisal should be completed to provide input prior to the publication of the main issues report.

For the purposes of the Transport Appraisal, transport planning objectives should be set which express the transport outcomes sought for the plan and describe how potential transport problems could be alleviated. The transport planning objectives should be set within the context of the overall vision and objectives for the plan.

Local Transport Strategy & Area Transport Plans

The Local Transport Strategy and 3 Area Transport plans currently set out the transport strategy and proposals for Fife. The adopted Mid Fife Local Plan and the emerging St Andrews & East Fife and Dunfermline & West Fife Local Plans reflect relevant proposals and strategies within these Local Plans. Relevant parts of the transport Strategies/Plans should also be reflected within the LDP.

The 3 Area Transport Plans will be reviewed in the future. Once these new Transport plans are published they will have to be reviewed and any new proposals will have to be shown in the LDP.

In the meantime consultation will have to take place with Transportation Services to ascertain if there are any transport proposals that are in the pipeline that are not in the current Area Transport plans.

Page 2 of 4

Risks

Political • Transport Scotland not supporting the Spatial Strategy of LDP • Certain major transport proposals can become political/election issues. • Transport issues which are not national projects could be pushed for inclusion by Local members (A92 dualling). • Locally supported transport projects (Levenmouth branch line) don’t have national support by Transport Scotland.

Economic • Cost to implement transport projects. • Costs to implement transport interventions • Transport interventions can in the long term have an economic gain.

Social • Improved access to public transport. • Provide sustainable travel choices. • Allow people the opportunity to access the key needs and services they require, be that of Employment, Health Care, Education or Leisure.

Technical • none

Legal • none

Environmental • Location and type of proposal could result in loss of Greenfield land • Certain proposals will result in cut in carbon emissions by promoting public transport and improving public transport links.

Options

• Set out the transport planning objectives of the LDP through the spatial strategy.

• A Transport Appraisal needs to be undertaken to inform to assess the cumulative impacts of the developments proposed in the spatial strategy as set out in the DPMTAG.

• All potential development sites will have to be reviewed by Transportation Service for inclusion into the LDP

• Review current transportation policies. Combine and amend policies so that the Development Plan leads the way on transportation policies.

• Review current transport proposals in adopted/emerging Local Plans and zone any new transport proposals in LDP – By reviewing current transport

Page 3 of 4

proposals in the adopted/emerging plans we can see which proposals are complete, in the pipeline or no longer relevant. Zoning new transport proposals which come out of the Area Transport Plan review in the LDP will give these proposals planning status. This will also make the planning process smoother when applications are submitted for relevant proposals.

• Up date transport section in strategy section of LDP – This will provide details of main transport proposals throughout Fife in one section of the LDP. This will make it easier for the customer to see what major transport proposals are proposed.

• Do nothing – LDP transport information will be out of date and will not show relevant transport proposals and strategies.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

• The transport planning objectives of the LDP need to be set out in the spatial strategy.

• The cumulative impacts of the developments proposed in the spatial strategy on the strategic transport network need to be addressed through a transport appraisal. Transportation and Environmental Service should be involved with this process. Work has already been done at a Strategic level through SESplan and TAYplan.

• Call for sites criteria sets specific transport criteria for submission. Next stage site assessment should involve consultation with Transportation Development Management to get their views on these sites with regards to access and accessibility to the transport network.

• Review transportation policies with Transportation Development Management.

• Proposals/strategies arising from new Area Transport Plans will have to be reviewed for inclusion in the LDP.

• Current Local Plan proposals and Transport strategy sections will have to be reviewed for inclusion in the LDP.

• Consultation will have to take place with Transportation Services (prior to the new Area Transport plans being produced) to ascertain if there are any transport proposals that are in the pipeline that are not in the current Area Transport plans.

Page 4 of 4

Fife LDP Technical Paper 16 Vacant & Derelict Land

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 (paragraphs 89-92): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy (paragraphs 48, 57): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Scottish Government Land Use Strategy 2011 (page 4, 24: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/345946/0115155.pdf

Scottish Government Regeneration Strategy 2011 (paragraphs 100, 117, 154, Annex A): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/364595/0123891.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 (Policy BL1): http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

Building Stronger Fife Communities approved by Environment, Enterprise & Transportation Committee on 16 April 2009 http://fish.fife/subjects/index.cfm?fuseaction=TopicDisplay&objectid=F4F0EE08- DAB7-0839-96D1422329277328

SESplan Proposed Plan (paragraphs 17 and 61) http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Proposed Strategic Development Plan (page 8): http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

Scottish Government Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance 2006

Fife Council's Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy (Update 2010)

OTHER REFERENCES

Scottish Vacant & Derelict Land Survey 2011: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00386399.pdf

Fife Council Vacant & Derelict Land Audit 2011: www.fifedirect.org.uk/vacantandderelict

Temporary Greenspace on Vacant & Derelict Land in Fife 2012

Page 1 of 7

Greenspace Scotland - Stalled Spaces Scoping Report 2010

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Derelict land is previously developed land (or a building) that is incapable of development for beneficial use without rehabilitation. Vacant land is previously developed land that is not likely to require rehabilitation but which is not currently used for its intended purpose.

Vacant and derelict land damages the image of areas in which it is present and can deter inward investment. It detracts from the environment of local communities, reducing quality of life, and can be harmful to the public's health.

Total vacant & derelict land in Fife 2007 – 2011

Total Vacant Land (Ha)

Total Derelict Land (Ha) Total V&D Land (Ha)

950 900 850 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 Hectares 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Source: Fife Council Vacant & Derelict Land Audit 2011

Fife has 867 hectares of vacant and derelict land (776 ha classified as derelict, 91 ha classified vacant – Fife Council’s Vacant and Derelict Land Audit 2011). Approximately 31% of dwellings in Fife are within 500m of a derelict site. The amount of land being brought back into use has reduced in recent years, possibly as an impact of the economic downturn.

Page 2 of 7

Number of dwellings within 500m of a derelict site by settlement

No. of Dw ellings w ithin 500m of Derelict Site

10,000

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000 No. of Dwellings of No. 3,000

2,000

1,000

0 e h ar es t lin yth up m C r os R enroth Thornton unfe Kirkcaldy venmou Burntisland Gl e owdenbeath D Inverkeithing L C Source: Fife Council Vacant & Derelict Land Audit 2011

The majority of sites are within settlements. The largest concentrations are in Levenmouth and Kirkcaldy, although there are smaller settlements with significant concentrations such as Inverkeithing and Thornton. There are also large derelict sites outwith settlements primarily where mining has taken place, the largest of these being Westfield which is 305 hectares.

Location of dwellings within 500m of a derelict site

Page 3 of 7

Scottish Planning Policy requires planning authorities to support and promote proposals to bring vacant or derelict land back into productive use for development or to create more attractive environments. Areas can be identified where investment in site assembly, remediation, infrastructure and environmental improvement will enable successful development in the longer term. Authorities should adopt a proactive approach to encouraging the reuse of buildings and previously developed land, making use of land assembly and compulsory purchase powers to enable redevelopment opportunities.

The Scottish Government Land Use Strategy states that it should be a priority to examine options for restoring vacant and derelict land to economically, socially or environmentally productive uses.

Building Stronger Fife Communities is a statement by Fife Council. It highlights that the creation and maintenance of attractive residential and commercial environments, in which all participate in sustainable mixed developments is the basis for cohesive communities. The heart of the community is the town centre and its quality reflects on all in the area. The attractiveness of an area is also about how well it is looked after and what quality of investment it encourages. Building Stronger Fife Communities, which prioritises the Levenmouth, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath areas, recognises that there needs to be a focused approach - for instance, identifying key locations or corridors that would benefit from improvement. This should engage the local community and businesses, whilst taking advantage of opportunities to link to employment and skills initiatives.

The Fife Structure Plan states that vacant and derelict land should be promoted for early redevelopment/re-use in Local Plans. SESplan and TAYplan prioritise the reuse of previously developed land and buildings. Previous Local Plans have included policy to promote brownfield land within settlements.

Many of Fife’s vacant and derelict land sites have been classified as brownfield opportunity sites in Fife’s Local Plans. Through the examination of these Plans, the reporters have recommended that the Council prepare supplementary guidance to address mechanisms to advance the delivery of brownfield opportunity sites (and other sites from the established land supply).

Vacant and derelict land on main urban and transport corridors can have a particularly important impact on an area’s image. The Mid Fife Local Plan required Fife Council, in consultation with Transport Scotland, to undertake a study focussing on areas of derelict land on the main entrances and routes into Kirkcaldy by road and rail for environmental and development improvements. A study has been produced by the Fife’s Regeneration, Environment and Place team.

Urban vacant and derelict land frequently offers scope for sustainable development with sites often located near to transport links and within walking distance of town centre facilities.

Sites which are derelict may contain buildings of architectural or historic value, including listed buildings. Leaving these sites derelict increases the risk of the

Page 4 of 7

condition of such buildings deteriorating, and may lead to a situation where they become beyond repair.

Urban design will often be important, particularly where sites are prominent or include historic features. It is important that this acts as an enabler rather than as an additional demand.

The economic downturn is likely to result in additional buildings and land falling out of use. Many organisations are likely to be looking to rationalise or reduce the amount of property they operate from. Town centres may see new vacant and derelict sites if the retail sector continues to struggle.

There are factors that can make vacant and derelict land unviable or less attractive to develop. These include: • Potential contamination; • Other adverse ground conditions; • Derelict buildings on site; • Sites more likely to be in areas less attractive to developers.

Fife’s approach to development contributions aims to minimise the impact of the constraints outlined above in order to enable such sites to come forward, for example, supplementary guidance on Affordable Housing allows for negotiation on contributions. Contributions can be split into two groups, on-site contributions and off-site contributions (which include education, transport and community needs e.g. affordable housing. Whilst on-site contributions will generally be required, more flexibility is given for off-site contributions where developers are able to prove that schemes would otherwise not be viable.

In cases where there is no intention from landowners to bring vacant and derelict land and buildings back into use, it may be appropriate, in certain circumstances, to consider the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders to gain control of land.

Risks

Political • Prominent derelict sites can lead to contentious issues. Desire to see derelict land redeveloped may result in pressure for proposals to come forward that would be contrary to settlement strategy or other planning policies.

Economic • There is evidence on how environmental improvement supports the local economy. Investing in the local environment can have significant economic benefits as regards performance and competitiveness, and can help reduce flight from an area of better off households. Dereliction is likely to deter investment in an area. There may be a cost to implement any proposals identified for bringing vacant and derelict land back into use. These could potentially include land assembly or compulsory purchase. • The Scottish Vacant and Derelict Land Fund 2012/13 allocation of £8.14M has already been decided and is split between five local authorities –

Page 5 of 7

Glasgow City, North Lanarkshire, South Lanarkshire, Dundee City and Highland. For 2013/14 the fund is £7.48M of which £3.93M has already been allocated to Glasgow City and South Lanarkshire. The remaining £3.56M is as yet unallocated. Local authorities and COSLA 1 will be asked for ideas for the remaining spend. Decisions on funding will be centred on themes such as building a sustainable future, supporting town centres, community led focus and innovative greening.

Social • A significant proportion of Fife’s vacant and derelict land is in areas with higher levels of deprivation (SIMD). Poor quality environments can contribute to deprivation. Tackling vacant and derelict land has the potential to regenerate neighbourhoods and create employment.

Technical • Derelict sites may include listed buildings or structures. These should be preserved where possible. Often these can be in a poor state of repair.

Legal • Part IIA into the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended 2000), gives Local Authorities the primary regulatory role for the inspection and subsequent remediation of Contaminated Land.

Environmental • Derelict land harms amenity value for residents as well as for visitors. Derelict sites, (structures, excavations, etc), can cause potential danger to the public and exposure to contamination or pollution is possible. There may be ecological or archaeological potential that can be realised through the remediation of sites.

Options

Do nothing – This would be contrary to national policy. An increase in the amount of dereliction, particularly within Fife’s settlements would have negative economic, social and environmental impacts and is therefore not considered to be a realistic option.

Continue existing policy support – Include policy support for prioritising the re-use of previously developed land and buildings. This is a requirement of national planning policy and Fife’s two strategic development plans. Such policy statements are useful but on their own unlikely to result in difficult long-term vacant and derelict sites being brought back into productive use. Greenfield sites continue to be more popular with developers. Supplementary guidance to address mechanisms to enable the delivery of brownfield opportunity sites would assist in this respect.

Additional policy and strategy support – As above there would be policy support for prioritising the re-use of previously developed land and buildings. However,

1 COSLA: Convention of Scottish Local Authorities

Page 6 of 7

Scottish Planning Policy requires a pro-active approach. This could be done by targeting the development strategy to focus on areas with higher levels of vacant and derelict land. Urban capacity studies can assist in identifying available land where development should be encouraged and prioritised. The Local Development Plan could also identify areas where investment in site assembly, remediation, infrastructure and environmental improvement are required to enable successful development in the longer term.

Greening vacant and derelict land – This option would involve assessing whether some existing allocated brownfield sites may be more suitable (either on a permanent or medium term basis) for green uses. The restoration of sites for green uses is supported by national development 12 of National Planning Framework 2 – Central Scotland Green Network which incorporates West and Mid Fife. This has the opportunity to provide habitats, active travel routes, greenspace links, providing an enhanced setting for development and improving recreational and cultural potential. In some cases natural regeneration may be sufficient, in which case intervention may not be required.

Developer contributions – The Local Development Plan could consider exemptions on developer contributions for vacant/derelict sites based on set criteria relating to constraints and site circumstances, or where there would be significant regeneration benefits that would outweigh the waiving of contributions. These would be likely to relate to off-site contributions. It is also possible that the LDP could identify sites as effective and non-effective and allow exemptions for non- effective sites.

Where vacant and derelict land has been allocated for lower value land uses e.g. employment land, consideration could be given to cross subsidise such uses with higher value land uses e.g. housing or retail through mixed-use development. Such an approach could allow subsidised provision of employment land (this approach is referred to in the Employment Land technical paper).

ISSUES

The Local Development Plan development strategy should support efforts to bring forward the re-use of brownfield sites.

It should be considered whether the Local Development Plan should identify areas where investment in site assembly, remediation, infrastructure and environmental improvement are required to enable successful development in the longer term.

The Local Development Plan could consider exemptions on developer contributions for vacant/derelict sites based on set criteria relating to constraints and site circumstances, or where there would be significant regeneration benefits that would outweigh the waiving of contributions? This would be targeted to locations where the market would be unlikely to redevelop such sites ordinarily, and could be done through the identification of zones, individual towns or corridors.

The process to identify green networks in the Local Development Plan should take account of opportunities to tackle vacant and derelict land.

Page 7 of 7

Fife LDP Technical Paper 17 WASTE

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 paragraph 27 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy paragraphs 212 - 224 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Zero Waste Plan http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/314168/0099749.pdf

Zero Waste Plan for Fife http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_March09ZWPlanforFife. pdf

Towards Zero Waste Fife http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_Item04TowardsZeroWa steFife.DOC

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 Policy W1 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan Policy 14 http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan Policy 6 http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

OTHER REFERENCES

PAN 63: Waste Management Planning http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2002/02/pan63/pan-63

Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 http://www.sepa.org.uk/waste/moving_towards_zero_waste/zero_waste_regulation s.aspx

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Page 1 of 5

Waste is the unwanted by product of industrial, commercial and domestic activities and a potential source of pollution, however it is also an economic resource. The Scottish Government considers that no more than 5% of municipal waste should be landfilled by 2025, by which time recycling/composting of municipal waste should reach 70%. The two main waste streams are municipal and non-municipal. The former collected by local authorities, is domestic and commercial with some industrial and recycling centre arisings. To put figures in perspective, non municipal referred to as commercial and industrial waste comprises 75% of Scotland’s waste arisings (arisings is the term used for the total waste produced).

Fife produced 250,000 tonnes of waste in 2010/11. Just over half, 51.9% went to landfill in 2010/11 with the remainder being recycled or composted. The recycling/composting rate continues to rise and is now about 52%, with 48% going to landfill. There are 370 recycling points and 11 recycling centres for the collection of up to 20 waste types. (Source: Fife Council, 2012).

Fife has two landfill sites: at Lower Melville Wood near Ladybank and Lochhead, near Dunfermline (see below).

Landfill Sites in Fife 2012

Lower Melville Wood also has the capacity to generate 1.25 MW of electricity from landfill gas, whilst Lochhead has the capacity to generate 2MW of electricity from landfill gas. In addition an anaerobic digestion plant is planned to open at Lochhead by late 2013.

Page 2 of 5

Apart from the two sites currently operating, the approved Fife Structure Plan allocates a site at Westfield, which has consent, for an integrated waste management facility with capacity to handle 500,000 tonnes of waste. In terms of site capacity therefore, Fife is relatively well placed.

Whilst the proximity principle is important in waste management, it will still be necessary to transport waste or recyclates as not every community will have local access to every type of waste management facility. Transportation distances should however be minimised,

The Zero Waste Plan emphasises the importance of separating different materials in the waste stream to simplify the process of recovering their value. Moving towards zero waste means collecting, sorting, reusing, recycling, and energy recovery. It aims to clarify the way forward for waste and resource management in Scotland, and provide a firm basis for decisions and plans for the future. Local Development Plans should set out a locational or spatial strategy for waste treatment facilities. This can be achieved either by allocating specific sites and / or by indicating clearly that land designated for employment and industrial or storage is appropriate for many waste management facilities.

Zero Waste Regulations were introduced by the Scottish Government in May 2012. They address both domestic and commercial/industrial waste. As a consequence, Fife’s Zero Waste Plan will need to be updated to reflect these new regulations and also to take account of developments in the Scottish Government’s Zero Waste Strategy. Key elements of the new regulations include:

• Setting a national target to recycle or compost 70% of waste from all sources and landfilling no more than 5% of remaining waste by 2025. • Targets for local authorities to recycle or compost 50% of waste from household sources by 2013, 60% by 2020 and 70% by 2025. • A ban on any metal, plastic, glass, paper, card and food collected separately for recycling from going to incineration or landfill from 1 January 2014. • A ban on biodegradable municipal waste going to landfill from 1 January 2021.

Replacement of the 25% cap on energy from local authority collected municipal waste with an approach that requires equivalent treatment standards for all waste streams and sectors (household, commercial and industrial waste), irrespective of which party collects the waste.

NPF2 emphasises that the effective management and re-use of waste is essential to a sustainable future. The EU Landfill Directive requires the amount of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfill to be reduced to 35% of the total produced in 1995 by 2020. Landfill Tax is increasing substantially. Additional facilities for the treatment and recycling of municipal, commercial and industrial wastes are therefore urgently needed. As the methane produced by landfill sites is a powerful greenhouse gas, reducing the scale of landfill will help to combat climate change. Waste can be considered as an economic resource and the

Page 3 of 5

construction and operation of waste management installations can also offer new economic opportunities.

Scottish Planning Policy underlines that the Scottish Government has adopted zero waste as a goal. It has set targets for municipal waste including the following:

• Increasing the proportion recycled or composted to 50% by 2020, and 70% by 2025. • A 5% limit on landfill of municipal waste by 2025; and • A 25% limit on energy from mixed municipal waste.

Development plans must identify appropriate locations for any waste management facilities that will be required, where possible allocating specific sites and provide a policy framework which supports the development of these facilities.

The SESplan Proposed Plan in Policy 14 states that Local Development Plans will encourage proposals for the recycling and recovery of waste, in line with the Zero Waste Plan; consider proposals for landfill development where this is supported by the ZWP and SEPA Landfill Capacity Reports; and safeguard Westfield as a site for waste treatment facilities.

TAYplan Policy 6 addresses energy and waste resource management infrastructure. This requires Local Development Plans to identify areas that are suitable for different forms of waste / resource management or criteria to support this. Beyond the provision of community or small scale facilities, larger scale waste management infrastructure is unlikely to be focused on North Fife. Local Development Plans should ensure that all areas of search have been justified at a minimum on the basis of a list of criteria.

The Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 contains a policy on strategic waste management. This requires Local Plans to identify a strategic network of sites for waste management, giving preference to any appropriate proposals at Lochhead and, and Westfield. Priority is given to recycling and sustainable waste treatment technologies as opposed to landfill. Given that these sites are identified, is there a need to indicate clearly that land designated for employment and industrial or storage is appropriate for many waste management facilities? At a site specific level, there is need to reconfigure and possibly relocate the recycling facilities at Lochhead landfill site. This will necessitate the identification of a site to accommodate the facility which serves north west Dunfermline and the West Villages area.

Risks

Political: • Planning for waste management facilities is a controversial area of planning and can fall into the category of “bad neighbour development”.

Economic: • Over reliance on landfill disposal can result in financial penalties. • Recycling can produce an income stream for the Council

Page 4 of 5

• Waste can be considered as an economic resource providing the raw material for manufacture of recycled products and as a source of fuel.

Social: • Waste disposal facilities, if inappropriately located can have adverse effects on communities.

Technical: • Leachate, if not properly handled can contaminate ground water.

Environment:

• Waste management facilities, especially landfill, has the potential to cause contamination and pollution, particularly in relation to leachates and water bodies and courses, and is the source of significant greenhouse gas emissions. • If landfill facilities are not properly planned, opportunities to generate energy from waste could be lost.

Options

Continue and develop current strategy: this would involve continuing with the current strategy of aiming for zero waste and minimising the need for landfill by promoting alternative waste treatment technologies such as anaerobic digestion and generating energy from waste. Sites for waste treatment facilities have been identified at Lochhead, Melville Wood and Westfield.

Reduce the emphasis on Zero Waste and plan to accommodate more landfill: given that there is remaining capacity at Lochhead and Melville Wood and any facility at Westfield has potential to accept 500,000 tonnes of landfill waste per year. There is potential to maintain current landfill rates or even increase them. This approach is not supported however as it would be contrary to national, strategic and Fife Council policy. It is therefore unrealistic.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1 Safeguard Westfield for waste resource recovery facilities (SESplan).

2 Encourage proposals for the recycling and recovery of waste and discourage proposals for new landfill sites. New landfill capacity will not be supported.

4 Develop link between waste and energy (source: St Andrews & East Fife LP Examination). This is also an issue raised in the Council’s updated Zero Waste Strategy. (See Tayplan) See CE

5 Potential relocation of the recycling facilities at Lochhead (not a major issue).

6 Planning for household waste – 4 bin collection (micro planning)

Page 5 of 5

Fife LDP Technical Paper 18 NRS Population Projections 2010

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Policy Framework http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2115939.pdf

Housing 159. Local planning authorities should have a clear understanding of housing needs in their area. They should prepare a Strategic Housing Market Assessment to assess their full housing needs, working with neighbouring authorities where housing market areas across administrative boundaries. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment should identify the scale and mix of housing and the range of tenures that the local population is likely to need over the plan period which:

• meets household and population projections, taking account of migration and demographic change; • addresses the need for all types of housing, including affordable housing and the needs of different groups in the community (such as, but not limited to, families with children, older people, people with disabilities, service families and people wishing to build their own homes) and • caters for housing demand and the scale of housing supply necessary to meet this demand; - prepare a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment to establish realistic assumptions about the availability, suitability and the likely economic viability of land to meet the identified need for housing over the plan period.

Health and well-being 171. Local planning authorities should work with public health leads and health organisations to understand and take account of the health status and needs of the local population (such as for sports, recreation and places of worship), including expected future changes, and any information about relevant barriers to improving health and well-being.

TAYplan Proposed Plan http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.p df

Page 1 of 5

Planning for this level of build broadly reflects the changes in the General Register Office Scotland (now the National Records of Scotland NRS) 2006-based projections. The National Records of Scotland Projections: Produced every 2 years, show population and household changes for the next 25 years assuming a continuation of the most recent five year trends.

SESplan Proposed Plan http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

The SESplan population is forecast to grow by around 200,000 over the period of the SDP. The number of households is expected to increase by 168,000 over the same period. Increases in population and households are the main factors in the increased need for housing.

The SESplan population is around 1.2 million (544,000 households) and forecast to grow to around 1.4 million (712,000 households) by 2033. There are expected to be increasing numbers of people in older age groups (65 – 84) and growing numbers of smaller households. (General Register Office for Scotland 2008 Based Projections)

In 2008, around 50% of the population lived in Edinburgh and the larger towns and 50% in settlements of less than 20,000 or the wider rural area. More than half of the area is rural, and farming, forestry and other rural based enterprises are vital in many areas. Improving connectivity across all parts of the SESplan area including through high speed digital networks is essential to enable the development of more sustainable communities.

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

The recent publication of the NRS Population projections data at council area level (2010) should be assessed in relation to the potential impact on the preparation of the Fife Local Development Plan.

According to the latest mid-year estimates produced by the National Records of Scotland (NRS) for 2010, Fife’s population is estimated at 365,020. The NRS principal population projections for Fife over the period 2010-2035 shows Fife’s population will increase to 399,721 by 2035, an increase of 34,700 (Figure 1). This equates to a population increase of 10% over this period and is consistent with the Scottish average figure. In comparison with other council area population projections, Fife is ranked 18 th out of 32 in terms of rate of change, with Perth and Kinross showing the highest growth (32%), and Inverclyde showing the largest decline (-17%).

Figure 1

Page 2 of 5

SW Fife Population Projections (Housing Constrained Model) - All Ages - Males and Females Cty of Dunf Cowdenbth Kirkcaldy 80000 Glenrothes NE Fife Levenmth 75000

70000

65000

60000

55000

50000

45000

40000

35000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Projections can change, as migration and birth rates vary over time for many reasons. However, the most certain part of this growth involves older age groups. This will result in a dramatic change in the make up of Fife’s population over a relatively short period.

According to the NRS figures, the number of Fifers of pensionable age is likely to increase by 27% from 2010-2035 (Figure 2). For older pensioners, aged 75 years and over, this is estimated to increase by 92% over the 25 year period (Figure 3).

Figure 2

Population Projections (Housing Constrained Model) - 65+ Ages - Males and Females

22000 SW Fife Cty of Dunf

20000 Cowdenbth Kirkcaldy Glenrothes NE Fife 18000 Levenmth

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Figure 3

Page 3 of 5

Population Projections (Housing Constrained Model) - 75+ Ages - Males and Females 11000 SW Fife Cty of Dunf 10000 Cowdenbth Kirkcaldy Glenrothes 9000 NE Fife Levenmth

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Fife’s aging population (27%) is in line with the Scottish average (26%), and there are quite a few councils that are showing higher growth figures than Fife. Because of Fife’s size however, the number of pensioners will be one of the largest in Scotland.

Most of Fife’s expected 34,700 growth in population will relate to those of pensionable age, with numbers of people aged 0-15 and those of working age, remaining fairly stable over the 2010-2035 period.

A growing elderly population may have implications for health and social care needs. A growing number of people may also have particular concerns about the impact of crime, antisocial behaviour and accidents in the home.

Risks

Social

• The structure of age groups within Fife will undoubtedly change and this will have an impact on how we plan for the future. An ageing population brings new challenges and this, along with changes to other age structures, must be taken into account.

Technical

• Fife Council believes the latest NRS projections (2010) to be optimistic for Fife, showing just under 400,000 population at 2035, in particular with the significant slow-down in house building in recent years, compared with higher rates in the earlier part of the decade. With this in mind, Fife Council believes that this figure should be lower, however, given the availability of

Page 4 of 5

appropriate data at this time, it is not possible to say with any certainty how much lower this figure would be. This will be helped greatly with the production of the Census 2011 data available late 2012.

• To calculate projections at lower more useful geographical levels such as Local Housing Market Areas using the recent NRS projections (2010) is considered unwise and potentially counter-productive. Using the 2011 census data will provide the most up to date and accurate position on Fife’s population now and projecting forward.

Options

• Do not use the NRS population projection data (2010) and await the outputs from the 2011 Census, available in late 2012. Update the local plan as necessary when new data becomes available.

There is potential for scenario building analysis to be carried out in-house using the census data, factoring in local conditions such as house build rates to give more realistic current and future population figures for Fife. Enterprise Planning and Protective Services’ Housing Land Audit data would feed into the scenario modelling.

• Use the NRS population projections (2010).

Issues to be addressed by the Local Development Plan

There are no major issues to be addressed by the local development plan in relation to the latest NRS population projections (2010). Whilst the overall population figures projected by the NRS are in question this should not cause any problems when preparing the local development plan.

Although there are no major issues for the LDP team concerning the population projection totals for Fife, an ageing population and changes to other age groups must be taken into consideration.

Using the 2011 Census data as a baseline for population projections, whilst factoring in local conditions such as recent house build rates, will provide more robust and useable population projection estimates for both land use and service provision planning.

Page 5 of 5

Fife LDP Technical Paper 19 Provision for Digital Ducting

POLICY REFERENCES

Data Ducting Infrastructure for New Homes, 2008 . http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/dataductinginfrast ructure

Scotland’s Digital Future Infrastructure Action Plan http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/01/1487/1

OTHER REFERENCES

Based on 2008 Data Ducting Doc referenced above.

Standards, Regulations and Guidance

Duct guidance (for external infrastructure): National Joint Utilities Group – Guidelines on the Positioning and Colour Coding of Utilities’ Apparatus – April 2003.

The Building Standards as appropriate.

British Standards as appropriate notably with respect to Electrical Installations and Telecommunications Systems.

Refer to the Scottish Government standards for man hole covers, man hole frames and ducting under roads.

CP 312-1: 1973 Code of practice for plastics pipe works (thermoplastics material) – General principles and choice of material.

Reference to the appropriate guidance for the specifications of conduit systems for cable management. BS EN 50086-2.4 is a particular requirement for conduit systems underground.

Cabling, Data Socket and Technology Requirements

There are various guides and standards on cabling and technology requirements (of which the developer’s specialist should be aware).

Page 1 of 5

In addition to the guidance and standards produced by national standards bodies (such as BSi) there are European (CEN/CENELEC (EN)) standards and international (ISO, IEEE, TIA and EIA) standards.

Communications Act 2003

Communications Act 2003 may not have a direct impact on developers unless they operate a data service (network) and whether they could be classified as a provider of an electronic communications network (ECN) or electronic communications services (ECS) under the Communications Act.

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

The purpose of Scotland’s Digital Future Infrastructure Action Plan 2012 is to deliver a step change in people's ability to access the internet, enabling people to connect from their homes, businesses and while on the move. These improvements to our digital infrastructure are essential if we are to maintain and improve the ability of our businesses to compete in a global market place; be successful in attracting inward investment; transform the delivery of public services; respond to the challenges of a low carbon economy and have vibrant, strong and connected communities in our cities, towns and rural areas. This will make a major contribution to the Government's purpose of making Scotland a more successful country, with opportunities for all to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth for all of Scotland.

Modern digital connectivity is one of the essential components of creating a successful country. For businesses and social enterprises, it enhances productivity and drives innovation. In rural communities and fragile areas, it has the potential to boost economic development, retain young people and attract new residents. Connectivity, both fixed and mobile, is central to the successful development of emerging sectors such as renewables, digital healthcare and cloud computing, but also to more traditional sectors, such as tourism or business services, which are increasingly using digital technologies.

Further, as more people work from home, there is an increasing demand for data services to enable them to conduct business as if they were in an office. People are now taking this into account when buying a home, looking for space for an “office” and the availability of broadband connectivity. Furthermore, Intelligent Homes can exploit data service connectivity and deliver new services to residents, manage heating and energy usage automatically to help reduce carbon emissions and wasted energy.

Although this Technical Paper refers to ducting, cabled and fibre technologies data service delivery is by no means limited to wiring and wireless technologies offer an alternative. It is expected that the demand for such services will increase and it is felt that doing nothing is becoming less of an option. Digital ducting is the physical infrastructure underground that can carry the cables associated with digital

Page 2 of 5

technologies and can sit alongside traditional infrastructures such as telephone and electricity.

Currently data services are delivered in a variety of ways including using: • the infrastructure that delivers standard telephony services • a cable television network • a dedicated multi-services broadband network • mobile telephony, wireless and satellite to offer flexibility and deliver services to areas that cannot access other services.

As the take up of broadband and associated data services has increased it has become apparent that people will demand a data service with a home as a matter of course, considering it as important as other utilities.

It is envisaged that in the near future developers will be looking to use data services within their new dwellings as selling points. These may include broadband ready homes, central security services, intelligent heat and power management. This would also act as a selling point to any developers of business and industry developments.

Wireless technologies offer flexibility for the delivery of data services and arguably a simpler implementation. However, it is understood that wire based services will still be required to deliver high data demanding services. Indeed, even wireless based services still require some form of cabling for connection to the larger service provision.

Risks

Economic

• External infrastructure is required to facilitate the installation of cabling and possibly network equipment to support the provision of data services to dwellings. The cabling and network equipment is likely to be installed by a data service provider once a development is underway, for example when there is a revenue stream from residents. However, it may not be installed until after a development has been completed incurring additional cost and delay to residents.

Technical

• Ideally one or more data service providers should have been identified at the outset of a development as they may assist in the detailed design of the external infrastructure.

• However, it is important that the external infrastructure is not restricted by design to a given data service provider or a particular network technology. It also needs to be recognised that the external infrastructure should be available to other data service providers.

Page 3 of 5

• Further detailed guidance that should be considered in the design and implementation of the external infrastructure is contained within the document Data Ducting Infrastructure for New Homes, 2008 . The document contains information on topology and layout requirements, trenching, duct types, associated chambers, street cabinets, support for wireless technology, duct signage and layout recording, boundaries and termination and capping.

• It is clearly impossible to pre-cable a dwelling to support all possible applications. Indeed, the current provision of telephone and television sockets in homes is often inadequate and lacking in flexibility. The result is that many dwelling have extensive cabling that is often surface mounted or trailed across floors.

• Occupants of dwellings are likely to require: • data sockets at useful locations throughout the dwelling; • a readily accessible location where network equipment can be installed with a simple user-friendly method of connecting the network equipment to live data sockets; and • mains electricity sockets located near the data sockets.

It is not only new developments which should benefit from improved telecommunications ducting. Communities as well as businesses can benefit from improved digital communication. In developing a new approach, the potential to use fibre optic to provide a broadband service to remote rural communities, will be investigated with wind energy and other utilities providers. This would help to address some issues raised by local communities during the Community Matters stage of preparing the Local Development Plan.

Future proofing

It is important to note that as technological advances are made that materials and construction methods may well change in the future, therefore developers should ensure that when developing a site with digital ducting that they do so using the most up-to-date construction methods and technologies where possible.

Options

Do nothing option – there is a risk that new developments lack the digital ducting to the required quality making them less competitive than similar developments within the city regions where population densities make private sector investment in ultra high speed broadband more likely.

Identify one or more data service providers at the outset of a development to assist with the design of the external and internal infrastructure. Adopt the design and implementation of the external infrastructure is contained within the document Data Ducting Infrastructure for New Homes, 2008 to ensure consistency with a nationally recognised approach.

Page 4 of 5

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

• Give developers the opportunity to consider the installation of infrastructures within new developments and dwellings to support the later provision of data services by third parties. • Reduce the risk of non-standard infrastructures (for example using ad hoc ducting types and topologies) leading to future incompatibility issues within different developments. • Give developers the opportunity to add benefits to new developments and add to the marketability of their dwellings or business premises. • There is also the possibility that developing such infrastructure will allow for existing houses and businesses to ‘tap into’ this new infrastructure in terms of retrofitting this ducting infrastructure.

Internal infrastructure needs

Some of the equipment that may require cabling within a typical dwelling may be considered as: • Communications, entertainment and other equipment that require broadband or at least basic internet connectivity. The connection of such equipment is the prime focus of this guidance. • Other equipment that may require an external network connection other than the internet e.g. district heating schemes. • Systems and equipment that require cabling within the dwelling but may or may not have any need for external connectivity.

Page 5 of 5

Fife LDP Technical Paper 20 Coastal Planning

POLICY REFERENCES

National Planning Framework 2 (paragraphs 101-102): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/278232/0083591.pdf

Scottish Planning Policy (paragraphs 98-103): http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

PAN 53 Classifying The Coast For Planning Purposes http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1998/10/pan53

Scotland's National Marine Plan: Pre-Consultation Draft (Scottish Government, 2011) http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/03/21114728/0

Fife Shoreline Management Plan 2011 http://www.fifedirect.org/minisites/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&pageid=C04 0877C-B767-3F71-8454BE5167C5BC58&siteID=C03E446A-0241-A6A5- 7462DD169B215841

TAYplan Strategic Development Plan – Policy 3: Managing TAYplan’s Assets http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/FINAL%20Approved%20Plan%20June%202012%20low%20res.pdf

Local Plan Policy E27: The Coast www.fife.gov.uk/localplan

ASSESSMENT

Fife’s Coast supports a wide range of economic activities, including fishing, industry and tourism. It also supports internationally important wildlife, and contains important landscapes that are an important part of the character of Fife. Fife’s Local Development Plan will need to balance these factors to ensure that coast is managed and developed appropriately, taking into consideration the potential impacts of climate change and sea level change.

The existing Local Plan policy for the coast is Policy E27: The Coast. This policy provides criteria restricting development on the undeveloped coast, and directs development requiring a coastal location or which contributes to the economic regeneration of coastal settlements to the developed coast.

Scottish Planning Policy Development plans should identify coastal areas likely to be suitable for development, areas subject to significant constraints and areas which are considered unsuitable for development such as the isolated coast. The identification of coastal locations which are suitable for development should be

Page 1 of 8

based on a clear understanding of the physical, environmental, economic and social characteristics of the coastal area and the likely effects of climate change.

Coastal areas likely to be suitable for development include existing settlements and substantial free standing industrial and energy developments, particularly where development is linked to regeneration or the re-use of brownfield land. These coastal areas may also contain internationally and nationally designated nature conservation sites, important cultural heritage resources and valuable areas of open space which should be protected from inappropriate development.

When identifying areas appropriate for development, planning authorities should take into account the locational requirements of different types of development, for example ports and other marine industries, land-based development associated with off-shore energy production and tourism/recreation related development.

Development plans should protect the coastal environment, indicate priority locations for enhancement and regeneration, identify areas at risk from coastal erosion and flooding, and promote public access to and along the coast wherever possible. Where relevant, development plans should also identify areas where managed realignment of the coast may be appropriate, setting out potential benefits such as habitat creation and new recreation opportunities. Planning authorities should take the likely effect of proposed development on the marine environment into account when preparing development plans.

Rising sea levels and more extreme weather events resulting from climate change are likely have a significant impact on coastal areas, and planning policy must respond to these challenges.

Strategic Development Plans TAYplan requires that Land should be identified through Local Development Plans to identify and safeguard parts of the undeveloped coastline along the River Tay Estuary and in Angus and North Fife, that are unsuitable for development and set out policies for their management; identifying areas at risk from flooding and sea level rise and develop policies to manage retreat and realignment, as appropriate.

SESplan does not contain policy specific to the coast but refers to significant development proposals at Rosyth (international container terminal and port) and Methil (Energy Park Fife).

Current Local Plan Policy Current policy for Fife states that development on the undeveloped coast will not be supported unless a series of criteria can be met. These include: • Need for a coastal location; • Avoidance of Greenfield land; • High standards of design and siting; • Proposals must not contribute to or be at risk of flooding or coastal erosion; • Cultural and natural heritage resources are safeguarded; • Footpaths/Cycle networks are not harmed; and, • Does not result in coalescence of coastal villages.

Page 2 of 8

Development which is proven to require a coastal location or which contributes to the economic regeneration of coastal settlements should be located on the developed coast in the first case.

Defining the Coast As stated above Scottish Planning Policy states that Local development plan should identify coastal areas likely to be suitable for development, areas subject to significant constraints and areas which are considered unsuitable for development such as the isolated coast, whilst TAYplan requires Local Development Plans to identify and safeguard parts of the undeveloped coast, that are unsuitable for development and set out policies for their management. Whilst SESplan does not contain a similar requirement there is a need for a consistent approach across Fife.

Planning Advice Note 53 provides guidance on the classification of the coast. The key or primary consideration in deciding whether a stretch of coast should be regarded as developed, undeveloped or isolated is the existence of settlements. Size of settlement should determine whether an area is classed as developed or undeveloped. A number of secondary indicators further assist in determining how a stretch of coast should be classified and in determining boundaries of specific areas. These are: infrastructure; industrial/commercial/power/port/military; tourism; leisure and recreation; offshore activity; and, character. It states that it is unlikely that any part of the mainland east coast of Scotland will be classed as isolated.

Fife’s three current Local Plans define the coastal zone (the land related to and influenced by the coast) as including land up to 0.25km inland from Mean High Water Springs, the coastal landscapes defined in the Fife Landscape Character Assessment and coastal habitats. The developed coast has been defined as settlements with a population greater than 2,000 and where there is existing large- scale development for industry, tourism and recreation outwith settlement limits. Some of Fife’s previous Local Plans identified areas of undeveloped coast on proposals maps, however, this was not done for the 3 current plans.

A high level analysis to identify areas of undeveloped coastline in Fife using the guidance set out in Planning Advice Note 53 and taking into account previous Local Plans. Two maps are included as an appendix to this document. These show factors influencing the classification of Fife’s coastline, and identify areas as developed or undeveloped.

Fife Shoreline Management Plan The second generation Fife Shoreline Management Plan was completed in December 2011 and sets out Fife Council’s policies for managing 179km of the Fife Coastline. The plan identifies preferred defence options along the coast. The Shoreline Management Plan is a non-statutory, high level plan which sets Fife Council’s policies for coastal defence having considered coastal processes, tidal behaviour, land use and the effects of sea level rise as a result of climate change. The plan should be used to inform strategic planning. Further details are contained in the Local Development Plan Technical Paper on Flooding.

Page 3 of 8

Renewable Energy Fife Council’s Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance. And Local Plan policies R2 and R3 refer to wind energy proposals on the shore line (R2) and off shore (R3). Both of these policies only support proposals that will not have a significant impact on the natural environment. It is not necessary for the LDP to provide greater detail on this although policy E27: The Coast could make reference to wind energy proposals.

National Marine Plan The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 requires Scottish Ministers to introduce a plan for the Scottish marine area, setting out policies for sustainable development. A pre- consultation draft National Marine Plan was published in Mar 2011. Consultation is due on a Draft National Marine Plan before the plan goes to Parliament.

The National Marine Plan area will physically overlap with terrestrial planning boundaries to ensure marine and terrestrial planning will address the whole of the marine and terrestrial environments together.

The National Marine Plan will set out: policies for sustainable development of Scotland's seas; policies on Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas and other conservation sites; and, economic, social and environmental objectives, including for the mitigation and adaptation of climate change.

A wide range of topics are covered including fisheries and aquaculture, oil and gas, carbon capture and storage, renewables, tourism and recreation, marine transport, telecommunication/cables, military activities, marine nature conservation, marine historic environment, coastal protection and flood defence, water abstraction, waste water, and, minerals.

The Scottish Government approach to development in the marine area is: • A presumption in favour of development; • Development should take account of sustaining and enhancing heritage assets; • Development should take account of impacts on National Scenic Areas. • Developments should take air quality issues into account; • Developments and activities will be resilient to, and will not unacceptably impact upon, coastal change; • Developments should not result in a deterioration of the ecological status of any water to which the Water Framework Directive applies; • Development should aim to avoid harm to marine ecology, biodiversity and geological conservation interests through location, mitigation and considering reasonable alternatives.

The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that Scotland capitalises on the potential presented by renewable energy and the low carbon sector, including wave, wind and tidal energies, and carbon capture and storage. Decommissioning ageing oil and gas equipment will also emerge as a new business activity.

Renewable sources (both terrestrial and marine) will generate electricity equivalent to 80% of Scotland’s annual electricity consumption by 2020. This will require:

Page 4 of 8

• Prioritising the development of demonstration facilities for fixed and floating offshore wind and wave and tidal marine energy • Developing an offshore grid system including links to Europe • Ensuring availability of port facilities for supporting the offshore renewables

Continued access to the marine and coastal resource should be maintained for leisure and recreational use. This may require maintenance or development of infrastructure such as slipways, piers, moorings, marinas and anchorages.

The Marine Acts for Scotland and the UK have introduced new powers to designate Marine Protected Areas to protect features of conservation importance in both inshore and the Scottish offshore region.

By 2015 the first Historic Marine Protected Areas (HMPAs) should be in place. These will review existing designated wreck sites and underwater scheduled monuments to create Marine Protected Areas and identify further priority sites.

Regional Marine Planning The Marine Act allows Scottish Ministers to delegate regional planning to a lead organisation of a Scottish Marine Region such as a local authority or, a group of nominated stakeholders acting together. These will be known as Marine Planning Partnerships. The regional plans will be approved by Scottish Ministers.

Boundaries of Scottish Marine Regions have not been determined yet. A consultation on possible boundaries was held late 2010/early 2011 and responses are being analysed before a decision is taken.

Fife Shoreline Management Plan The second generation Fife Shoreline Management Plan sets out Fife Council’s policies for managing the Fife Coastline. The plan identifies preferred defence options along the coast. The Shoreline Management Plan is a non-statutory, high level plan which sets Fife Council’s policies for coastal defence having considered coastal processes, tidal behaviour, land use and the effects of sea level rise as a result of climate change. The plan should be used to inform strategic planning. Further details are contained in the Local Development Plan Technical Paper on Flooding.

Risks

Economic • Failure to provide for the needs of development requiring a coastal location could harm economic strategies.

Social • The Coast forms an important amenity for Fife’s population. Fife Coastal Path provides access to most of the coastline.

Page 5 of 8

Legal • Habitats Regulations require that before submitting a plan for approval, that is not directly connected with or necessary for the management of a European Natura 2000 site, it must consider whether: a) the plan is likely to have a significant effect on such a site, and where this is the case; b) an appropriate assessment has been carried out of the likely impacts.

Environmental • Fife’s Coastal area contains a variety of sites designated for their environmental value. The Local Development Plan should aim to minimise and mitigate any potential negative impacts or to seek enhancements to these sites where possible.

Options

Comply with legal requirements and national policy: The Local development plan should protect the coastal environment, indicate priority locations for enhancement and regeneration, identify areas at risk from coastal erosion and flooding, and promote public access to and along the coast wherever possible.

Defining the Coast The Local Development Plan should show areas of developed and undeveloped coast, highlighting areas likely to be unsuitable for development, and set out policies for their management. A high level assessment has been undertaken to classify the coastline as developed/undeveloped. This could be published as part of the consultation on the Main Issues Report, to seek views, prior to more detailed identification of areas of undeveloped coastline through the Proposed Plan.

Update Coastal policy Policy relating to the Coast could make reference to wind energy and green network proposals, in addition to areas previously covered.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Fife’s coastline requires to be defined with policies for the management of coastal areas.

The Local Development Plan needs to take account of proposals for the management of Fife’s coast arising from Fife’s Shoreline Management Plan, including coastal re-alignment.

The Local Development should address the issue of wind energy proposals within coastal policy, and should take into account Fife’s green network.

Page 6 of 8

Appendix 1: Fife’s Coast

Page 7 of 8

Appendix 2: Developed and Undeveloped Coastline in Fife

Page 8 of 8

Fife LDP Technical Paper 21 Spatial Strategy

POLICY REFERENCES

Scottish Planning Policy http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/300760/0093908.pdf

Fife Structure Plan 2006-26 http://publications.1fife.org.uk/uploadfiles/publications/c64_structureplan09.pdf

SESplan Proposed Plan http://www.sesplan.gov.uk/assets/files/docs/proposed-plan/Proposed%20Plan.pdf

TAYplan http://www.tayplansdpa.gov.uk/1.%20Proposed%20Strategic%20Development%20Plan%202011.pdf

ASSESSMENT

Status of the topic and reason for the assessment

Strategy summary

A spatial strategy has been devised for the Fife Main Issues Report it comprises the following key elements:

• Promotes sustainable travel patterns and looks to make the best use of existing services and infrastructure.

• The continued promotion of existing allocations and the development of a strategy which augments the key elements of the existing Fife development plan strategy.

• A focus on the developing brownfield land, for any scale of development, in all settlements across Fife.

• A focus on identifying appropriate levels of employment land to support key sectors and encourage sustainable travel movements.

• A focus of strategic scale edge of town development on the settlements of Kelty, Cowdenbeath and North Dunfermline.

• A focus on investigating the opportunities to develop sites close to Glenrothes Town Centre.

1 • The development of an sub regional strategy for the North Dunfermline/Ore Valley Area which includes a strong linkage between the focusing of new development, infrastructure and the opportunities for environmental improvement through the green network.

• The encouragement of ‘organic’ growth in all other settlements that complement the settlement in question.

• The relaxation of developer requirements on brownfield and vacant and derelict land to encourage their development.

• The consideration of a more flexible approach to certain town centre and employment land sites which could allow the consideration of mixed use development opportunities.

• The development of a Fife wide Green Network

• Creation of strong linkages between development and the Green Network.

2 Preface

The Local Development Plan is at its Main Issues stage which is provides the focus for discussion and debate on the issues that will shape the final Local Development Plan. At this stage it is a requirement of Scottish Planning Policy that Fife Council sets out its proposed strategy for future land use change, identifies how it has been identified and presents it’s preferred spatial and policy options for addressing land use change across Fife. Where alternatives exist to the preferred approach these must be considered.

The purpose of this document is to set out the context and options which have been considered to be available to the MIR for the development of a Spatial Strategy for the Fife Local Development Plan. The document builds on the spatial strategy work already carried out for TAYplan and SESplan.

3 Ordnance Survey licence number 100023385.

Existing land use strategy

The Fife Local Development Plan is being produced in the context of a long history of strategic and local planning. Like all other Local Authorities, Fife has an existing land use strategy, currently set out in the Fife Structure Plan and its three Local Plans. It is the aim of the new Local Development Plan to continue with the majority of the land use strategy in the existing development plan. This approach is an accepted approach for the following reasons:

SPP (paragraph 5) states that visionary and ambitious plans will guide development and that ‘ these Plans provide guidance to potential developers and investors; provide various interests with the opportunity to participate in shaping the future of their nation and their communities; and give public authorities a structure within which decisions can be made with confidence’ .

This guidance is being reflected in the preparation of the LDP. Development previously committed through the development planning process has been thoroughly tested through the Structure Plan and Local Plan processes. This has led to substantial support for the strategies being pursued among communities, local politicians, infrastructure providers and many parts of the development sector. The vast majority of sites identified through this process still represent the best strategy for the continuing delivery of the housing requirements of the area.

Due to the current economic climate many of these allocations have yet to come to fruition. With large numbers of sites already allocated there is limited interest or capacity in these sectors to deviate from the existing strategies or augment them with large amounts of new housing land.

As such, there is a presumption that existing development allocations currently included in the Fife Development Plan will continue and be subsumed within the new Local Development Plan. The purpose of this spatial strategy exercise is to amalgamate future change into this existing strategy in a manner which complements that already planned across Fife. All the main land allocations will continue as planned through the existing development plan. This includes the Strategic Land Allocations, employment land designations, green belts and environmental/landscape designations. However, in progressing these sites into the Proposed Plan and beyond they will be required to justify their inclusion and that they will deliver housing

4 during the lifetime of the Local Development Plan. The key elements of the existing strategy are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Key elements of the Existing Fife Development Plan Strategy

Understanding Change – settlement context

Fife is uniquely covered by two Strategic Development Plans, TAYplan and SESplan. Both of these documents restates the key elements of the Fife Structure Plan and thus provides the continuity and certainty that is outlined above.

Each of the documents also provides a context through which the future focus of land use change should be managed. The development of the spatial strategy requires the amalgamation of the spatial strategies in TAYplan and SESplan. These strategies are compatible but are presented in a slightly different manner. Both focus on the ability of settlements to accommodate future change and encourage LDPs to further assess opportunities based on a wide range of sustainable principles. These require to be encompassed into the spatial planning of the Local Development Plan.

The success of the LDP is achieving its key aims will be dependant on it addressing

5 these sustainable principles.

To further address sustainability and provide greater linkage with the Strategic Environmental Assessment the identification of sites through the Proposed Plan will include an assessment based on the SEA criteria.

Directing future change – Fife wide Settlement Strategy

TAYplan and SESplan direct the LDP to look at settlement capacity to accommodate change. However as would be expected from Strategic Development Plans they focus on directing the larger scale change over the next 20 years, some of which is beyond the life span of this Local Development Plan.

Both SDPs direct the LDP to look a series of settlements that they deem to have the ability, in principle, to accommodate further larger scale change.

TAYplan directs future additional change to a series of Principal Settlements which are displayed in three different tiers. Principal Settlements are where there is deemed to be the best access to services and existing infrastructure. This is not based on an assessment of the settlements current ability to accommodate growth, rather it is a theoretical statement that each settlement is of a scale that will normally be able to accommodate some additional growth. The settlements which TAYplan identifies are shown in Table 1.

Tier 1 - TAYport , Newport , Wormit (All based on proximity to Dundee)

Tier 2 - St Andrews, Cupar

Tier 3 - Anstruther, Leuchars, Guardbridge, Newburgh

Table 1 – TAYplan settlements capable of accommodating strategic change

TAYplan also has a tiered approach to development locations in and around settlements with development initially being preferred to be located in settlements, on previously developed land.

SESplan is based on a greater level of initial assessment and directs strategic growth to two areas, North Dunfermline and the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys. Within the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys SESplan identifies a series of settlements which should be considered for strategic growth.

SESplan also promotes the reuse of land and sustainable principles and looks to use

6 brownfield land ahead of other edge of town centres. The settlements and area which SESplan identifies are shown in Table 2.

Ore Upper Leven Valleys – Kelty, Cowdenbeath, Lochgelly, Cardenden, Ballingry, Thornton, Glenrothes (Town)

North Dunfermline

Table 2 - SESplan Strategic Development Areas

Figure 2 shows an amalgamated representation of the spatial strategies in SESplan and TAYplan.

Figure 2 – SDP spatial strategies

To determine their suitability of accommodating further development, all the settlements listed above have been assessed against a range of criteria which have been derived from key aims of both SDPs and Scottish Planning Policy. These

7 individual settlement assessments are included in Section 3 of this report.

Within the context of the elements highlighted in Figure 1, and utilising the guidance of SPP paragraph 38, a range of criteria have been drawn up for the settlement assessment.

These are deemed to be key considerations in deciding on the suitability of future change. They address the legacy of the existing development plan, the need to consider the financial implications of future strategies and the need to reinforce the strong place making and environmental agenda promoted in the existing development plan. The criteria used to carry out the settlement assessments are shown in Table 3.

Element Issue Assessment context

Brownfield If designed well then new Would focussing development land/regeneration development can encourage on this settlement encourage opportunities regeneration in a settlement. settlement wide regeneration?

Level of existing The levels of outstanding Can the character and commitments allocations or consents in a functioning of the settlement particular settlement can have be maintained with the a huge bearing on its addition of further character and over allocation development? can lead to damage to its intrinsic qualities.

Infrastructure capacity Investigation of capacity of Can the infrastructure of a existing infrastructure settlement, particularly particularly education and education and transportation transportation. sustain further development without the need for significant additional infrastructure provision?

Land availability Landscape designations Does the settlement have around a settlement, available land around its edge constraints such as flooding of a scale that could or topography can have a accommodate development? major impact on the ability of a settlement to accommodate

8 further edge of town development.

Employment land The availability of employment Does the settlement have a sites in a settlement can help good supply of quality existing encourage more sustainable or allocated employment travel patterns. sites?

Accessibility Sustainability of settlements Is the settlement well and access to services is connected to local and important to the reduction of regional services and travel. networks?

Table 3 – Criteria for assessing settlements

Each settlement was assessed against the criteria in Table 3 and given a score of 1, 2 or 3 (1 being most favourable).

Through this assessment it is possible to get a Fife wide perspective on the preferable locations for development and equally those settlements where further change, above that already allocated, would be unadvisable and potentially undermine the existing strategy.

Results and Conclusions on Settlement Assessment

The amalgamated scoring shows the suitability of focusing additional development in each of the settlement is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – Capacity of settlements to accommodated further strategic scale change (above that already allocated through the Fife Structure and Local Plans)

10 Main Strategy Options

Based on the settlement assessment a Fife wide strategy can be developed that directs development to the most appropriate locations. There are four key spatial options that have been considered and the extent to which the results of the

settlement assessment fits with each determines which approach is most suitable.

Urban Consolidation

An urban consolidation strategy looks to focus new development on sites within existing settlements. Focusing new development initially on brownfield land is a requirement of Scottish Planning Policy and this approach was reflected in the existing Fife Development Plan and it is intended that this approach is continued through the new LDP.

This approach would predominately mean the redevelopment of brownfield sites but it is unlikely that sites will be available of on a large scale, particularly in North Fife, for identification through this current development plan process. Although it is expected that there will be limited possibilities for accommodating larger scale brownfield development in North East Fife it is still possible that brownfield sites of this scale may come forward during the lifetime of the LDP.

It is also important that the availability of a site does not lead to a presumption that it will be available for housing development. There will be a need to preserve employment land in the right locations and protect valuable open space and commercial areas which can provide services for local people. All these elements link together to provide well designed and functioning settlements.

Brownfield development opportunities often arise due to the relocation of businesses or restructuring of property interests such as schools or public services and by their very nature are difficult to allocate in plans. However, due to their inherent sustainable nature, their reduced environmental impact and links with national and SDP policy, it is prudent to support the redevelopment of brownfield land wherever possible.

12 There are wider, potentially beneficial, policy impacts of allowing brownfield land to be developed. These differ across the region from affordable housing provision in North East Fife to the regeneration of derelict land in Mid and West Fife. However, both point to the benefits of supporting brownfield development.

It is therefore proposed that an approach is promoted through the Local Development Plan that supports the potential development of brownfield land in any of the settlements of Fife. Even if few brownfield sites are available to be identified through this Local Development Plan, if sites do come forward they will be counted against either the urban capacity allowance or the windfall allowance.

Preferred Approach: To support the identification of housing sites on brownfield land in the settlements of Fife.

However this lack of availability of brownfield land raise the possibility of a shortage of sites for future allocations and it is prudent to expand the strategy to look at the favoured approach to edge of settlement development or new settlements.

The drive to focus on brownfield land is being supported by the preferred retail and employment land policy in this Main Issues Report. It is also a preferred approach to reduce developer requirements on brownfield sites to take into account the potentially higher development costs.

13 Dispersed, urban expansion and new settlements options

New Settlements

New settlements have already been ruled out by TAYplan and have also been ruled out through the existing Fife Structure Plan. It is proposed to continue this policy approach in the Local Development Plan as it does not make the best use of existing infrastructure or provide for future development needs of existing communities.

Preferred Approach: It is proposed to have no new settlements allocated in the Local Development Plan.

Dispersed Approach

This strategy looks to disperse development to smaller settlements and identify small scale development away from the main centres. This strategy fits in well with the outcomes of the assessment in North Fife as it complements the existing allocations and strategy for the areas by directing change into a larger number of locations that will accommodate small scale organic growth.

However for South Fife this does not correspond well with the settlement assessment. While it does not conflict with the requirements of SESplan it does not address the outcomes of the settlement assessment which points to the opportunity to accommodate larger scale growth in particular settlements in the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys, particularly Kelty and Cowdenbeath.

15 Urban Expansion

This looks to concentrate a large amount of new development in some larger settlements. This is not dissimilar to the approach that was taken by the existing development plan with its Strategic Land Allocations. To progress this strategy for additional allocations across the whole of Fife would conflict directly with the outcomes of the assessment in North Fife.

This is primarily due to the potential conflict with the existing Strategic Land Allocations. However this approach works much better in relation to the assessment outcomes for the Ore Valley/Upper Leven Valley Area.

In South Fife the settlements perform average or above, with the exception of Lochgelly. Those fairing worse tend to do so as a result of reduced level of accessibility or due to high levels of existing land allocations.

What is clear is that in North East Fife, none of the settlements are in a position to accommodate further large development. As with south Fife this is for a variety of reasons but one key element is the challenges that future allocations would bring to the existing strategy and in particular the Strategic Land Allocations.

The need to avoid direct competition to these sites has been reinforced through the Reporters findings to the St Andrews and East Fife Local Plan Examination and it seem prudent to continue to adhere to this way of thinking. This principle also applies when considering the results of the scoring for Lochgelly.

16 Identification of Preferred Approach

From the consideration above it is clear that no option fits well across the whole of Fife and the preferred approach to directing strategic development will need to an amalgamation of urban consolidation, dispersed and urban expansion approach.

Many options could be considered for the preferred and alternative strategy approach. Two of most viable options are being considered further as the represent the best match with the outcomes of the settlements assessment, match the requirements of the SDPs and relate most closely to the existing Fife Development Plan strategy.

Urban New Dispersed Urban consolidation settlements expansion

Focus new Will not provide Disperse development Focuses development development on sites continuity with the to smaller settlements on larger settlements. within the existing existing development & identify small scale Would conflict with the settlements. plan strategy as it is development away existing Strategic Land ruled out by Fife from the main centres. Allocations. Structure Plan (2009). Not supported by Preferred approach TAYplan. The however it is unlikely timescale, likely On its own, it does not On its own, it does not that this, on its own, environmental impact, meet strategic meet strategic will provide enough & scale of new requirements in the requirements in the breadth of investment required to SESplan area. SESplan area. development establish an entirely opportunities because new settlement makes of limited sites this the least favoured available within existing option. settlements to meet strategic requirements.

Mixed pattern approach (preferred):

combination of an urban consolidation, dispersed and urban expansion pattern

Alternative ways to deliver … Option 1 (Preferred) Option 2 (Alternative)

Promote brownfield development and also Promote brownfield development and concentrate development around existing Strategic Land edge of settlement strategic development towards Allocations to make use of infrastructure already North Dunfermline and the western and eastern being provided as part of these developments. ends of the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys. This approach is less favoured as it concentrates Preferred approach because it meets the too much development on areas still to be built out, SESplan & TAYplan strategic requirements and thus competing with the existing strategy and does provides scope for gradual, organic growth of not provide as much scope for smaller settlements smaller settlements. to grow.

Option 1

This option has a positive sustainable approach as it focuses development on brownfield land. From the results of the settlement assessment, an initial assessment would point to a strategy that looks to focus edge of settlement strategic development

18 towards the western and eastern ends of the Ore/Upper Leven Valley area and particularly on the towns of Cowdenbeath, Kelty and Glenrothes Town and also to North Dunfermline. This makes best use of sustainable locations, land availability, existing infrastructure and also focuses on areas which are national and regional priorities for development and environmental improvement. They also provide good opportunities for linking into the strategic green network. This best complements the existing development strategy and this strategy is developed further later in this document.

This option also meets the SESplan & TAYplan strategic requirements and provides scope for gradual, organic growth of smaller settlements. Further more detailed assessment is required to assess the specifics of the preferred settlements in the Ore Valley area and this is considered later in this document.

Preferred Approach: Promote brownfield development and also edge of settlement strategic development towards North Dunfermline and the western and eastern ends of the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys.

Option 2

This option also links well with sustainability principles due to its focus of development on brownfield land. It also looks to make the best use of infrastructure by concentrating development around existing SLAs. However this approach may put too much strain on this same infrastructure and undermine the delivery of the existing SLAs which are progressing well and have a large amount of buy in from the development industry. However such an approach would have a negative impact on other areas which do not have SLAs and prevent them from having levels of development which their communities require.

Alternative Approach: Promote brownfield development and concentrate development around existing Strategic Land Allocations to make use of infrastructure already being provided as part of these developments.

Having considered the options for the Fife wide strategy the next step is to look further at the preferred Option 1 and the areas on which it focuses, North Dunfermline and the western and eastern ends of the Upper Leven/Ore Valleys.

Ore Valley/Upper Leven Valleys

SESplan allocates 500 houses to the Ore/Upper Leven Valleys. The assessment of

19 the key settlements showed in Figure 3 highlights that the Kelty and Cowdenbeath areas best meet the requirements as there areas have the greatest accessibility least constraints and greatest infrastructure capacity. They also provide opportunities to link into the strategic Green Network.

While the settlement assessment did not identify Glenrothes as a suitable location for edge of settlement development it would be beneficial to the town to promote further development near to the town centre to support its rejuvenation. This is in line with the key aim of the plan to support town centres and links in with the Glenrothes Town Centre Strategy being developed by the Council and referenced in the Glenrothes settlement profile below. Two other reasonable alternatives have also been considered.

The first looks to focus further development around the existing SLA at Lochgelly. The second promotes a more dispersed approach with allocations being made to a series of small sites across the area. Both these options are less favoured as they do not fit in as well with the settlement assessment or make good use of existing infrastructure capacity. They also fit less favorably with the strategic aims of SESplan. These three options are shown in Figure 4.

Preferred Approach: Concentrate edge of town strategic development around Kelty and Cowdenbeath. The preferred approach is to also investigate the opportunities for identifying development sites within Glenrothes Town Centre to encourage the reuse of brownfield land and support the town centre.

Option 1a (Preferred Option 1b (Alternative) Option 1c (Alternative) Approach)

Focus on Kelty/Cowdenbeath Reinforce existing SLA in Dispersed approach on and Glenrothes Town Lochgelly a range of sites across Ore Valley.

This option directs There is a large amount of development to the most existing development and This option does not sustainable locations while to focus on its delivery make best use of supporting national and further allocations should sustainable locations regional spatial strategy. be avoided to prevent or fully implement diversion from the existing regional spatial policy. allocations which have a

large degree of community and developer buy-in.

Also this option does not cater for the wider needs of the area.

Figure 4 – Options for Upper Leven/Ore Valleys

21 North Dunfermline

SESplan also directs the Local Development Plan to investigate opportunities for an additional 500 houses in North Dunfermline . Due to the more focussed area of search the options for this area have to be considered in terms of general locations or combinations of locations, rather than settlements.

The key issues are the need to link in with the existing strategy for Dunfermline, particularly the Strategic Land Allocation to the West and North West of the Town, to link in with the transport infrastructure planned for the north of Dunfermline and to consider the identities of the existing communities in the area.

With these issues in mind three options have been identified as representing the most credible approach that could be progressed for this area. These options are shown on Figure 5. The SESplan allocation to the North Dunfermline Strategic Development Area could be allocated to single sites to the North West or North East of Dunfermline. Alternatively, a number of smaller sites could be allocated across the north of Dunfermline in keeping with the preferred spatial strategy for the area (that is, a combination of urban expansion and dispersal).

Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c

Dispersed approach on a range of Focus on the Development to the Focus on development to the North sites across North to North East North West of Dunfermline. East of Dunfermline Dunfermline to offer choice in location and development.

Although this option it has potential This links in well with the proposed issues of being remote from the distributor road route and the park This complements the delivery of the Dunfermline and has greater and ride development at Halbeath. northern distributor road and offers a landscape impact that the other range of smaller sites to provide options it does provide a key part of alternative development the northern distributor route and opportunities to the SLA to the west. links in with the existing SLA. Care However it deflects the focus away would have to be taken in phasing to from development to the west of the ensure it did not compete with the town and if chosen it may need to be existing SLA. phased towards the latter part of the Plan period.

Figure 5 – Options for Dunfermline North

SESplan also proposes a longer term (from 2024-32) housing allocation for the entire Edinburgh city region of 24,050 houses. The SESplan area will receive a proportion of this allocation and this will be considered through future iterations of SESplan. The Fife share of this allocation will be allocated by SESplan in broad accordance with its existing SESplan strategy. They will be taken into account in the next round of Local Development Plans.

Managing the scale of future settlement growth

It is important that smaller settlements are not the focus of disproportionate growth that would overwhelm local services or dramatically change the character of an area. Therefore it is proposed to look into options to allocate development proposals in smaller settlements which support communities’ desires for gradual or ‘organic’ growth, support local services, provide opportunities, for the housebuilding industry to recover, and meet housing needs.

23 Preferred Approach: To investigate the opportunities for organic growth across the settlements of Fife, which will meet the needs of the local communities.

Smaller scale sites

The current development strategy includes a number of large sites and it is proposed to augment this approach through further strategic allocations. However, further flexibility can be brought into the housing land supply and the needs of local communities can be addressed through the allocation of smaller scale housing sites. This is particularly so in North Fife where no further strategic release of land for houses are proposed.

Development opportunities identified at this Main Issues Report stage will be further considered in preparing the Proposed Plan.

At present it is not proposed to restrict where small sites will come forward with the exception of Cupar and St Andrews. Both these towns have strategic development allocations and, in the case of Cupar, the St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan examination findings were that small scale development allocations would undermine the strategic development at Cupar North.

Preferred approach: Within the context of the overall development strategy, and with the exception of St Andrews and Cupar, it is proposed to consider the opportunities for small scale dispersed development across settlements in Fife to contribute to Fife’s development requirements.

Identifying development sites

This Main Issues Report does not specify preferred sites for development. There are several reasons for this approach:

• we cannot be sure we have a full range of possible development sites – others may be submitted as part of the Main Issues Report consultation; • information may arise during the public consultation that would sway any decision on whether to include a site in the future Local Development Plan; and • any additional requirement for sites will be calculated as part of the next stage in the Local Development Plan process to take into account the outcomes of the SESplan examination which should be completed early in 2013.

24 Candidate sites which have been submitted so far are included in a sites atlas which accompanies this plan. It is not the intention of the Council to promote all these sites for development.

The inclusion of the sites in the atlas simply means they have passed an initial site assessment process and will now be considered in more detail through the Main Issues Report Consultation and through dialogue with key agencies such as Scottish Water, Scottish Natural Heritage, and Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

It should also be noted housing development is not proposed on all the submitted sites. Information in the site atlas describes the use that is being promoted for the site.

The remainder of this document looks at settlement specific issues. For particular areas which are facing land use change and there are issues that need to be addressed through the Local Development Plan, a settlement profile has been produced. In some occasions the need to address Land use change had arisen from the Strategic Development Plans or the Reporters findings on the three Fife Local Plans. The profiles give a settlement context, an indication of the land use policy for the area that will not be changing through the Local Development Plan and the issues that need to be considered through this Local Development Plan. Figure 6 highlights those areas where settlement profiles have been produced.

Figure 6 – Areas with settlement profiles – highlighting areas where there are key issues that need to be addressed through the Local Development Plan

26 Section 2 - Settlement/Area Specific Issues

Cairneyhill-Crossford-Oakley

These are small settlements located to the west of Dunfermline in relative close proximity to one another. The area’s origins are mixed but agriculture, weaving and mining industries all largely contributed to local economy at various points over time towards the end of the 20 th century. Crossford, the largest of the three settlements and the oldest developed around the Pitfirrane estate. Early activity in the settlement is believed to relate to agricultural but in the 16th century Coal and Iron Stone were mined from the lands of Pitfirrane under a charter granted to the local Lairds with the produce transported to the port at Limekilns for export. By the 19 th century there are records of Crossford developing as a weaving community. Coal mining contributed to the local economy in the 19 th century and into the 20 th century. Cairneyhill is the second oldest settlement dating back to the 18 th century developing as a weaving community and growing organically in later centuries. Oakley is the youngest of the three settlements and owes its origins to the former Forth or Oakley Iron-works and the establishment of coal mining. The Closure of Comry Colliery in the latter half of the 20 th century resulted in adverse impacts on the economic base of the settlement. The closure of the rail lines between Dunfermline and Alloa in the 20 th century cut the area off from the main rail network.

Dunfermline acts as the principal service centre for the local area and the settlements have good connections to the town. The settlements have grown organically and there has been recent housing development in each of them.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Good provision of community, • Access to major employment leisure and civic facilities opportunities

• Good transport links • Affordability and availability of housing • Good mix of housing tenure and style • No direct rail link

• Development Constraints (Coalescence issues between Cairneyhill/Crossford)

27 Opportunities Threats

• Regeneration opportunities in • Availability of funding for Oakley improvements to built fabric and new build housing • Attracting more local employment including tourism • Ground conditions from former mining activities • Development interest

• Potential transport improvements from proposed Dunfermline/Alloa Rail Link

Continuing Strategy for Town

Proposals for the expansion of Cairneyhill and Oakley are included in the existing Local Plan and will be continue to form a main part of the strategy for this area.

28 Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Following examination on the current Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan it was recommended by the Reporter that future development around Cairneyhill and Crossford be considered further in this new Local Development Plan.

In considering the strategy for this area the issue of coalescence and access to some of the site options will need to be considered. Key Issues will be:

Edge of town Development - Cairneyhill - There are considerable development options to the north of Cairneyhill. Through the Main Issues Report we need to consider the scale of development to the north of Cairneyhill and in particular the potential for coalescence with Crossford.

Edge of town Development – Oakley - There are considerable development options to the north of Oakley. Through the Local Development Plan we need to consider the scale of development around Oakley.

Cupar

Cupar is a former royal burgh lying in the north east of the region in an area known traditionally as the Howe of Fife. The town is believed to have grown around the site of a castle but it became established as a market town lying at the centre of an expansive rural hinterland. The castle was believed to be the seat of the Earls of Fife and the seat of a sheriff establishing the town as a centre of judiciary. The town became an important administrative centre as the county town for Fife, a title which it retained up until towards the end of the 20 th century. The town gradually expanded with a number of fine public buildings constructed in the centre between the 17 th and 19 th centuries and streets of Georgian and later Victorian properties were built around the historic core. The 20 th century saw further expansion of Cupar, largely to the south and west with the development of modern housing estates and a modern trading estate was built to the east.

The town continues to act as a service centre for its rural hinterland and retains an administrative role for the north east area of Fife. A series of traffic improvement projects have recently been implemented in Cupar to assist in easing the levels of congestion in the town centre.

Major expansion of Cupar is planned to the north which is linked to the development of a northern relief road.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Built heritage • Congestion and circulation within the road network • Cultural and leisure facilities • Lack of affordable housing • Good provision of community and civic facilities • Declining town centre • Elmwood College • Diminishing settlement role • Evening economy • Lack of pulling factor for visitors • Good public transport links heading to St Andrews

• Economic base • Air Quality Management Area declared for the Bonnygate

30 Opportunities Threats

• Strategic scale growth allocated • Further contraction of retail and decline of town centre • Proposed improvements to local transport network inc. northern • Housing market relief road associated with • strategic growth Traffic congestion and on street parking • Potential for green network • enhancements Availability of funding for improvements to built fabric and • Capture more visitors heading to new build social housing St Andrews

• Enhance the role and offering of the town centre

Continuing Strategy for Town

The Strategic Land Allocation will continue to be allocated to the north of the town. This includes 1450 houses and associated commercial, retail development and community facilities. This will have strong links to the rest of the town.

31 The town will continue to act as a service centre for its rural hinterland and retains an administrative role for the north east area of Fife. A series of traffic improvement projects have recently been implemented in Cupar to assist in easing the levels of congestion in the town centre and address air quality issues. Further traffic congestion issues will ultimately be addressed through the provision of a relief road to the north of the town which will be delivered as part of the Strategic Land Allocation.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Brownfield Development – There are several brownfield sites across Cupar which could be developed for housing. It is possible that in the future, other sites may become available for development. It is proposed to support brownfield opportunities when they conform to the other policies of the plan.

Edge of town Development - To protect the landscape setting and concentrate development focus on the Strategic Land Allocation and any brownfield land it is proposed to have no new edge of settlement housing development allocated through the Local Development Plan.

Town Centre – Existing Local Plan Policy looks to enhance Cupar’s role as the commercial and service centre for rural East Fife by encouraging further retail development in the town centre and attracting commercial investment. This includes protecting and enhancing the role of the town centre whilst providing land for a bulky goods retail park. This objective should be considered further through the Local Development Plan process.

Green Network – A green network will be promoted across the town to provide linkages for the local population and biodiversity. The methodology is highlighted in the Green Network Background Paper and views are sought on this concept.

32 Dunfermline

Dunfermline is a former royal burgh and is the second largest settlement in Fife located in the west of the region approximately 5 miles to the north of the Forth Bridges. Whilst settlement in the area is recorded as dating back to Neolithic and Bronze Age periods, the first record of Dunfermline dates from the 11 th century. The founding of a church by St Margaret which later became an Abbey established it an important ecclesiastical centre. The role of the township also developed as a seat of Scotland’s royalty and for a time it became the de facto capital of Scotland until the union of the crowns ended the royal connections in the early 17 th century. Almost three quarters of medieval Dunfermline was destroyed by fire in 1624 and the town went into decline. A revival of fortunes in the 18 th century saw the town became a major centre for linen and textile industries and a number of Georgian and Victorian streets were developed around the historic core to the north, south and east to house workers of the industries. Dunfermline benefited from philanthropist Andrew Carnegie towards the end of the 19 th century with the development of new cultural, leisure, and educational facilities including a theatre, a college and the gifting of a major public park. The 20 th century saw further development of the town, largely to the south and east with the establishment of modern housing estates and industrial parks.

The town acts as the principal service and retail centre for west Fife and is further developing its role as a major tourist destination. There has been substantial outward expansion to the east and southeast of Dunfermline over the last 20 years with the development of modern housing estates, office and business parks, a retail park and a leisure park. A major expansion of town centre floorspace took place in 2008. A replacement Dunfermline High School was completed in 2012 and three primary schools have been constructed in the eastern expansion area.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Built heritage in and adjacent to town • Circulation within the road network centre (Halbeath Road) • Strong cultural and leisure facilities • Decline in parts of the town centre • Good provision of community and • Proximity to other competing centres civic facilities • • Carnegie College Green spaces (excl. Pittencrieff) are not of a high quality • Good transport network

• Good access to a range of

33 employment

• Close proximity to Edinburgh Airport

• Generally well performing town centre

• Good mix of housing tenure, style and quantity of housing

Opportunities Threats

• Development opportunities in and on • Competition from nearby retail edge of town centre centres e.g. Gyle Shopping Centre

• Proposed improvements to local • Primary and Secondary education transport network inc. park & ride constraints schemes Halbeath and Rosyth • Decline in housing market • Attracting additional employment opportunities • Loss of built heritage through urban decline • Potential for green network enhancements • Development pressures and properly managing growth • Further strategic scale growth proposed

• Maximise economic benefits from renewable energy- District Heat

• Increasing tourist sector

Continuing Strategy for Area

The town will continue to be the principal retail and service centre for west Fife. A number of projects will be ongoing to regenerate the town centre including streetscape improvements, the development of a new edge of centre supermarket and construction of a new museum and art gallery.

Expansion of Dunfermline is planned to the northwest and southwest through the Strategic Land Allocation. This will involve the development of 4,200 houses, 80Ha of employment land, new schools, neighbourhood centres and associated greenspace. A series of transport improvements including a western distributor are to be developed to manage expected increases in traffic. In the longer term a northern link road will also be introduced linking Milesmark to Halbeath.

North Dunfermline

SESplan identifes the North Dunfermline as a Strategic Development Area and as such a focus for potential strategic scale development. It directs an allocation of 500 houses to this area. Due to more focussed area of search the options for this area have to be considered in terms of sites or combinations of sites, rather than settlements.

The key issues are the need to link in with the existing strategy for Dunfermline, particularly the Strategic Land Allocation to the West and North West of the Town, the need to link in with the transport infrastructure planned for the north of Dunfermline and the need to consider the identities of the existing communities in the area.

With these issues in mind three options have been identified as representing the most credible approach that could be progressed for this area, based on the information we have to hand.

These options are shown on the diagram below. The candidate sites which have already been submitted as part of the LDP process have been highlighted as examples of the types of distribution that could be taken forward through the LDP. Other sites may come forward during the LDP consultation and these will be considered in the final decision on which strategy to choose. However, based on the information we have to hand the options are as follows:

Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

SESplan directs strategic scale edge of settlement development towards the North Dunfermline Area. Through initial Assessment three options seem most credible.

Option 1 - A large candidate site Swallowdrum (c 500 houses) to the north west, owned by I &H Brown. This site was considered by the Reporter at the D&WF Local Plan Examination. He concluded that the site 'could form an acceptable extension to the Wellwood S.L.A., but only if a need for further housing emerges at this location.' ( LDP-SA-1-76 / DUN 009) Location plan attached.

Champion Homes are promoting an 11 ha site to the immediate west of the above site, at Craigluscar Road .The site was considered at the Examination and the Reporter concluded that the site may be suitable 'if a need for further housing land at this location emerges and it cannot be accommodated within the existing S.L.A.'

The area is distant from the city centre. Towards the west of this area sites have been considered through previous local plan examinations and deemed ‘unwarranted

36 extension into the countryside area', and should not be allocated for housing. Theses sites are distant from the city centre.

Option 2 - Halbeath area - The Reporter at the Dunfermline and West Fife Examination concluded that in principle the 'site could be a suitable location for a major expansion of Dunfermline'. However, 'it is inappropriate to bring forward a proposal of this scale at this time in this location'. The Reporter concluded that he did not think that 'this site should be considered further until such time as the preferred strategic land allocations are much more advanced'. The northern link road would run through the site. This site is distant from the town centre and is unlikely to assist regeneration.

Option 3 – Is proposing to spread the allocation over a number of sites in the northern area, the largest being east of Wellwood where a significant area of land (390ha) is being promoted by I &H Brown at Colton . The land is proposed for mixed uses ( expansion of country park, leisure hub possible hotel/golf complex) and 150+ houses). Long term access via northern link road. This site has not previously been submitted. (LDP-SA-1-91 / DUN007)

It is worth noting that a site owned by Omnivale to the immediate east of the Wellwood SLA allocation was also considered at the Examination. The Reporter concluded that ' if a need for further housing land at this location emerges and it cannot be accommodated within the existing SLA, then I am satisfied that this could be an appropriate location.' I have been advised by Andrew McCafferty that this site will be submiitted via the MIR consultation process. The indicative alignment for the northern link road runs through this site. ( DWFLP339)

Land was also promoted through the D&WFLP at West Baldridge Farm . The Reporter again concluded that the site 'could form an acceptable extension to the Wellwood S.L.A., but only if a need for further housing emerges at this location'.( DWFLP1293)

As part of this spread of sites it could also be considered to allow smaller areas to come forward from options 1 and 2 to contribute to the mix of sites.

Key issues to bear in mind in forming the spatial strategy for Dunfermline include the need to fund the development of the northern distributor and the need to ensure the successful delivery of the SLA in the north and west. Allocating another 500 units anywhere in Dunfermline during the same time period could be detrimental to the

37 SLA. Given we have to make the allocation a combination of small sites might have less impact ( e.g at Wellwood, West Baldrigde Farm and Colton (150+).

Focus of Strategic Development – SESplan directs strategic scale edge of settlement development towards the North Dunfermline Area. Through initial Assessment three options seem most credible.

Central Dunfermline

There are a number of pipeline developments proposed in and adjacent to the town centre area that, once built, will result in significant inward investment. The Council is promoting further opportunities to enhance the centre including brownfield redevelopment sites and is advancing proposals for a new public square linked to planned streetscape improvements and other major projects including the new museum and art gallery. Options to potentially accommodate the Carnegie College in a new building in the centre of Dunfermline will also be explored. Proposals have more recently arisen for the development of another new supermarket on the site of the existing police station on the north-eastern edge of the town centre and for the refurbishment of the Carnegie Retail Park.

There may be potential to refocus retail activity in the centre of Dunfermline it is proposed to divide the town centre between a core area and a wider town centre, allowing more flexibility in the range of uses that can be accommodated outwith the core area. See Retail Technical note for further information.

39 Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

District Heating –The landfill gas recovery plant and the development of an anaerobic digestion plant at Lochhead Landfill to the north of Dunfermline provide an opportunity expand the existing district heating scheme in the locality. This would contribute to meeting government targets on carbon reduction and sustainable energy generation.

Forth Bridgehead

The Forth Bridgehead area represents a stretch of coast in southwest Fife containing a cluster of settlements comprising Rosyth, Inverkeithing, North Queensferry and Dalgety Bay. The area is the principal gateway into Fife from the south linking it to the wider Edinburgh city region and the rest of central Scotland. The largest settlement in the area is Rosyth which dates from the early 20 th century and was developed as a garden city by the Royal Navy to house workers, officers and their families who would work at a major Royal Navy Dockyard established on the Firth of Forth. Dalgety Bay is the second largest settlement in the area and was developed in the mid-20 th century as a private sector led new town providing homes for commuters to Edinburgh following the opening of the Forth Road Bridge. The new town was built on the site of a former airbase at Donnibristle/Hillend. Inverkeithing, a former royal burgh, is the next largest settlement whose origins date back to medieval times. The town established around a port and developed into an industrial centre for ship breaking and papermaking by the 19 th century. Modern housing estates have been developed around the town in the 20 th century. The settlements in the area have expanded throughout the 20 th century to the point of near coalescence. North Queensferry is the smallest of the settlements in the area but is potentially the oldest, said to be established in the 11 th century by St Margaret as a ferry crossing for travel between Dunfermline and Edinburgh. This ferry link remained up until the mid-20 th century when it was replaced by a bridge.

Following the vacation of the docks by the Royal Navy the area continues to be developed as a major business area with financial services and manufacturing activities. Ship building also remains important to the local economy.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Riverfront location • Peak time traffic congestion (M90) • Cultural and leisure facilities • High level of vacant and derelict • Good provision of community and civic facilities land (Inverkeithing and Rosyth Docks) • Good transport network • Green spaces are not of a high • Good access to a range of quality employment • Development constraints • Close proximity to Edinburgh (coalescence, coastal

41 Airport designations)

• Good mix of housing tenure, style and quantity of housing

Opportunities Threats

• Regeneration opportunities • Decline in housing market (Caldwell Mill) • Coastal flooding and erosion • Proposed improvements to • transport network inc. new Forth Contaminated land at Dalgety crossing and park and ride Bay scheme at Rosyth

• Attracting additional employment opportunities

• Further strategic scale growth proposed

• International container terminal

• Maximise economic benefits from renewable energy

• Continental ferry link

Continuing Strategy for Area

There will be continued focus on the port of Rosyth for economic development in line with its role as a National Development (As identified in National Planning Framework 2). Potential opportunities will also be pursued for leisure development.

A new Forth Crossing is currently being constructed to the west of the existing road bridge which will improve linkages to the city region and reduce the burden on the existing bridges.

Further planned development in the area is largely concentrated in Rosyth and Inverkeithing where there are high instances of vacant and derelict land and where there are regeneration opportunities.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Brownfield Development – There are several brownfield sites across the Forth Bridgehead area which could be developed for housing. It is possible that in the

43 future, other sites may become available for development. It is proposed to support brownfield opportunities when they conform to the other policies of the plan.

Further edge of town development – In line with the SESplan spatial strategy and the overall spatial strategy, edge of settlement development will be limited to small scale allocations.

Dalgety Bay Town Centre – To promote further appropriate uses adjacent to Dalgety Bay town centre there is potential to identify an area of wider town centre where retail and community facilities will be directed.

Inverkeithing Strategy – There has been a reduction of the availability of brownfield land in the Inverkeithing area and therefore future policy for this area, as originally set out in the Structure Plan will need to be revisited. It is proposed to prepare a strategy for the wider Inverkeithing area.

Issues the strategy will cover include:

• Opportunities for regeneration across the area. • Assessing the suitability of the sites currently allocated for housing. • Potential for edge of settlement Greenfield expansion to east of the town.

Views will be sought through the Main Issues Report on the issues that the inverkeithing strategy will need to address.

District heating –The proposed development of the biomass power plant at Rosyth docks provides an opportunity to develop a district heating scheme for the locality. This would contribute to meeting government targets on carbon reduction and sustainable energy generation.

44 Glenrothes

Glenrothes is a former post-war new town and is the third largest settlement in Fife located centrally in the region. Early settlement in the area is recorded as dating back to the neolithic period and adjacent villages have medieval origins however it was not until after the Second World War that Glenrothes was planned and developed. Its original purpose was to house miners who were to work at a newly established coal mine, the Rothes Colliery. Following the failure of the mine the town developed as an important industrial centre with several major electronics and hi-tech companies establishing in Glenrothes. The settlement has been purposely planned using a series of masterplans. Development of Glenrothes started in the east and progressed westwards before the town expanded to the north and the south with elements of Garden City and Radburn principles heavily influencing the town’s design.

Glenrothes is the administrative capital of Fife containing both the Fife Council and Fife Constabulary headquarters. The town is well-known for the quality of its parks and landscaping and its numerous outdoor sculptures and artworks. A biomass power station, replacement secondary school and a replacement sports and leisure centre are all being constructed in Glenrothes. The local college has also been extended significantly in recent years and new retail development has taken place in the Queensway industrial area next to the town centre.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Good mix of housing tenure, style • Declining industrial areas and quantity of family housing • Declining town centre and retail • Parks and greenspace offer • Proximity to Regional Park • Public perception • Range of cultural and leisure facilities • Lack of evening economy • Good provision of community and • civic facilities Over reliance on private car and lack of accessibility to parts of the • Good road links town by public transport • Good proximity to employment • No rail station within settlement opportunities boundaries • Adam Smith College

Opportunities Threats

45 • Development opportunities in and on • Stability of economic base the edge of the town centre • Stability of housing market • Renewal opportunities in older industrial/business areas • Availability of funding for improvements to built fabric • Proposed housing and business growth • Continued decline of the town centre and local retail offer • Proposed improvements to local transport network • Continued decline of industrial areas • Attracting additional employment opportunities • Continued negative public perception • Improvements to evening economy and leisure facilities • Loss of greenspace

• Maximise economic benefits from renewable energy- District Heating

46 Continuing Strategy for Town

Further development in Glenrothes is planned to the east of the town continuing the Strategic Land Allocation from previous plans. A series of transport improvements are planned, particularly at Bankhead and Preston Roundabouts. There is a renewed focus on attracting retail and commercial investment into the town centre, particularly facilitating a new supermarket development and public realm improvements. There continues to be a desire to renew the town’s ageing industrial areas with investment, in some cases cross-subsidised by housing building such as at Whitehill and Westwood Park.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Central Glenrothes– It is proposed to maintain a core-retail function focused on the Kingdom Shopping Centre. Specific proposals for the development of a new supermarket at North Street and for a new retail park at Queensgate will assist in improving the retail offer of the town. Outwith the core retail area there may be the opportunity to proactively explore opportunities for brownfield development within or in close proximity to the town centre in order to increase its vitality and viability. This could include allowing residential and complementary commercial uses to be developed in and around the town centre. It is also proposed to explore opportunities for possible public realm improvements and to capitalise on projects promoted in the town centre action plan.

Employment Land - There continues to be a desire to boost the local economy and specific proposals are being developed which will see a central business park created as part of efforts to renew Queensway Industrial Estate. Wherever possible opportunities to capitalise on investment and regeneration in the town’s employment areas will be explored, including the potential for cross-subsidisation from housing development.

District heating –The development of the biomass power plant at Tullis Russell papermills provides an opportunity to develop a district heating scheme for the locality. This would contribute to meeting government targets on carbon reduction and sustainable energy generation.

Further edge of town Development - To concentrate development focus on the existing Strategic Land Allocations and any brownfield land it is also proposed to have no new edge of settlement housing development allocated through the Local Development Plan.

47 Green Network – Landscaping and greenspaces are a key characteristic of Glenrothes. A green network will be promoted across the town to provide linkages for the local population and biodiversity. The methodology is highlighted in the Green Network Background Paper and views are sought on this concept.

48 Kirkcaldy

Kirkcaldy is a former royal burgh and is the largest settlement in Fife located on the coast in central Fife. Settlement in the area is recorded as dating back to the Bronze Age period however the first record of Kirkcaldy dates from the 11 th century. By the early 16th century, the establishment of a harbour at the East Burn developed the town’s early role as a trading port. The original development of the town saw it develop linearly along the coastline with a near mile long single street recorded on early maps dating from the 16 th and 17 th centuries. The street eventually reached a length of nearly 4 miles merging Kirkcaldy with its neighbouring small settlements. Early industries such as salt panning, coal mining and nail making were also being developed in this period. The production of linen which followed in 17 th century was instrumental in the introduction of linoleum in the 19 th century where Kirkcaldy became the global centre for the production of linoleum up until the mid 20 th century. The town began to develop inland and a number of Georgian and Victorian streets were developed around the historic core to the north and east to house workers of the industries. Fine public buildings and parks were also established in this period. Traditional manufacturing and coal mining industries were the mainstay of the town’s economy until these began to decline later in the 20 th century. The town expanded considerably in the 1960s and 1970s with the development of new housing estates to the north, though the decline of the town’s industries restricted its growth thereafter. The development of more service industries began changing the economic base of the town towards the end of the 20 th century.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Built heritage in and adjacent to • Declining town centre town centre • Declining industrial areas • Strong cultural and leisure assets • Lack of clear focus or role for the • Good provision of community and town civic facilities • • Adam Smith College High levels of multiple deprivation in parts of the town • Good transport network • High level of vacant and derelict • Good access to a range of land, notably around Victoria employment Road and Invertiel • Good mix of housing tenure, style • Congestion at Gallatown-

49 and quantity of housing Redhouse Corridor

• Prominent seafront location • Poor urban realm along esplanade

Opportunities Threats

• Regeneration opportunities • Continued decline of the town around town centre and waterfront centre

• Brownfield regeneration • Continued decline in economic opportunities base

• Proposed improvements to local • Secondary education constraints transport network • Stability of housing market • Attracting additional employment • opportunities Availability of funding for improvements to built fabric and • Potential for green network new build social housing enhancements • Loss of built heritage through • Strategic scale growth at East and urban decline South West should assist • regeneration Coastal flooding and erosion

• Potential for cross Forth ferry/hovercraft links

Continuing Strategy for Town

The town will continue to be the principal retail centre for mid/central Fife. A number of projects will be ongoing to regenerate the town centre including streetscape improvements and construction of a replacement swimming pool.

Expansion of Kirkcaldy is planned to the northeast and southwest through the Strategic Land Allocations at Kirkcaldy North East and Kirkcaldy South West.

Kirkcaldy East will involve the development of 2,850 houses, two primary schools, two neighbourhood centres and associated greenspace. A series of transport improvements including an upgraded Redhouse and Gallatown roundabouts and a new Mitchelston roundabout are planned to address the existing traffic issues. In the longer term a link will also be introduced from the Mitchelston Roundabout to the Standing Stane link road.

Kirkcaldy South West will deliver 1000 house, a primary school and a neighbourhood centre.

There are proposals for a replacement secondary school in Kirkcaldy east. There is a renewed focus on attracting further retail and commercial investment into the town centre and to reduce the amount vacant and derelict land in the town by capitalising on brownfield development opportunities.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Brownfield Development – There are several brownfield sites across Kirkcaldy which could be developed for housing. It is possible that in the future, other sites may become available for development. It is proposed to support brownfield opportunities when they conform to the other policies of the plan.

Further edge of town Development - To protect the landscape setting and concentrate development focus on the Strategic Land Allocations and any brownfield land it is also proposed to have no new edge of settlement housing development allocated through the Local Development Plan.

Vacant and derelict land - There continues to be a number of vacant and derelict sites close to the centre of Kirkcaldy. These have a large impact on the image of the

52 town, particularly as many of them are adjacent to the east coast main rail line. It is proposed to identify this area as a brownfield regeneration corridor and develop a pro active strategy for this area to encourage their redevelopment. (Also see the proposal to reduce developer contributions on vacant and derelict and brownfield sites, see Main issues Report and Developer Obligations Framework for further information).

Town Centre – There is a need to address the trend of decline in the retail activity in the town centre. One option would be to refocus retail activity in the town centre by redefining the town centre between a core area and a wider town centre.

Central Fife Retail Park – The Central Fife Retail Park has seen considerable expansion over the last 5 years. To protect and focus retail activity in the town centre one consideration could be to restrict any expansion of the retail park for at least the lifetime of this Local Development Plan or restrict the type of goods which could be sold in future expansions of the Retail Park. .

Green Network - Existing green network assets; and opportunities for expansion and enhancement of the green network have been identified for Kirkcaldy. These will provide access to green spaces and active travel routes for the local population and biodiversity.

Secondary School – Changes to the provision of secondary schooling are proposed for the North East of Kirkcaldy with 4 options currently being considered. The decision on this site is being taken through a separate consultation exercise and the results of this will be reflected in the Local Development Plan at later stages.

Levenmouth- Population 24,942

The area known as Levenmouth is a settlement cluster comprising Leven, Methil, Methilhill, Buckhaven, Windgates and Kennoway, located on the coast and inland in east-central Fife. It is likely that Leven’s origins lie as a medieval ferry crossing carrying travellers and goods across the mouth of the Leven River and later as a bridge crossing on the Kirkcaldy to Cupar route. A port developed on the mouth of the river and by the 17 th century coal mining and salt mining industries began developing in the locality. The 18 th Century saw manufacturing and mills develop along the River Leven and the area became a commercially important industrial port. By the mid 19 th century the Leven Railway opened helping it to become a tourist destination. Major port facilities were moved later in the 19 th century from Leven to Methil and huge railway yards were established in the area transferring coal from nearby pits to ships at the docks. With the growth of coal mining and activity at Methil docks, the two towns of Buckhaven and Methil expanded until they were merged into a single burgh towards the end of the 19 th century. In the early part of the 20 th century Methil docks became Scotland's principal coal port but later in the century coal mining rapidly declined and passenger rail links were lost in the 1960s. In this period a series of comprehensive redevelopment programmes took place throughout the locality and the settlements expanded inland. The exploitation of oil in the North Sea began to take over from the Fife Coalfields as a main source of local employment. However the decline in the local economy saw the area’s population gradually reduce.

Leven acts as the principal retail and service centre for the locality. Development in Levenmouth has been concentrated to the northwest of Leven. The area has begun to see revival of its economy over the last 5 years with significant expansion by Diageo and redevelopment of the docklands as an Energy Park.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Range of cultural and leisure • No direct rail links assets • Road network in need of • Provision of community and civic improvement facilities • Declining older industrial areas • Recent major investment- Energy

54 Park, Diageo • High levels of multiple deprivation in the area • Prominent seafront location • High levels of vacant and derelict • Leven town centre has low vacancy rates and is generally land performing well • Public perception • Affordability and availability of housing • Variable quality of social rented housing • Positive local support for development

Opportunities Threats

• Regeneration opportunities • Stability of economic base throughout the area • Stability of housing market • Proposed strategic-scale housing • and business growth Availability of funding for improvements to built fabric and • Proposed replacement secondary new build housing school • Lack of Government support to • Proposed improvements to local re-open rail link transport network inc. rail link and • new Standing Stane road link Ground conditions from former mining activities • Attracting additional employment • opportunities Coastal flooding and erosion • • Maximise economic benefits from Continued negative public renewable energy - Energy Park perception

• Potential for green network enhancements

• Increase tourism

Continuing Strategy for Area

The Strategic Land Allocation continues to be planned between Methil, Methilhill and Buckhaven to the west area. This is includes 1650 houses, a business park and associated community facilities. A series of transport improvements including a Standing Stane link road and reopening of the Levenmouth rail link are planned. There are proposals for a replacement secondary school and to reduce the amount vacant and derelict land in the town by capitalising on brownfield development opportunities. Continued expansion of the Energy Park Fife and local employment is planned to boost the local economy.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Brownfield Development –It is proposed to support and actively promote brownfield opportunities when they conform to the other policies of the plan in order to supplement the growth being provided on Greenfield sites.

Employment Land - There continues to be a drive to improve the local economy and to support the planned growth of the Energy Park Fife. The Low Carbon Investment Park proposed at Muiredge will make a significant contribution to this ambition but it

56 is proposed to consider further opportunities in the Muiredge area and to safeguard land as having potential for employment purposes if the need arises.

Green Network – Existing green network assets; and opportunities for expansion and enhancement of the green network have been identified for the Levenmouth area. These will provide access to green spaces and active travel routes for the local population and biodiversity.. Key linkages will include a proposed new green network link through the SLA area linking the coastal path at Buckhaven to the River Leven valley.

Secondary School - A new secondary school is proposed for the area which will replace the existing two secondary schools in the locality. The preferred site for the new school is on the existing playing fields of Buckhaven High School linking in with the development of the Strategic Land Allocation.

Newburgh

Newburgh is a former royal burgh lying on the south bank of the River Tay not far from Fife’s boundary with Perth and Kinross. The town’s existence relates largely to the presence of the river, developing as a fish settlement from around the 12 th century. The establishment of an Abbey at Lindores also in the 12 th had significant bearing on the town’s existence. In the 13 th century the monks of the abbey were given permission by the king to establish the town as a burgh with a weekly market. Despite the abbey being destroyed in the 14 th century the town continued to develop and by the 18 th century the town was recorded as having a harbour and quayside home to 40 boats. Fishing, malting, quarrying and the making of linen for floorcloths were recorded as important local industries. The 19th century saw Newburgh connected to the rail network and the development of a large linoleum factory along the waterfront. The 20 th century saw small scale expansion of Newburgh, largely to the east and west with the development of modern housing. The town lost its rail access in the mid 20 th century along with many of the traditional industries that once supported the town’s economy.

Local services and a few shops provide some employment, but most residents now commute to larger surrounding settlements to work.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Riverfront location and coastal • No direct rail link landscape quality • Isolated location from rest of Fife • Built heritage and historical settlement pattern • Topography and landscape limit further growth • Cultural and leisure facilities • • Community supportive of growth Limited effective employment land supply

• Limited visitor services/facilities

Opportunities Threats

• Increase tourism sector building • School roll has shown decline in on local assets recent years and needs impetus of new development to • Potential for rail station reinvigorate • Expansion of existing

58 employment offering

Continuing Strategy for Area

Some expansion of Newburgh is planned to the east and there will be continued promotion of the reopening of the rail station. Newburgh is specifically mentioned in TAYplan as having an opportunity for further growth.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Edge of Town Development – Options exist to the east of the settlement for small scale development site allocations and will need to be considered through the Local Development Plan process.

Waterfront revitalisation Opportunities - for enhancing the role of the waterfront and encourage linkages between it and the town centre should be considered through the Local Development Plan process.

Ore/Upper Leven Valley

The Ore Valley area contains a cluster of medium and small settlements comprising Cowdenbeath/ Hill of Beath, Kelty, Lumphinnans, Lochgelly, Glencraig/ Crosshill/ Lochore/ Ballingry and Cardenden/ Dundonald/ Auchterderran/ Bowhill, concentrated around Lochore Country Park located in an area stretching between Westfield and St Ninians. The area’s origins are synonymous with the coal mining industry which provided the mainstay of the local economy until towards the end of the 20 th century. There are records of a church being established at Beath in the 15 th century but it was not until the 18 th century that the area began to develop on a northbound coaching route to Perth and around coal pits. Coal mining flourished in the area in the 19 th century boosted by the development of railways establishing the area as Fife’s mining heartland. In the 20 th century there was a gradual reduction in the local population linked to the decline of the mining industry. Mossmorran petrochemical works was developed in the 1970s providing some new employment prospects to the area. Lochore Meadows Country Park was developed in this period on the site of a former coal mine and remediation has taken place on a number of other sites. The development of the A92 in the 1990s provided improved transport links to the area.

Cowdenbeath acts as the principal service centre for the local area with Lochgelly also providing important facilities including a theatre.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Range of cultural and leisure • Declining older industrial areas assets • High levels of multiple • Provision of community and civic deprivation in the area facilities • Vacant and derelict land and • Lochore Meadows environmental degradation • Good transport links • Public perception • Good proximity to employment opportunities • Lower land values in parts of the area • Affordability and availability of housing • Variable quality of social rented housing • Positive local support for development

60 Opportunities Threats

• Regeneration opportunities • Stability of economic base throughout the area • Stability of housing market • Strategic scale proposed housing • and business growth Availability of funding for improvements to built fabric and • Proposed improvements to new build housing transport network • Ground conditions from former • Attracting additional employment mining activities opportunities • Continued negative public • Potential for green network perception enhancements

• Maximise economic benefits from renewable energy

• Increasing tourist sector- land art project

• Westfield remediation

61 Continuing Strategy for Area

There has been recent housing development in Lochgelly, Cowdenbeath and Kelty and some positive regeneration work has been taking place throughout the area over the last 10 years and there are several small sites across the area which will continue this trend.

Major expansion of Lochgelly continues to be planned with 1450 houses, a primary school and community facilities proposed. Further major growth is focussed on the area by SESplan. The remediation of Westfield continues to be a major priority for the area.

The area will continue to be a focus for environmental enhancement, as is encouraged in National Planning Framework 2.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

SESplan identifies an allocation for 500 houses. The preferred strategy for the area continues the existing Local Plan allocations for the area and complements them in a manner which aims to make the best use of infrastructure and bring the widest community and environmental benefits possible. The Mid Fife area is also identified in national planning policy as a focus for environmental action. Option 1 provides key opportunities to address the environmental improvement goals of national planning and link into the strategic Green Network priorities of the Lomond Hills Regional Park, the Earth Project, Lochore Meadows and Westfield. The Green Network is covered in the Green Network Background Paper and the MIR.

Focus of Strategic Development – SESplan directs strategic scale edge of settlement development towards the Ore/Upper Leven Valley. Through initial assessments it is proposed to concentrate strategic scale development in the Kelty/Cowdenbeath area.

Glenrothes Town Centre – It is proposed to proactively investigate the opportunities for brownfield development in close vicinity to Glenrothes town centre to increase the vitality of the town centre.

Green Network – A green network will be promoted across the area linking the key strategic Green Network priorities of the Earth Project, the Lomond Hills Regional Park and Westfield. More detailed Green Network assets and opportunities have also been identified for Cowdenbeath and Lochgelly.

62 Development of Green Network Strategy – As part of the Main Issues Report consultation exercise it is proposed to run a workshop to further development the Green Network and strategy for the area.

St Andrews

St Andrews is a former royal burgh and is the fourth largest settlement in Fife lying on its north eastern coast. Whilst settlement in the area is recorded as dating back to Mesolithic times, the town developed from the 8 th century as an important ecclesiastical centre, focused around the cathedral, until the Scottish Reformation in the 16 th century. The University of St Andrews was founded in the 15 th century; the third oldest university in the English-speaking world. St Andrews also established itself as the "home of golf" with the establishment of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club founded in the 18 th century. By the 19th century, the town had begun to expand beyond its original medieval boundaries with streets of Georgian and later Victorian properties built. The 20 th century saw further expansion of St Andrews to the south and west with the development of modern housing estates.

The town acts as the principal service and retail centre for north east Fife and is a popular tourist destination. A community hospital opened in 2009 strengthening this role. It is also a centre of academic excellence and the developing knowledge-based economy. The University is an integral part of the town and during term time students make up approximately one third of the population.

Strengths Weaknesses

• Built heritage • Circulation within the road network

• Strong cultural and leisure • No direct rail link facilities • Lack of available employment land • Good provision of community and civic facilities • Lack of affordable housing

• Good evening economy and • Development constraints café culture • Seasonal variations in tourism • Further education establishments

• Strong tourist draw- Home of Golf

• Well performing town centre with good range of retailing

• Seafront location

• Landscape setting

64 Opportunities Threats

• Proposed improvements to local • Traffic congestion and on street transport network parking

• Attracting additional employment • Coastal flooding and erosion in opportunities some locations.

• Potential for green network enhancements

• Further strategic scale growth proposed

• Potential to improve urban realm at East Sands

• Opportunities arising from creation of university science park.

Continuing Strategy for Town

The Strategic Land Allocation continues to be planned to the west of the town. This is includes 1090 houses, a science park and associated community facilities. A green belt will continue to be defined, as shown in the adopted St Andrews and East Fife

65 Local Plan (2012), around the landward area of the town to manage growth and to protect its historic setting. The Local Plan will continue to include restrictions on new Houses of Multiple Occupancy in the central area of St Andrews.

The Local Development Plan will continue to promote a high quality town centre which can satisfy the needs of residents and visitors, whilst respecting the heritage of the town.

Issues for Consideration through the Local Development Plan

Brownfield Development – Future land use change, including changes to secondary school provision, may make new opportunities available for brownfield development. It is proposed to support brownfield opportunities when they conform to the other policies of the plan and particularly the St Andrews design guidelines.

Edge of town Housing Development - To protect the historic setting and concentrate development focus on the Strategic Land Allocation and any brownfield land it is also proposed to have no new edge of settlement housing development allocated through the Local Development Plan.

Employment Land - There continues to be a lack of employment land in St Andrews. One approach would be to require all developments over a certain size to provide a percentage hectarage of employment land.

Green Network – A green network will be promoted across the town to provide linkages for the local population and biodiversity.

Secondary School - A new secondary school is proposed for the town with 4 sites currently being considered. These are Pipeland Farm, Kilrymont, Petheram Bridge and Station Park. The decision on this site is being taken through a separate consultation exercise and the results of this will be reflected in the Local Development Plan at later stages.

66 Section 3

Results of settlement Assessment - Considering opportunities for additional development (over and above that already committed through the Local Plans).

Ore/Leven Valley 1 = favourable, 2 = less favourable 3= not favourable

Settlement Glenrothes Kelty Thornton Lochgelly Cardenden Cowdenbeath Ballingry/Lochore

Assessment Criteria

Regeneration 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /Brownfield

Land

Level of 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 Existing There are a Only Few existing The SLA (1750 A large amount of Only small/medium Only small/medium Commitments large number of small/medium allocations and houses) provides housing is scale allocations are scale allocations are existing scale potential sites a more than already proposed currently allocated to currently allocated to housing sites allocations are are available. adequate level of for the settlement this settlement. this settlement. on the currently Potential to housing on but there has boundary of the allocated to this compete with arrange of sites been little settlement, settlement. the existing for the progress in particularly to SLA at foreseeable developing these the east of the Kirkcaldy East. future. Further sites. town. Future allocations

67 edge of should be settlement avoided to allow opportunities focus on existing would be proposals. positioned far from the town centre.

Settlement has low density and centrally located brownfield development could benefit the performance of the town centre.

Infrastructure 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 Capacity Some strategic There is good Secondary Some spare Primary school Primary school capacity Primary school transport access to the school capacity capacity may capacity will only may exist to capacity may exist to interventions M90 through an is limited once remain after the be available to accommodate accommodate are required under utilised existing building of the accommodate additional strategic or additional strategic or around the junction. allocations are Strategic Land small scale small scale small scale eastern side of taken into Allocation. development. development. development. the town and account. However, further developers Primary school development may Secondary School Secondary School Some capacity would have to capacity may still require capacity will be more capacity will be more may exist in There are no contribute to be able to developer limited. limited. both secondary strategic accommodate funding of

68 their provision. and primary additional small additional transport There is good transport There are no schools. scale classrooms. interventions infrastructure capacity strategic transport Education allocations. identified for the in the town but some issues in the area but impacts would Transportation settlement. local transport issues access through the vary depending issues have been will need to be resolved local network to the on where addressed around the provision of wider areas of Fife is allocations through the new retail facilities on not of a high were made, but Transport the edge of the town. standard. capacity to Assessment for accommodate the Strategic small scale Land Allocation development and there will be would generally capacity at be available. strategic Strategic scale junctions for capacity would additional be more development. problematic in Development some locations would have to particularly the contribute east of the towards strategic town. transport infrastructure.

Land 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 availability There are The boundaries Some issues Settlement is There are no There are no major Due to its relationship several sites of the with flooding constrained to major restrictions restrictions on edge of to the regional park available on the settlement are but site the north by the on edge of settlement allocation. the availability of edge of the unrestricted availability is regional park, to settlement edge of settlement settlement but from favourable. the south east by allocation. sites is limited. these are far designations a pipeline

69 from the centre. and potential exclusion zone. Opportunities in flooding. and,to the south the short to Potential by the A92 and to medium term candidate sites the west by will be restricted are available. proximity to to small sites Lumphinnans. but opportunities for increasing the density around the town centre should be encouraged through potential over supply of housing.

Employment 1 3 1 2 3 2 3 land Good range of Strategic All current A reasonable No current supply A limited supply of A constrained supply sites. However location employment level of of employment employment land. of employment land. some could do adjacent with sites employment land land. This could Problem with This could be with access onto the constrained through existing be improved obsolescence. This improved through modernisation. M90 at J4. One however not a sites and those to through could be improved Fife Council constrained key settlement be progressed additional through mixed use intervention to In the longer site. However for employment through the SLA. allocations. allocations or following service allocated term there may provision could provision a review of sites, land. be opportunities be improved (FELS). consider introduction of to identify some through future Opportunity to transition areas. sites as consider

70 transitional. allocations. reviewing allocations focussed on ability to deliver

Accessibility 2 2 1 1 2 1 3

Accessibility is Accessibility to Good linkages Good access by Good access by Good access by train Not good access by poor for a town to the A92 and train and road to train and road to and road to the local train and road to the of this size. No the Fife Circle the local area the local area area and wider Fife local area and wider train station. network. and wider Fife and wider Fife Region. Fife Region. Region. Region. Issues around However, local the Strathore road access is of Road junction with Main a low standard. Street.

Total 10 10 8 13 12 9 14

Conclusions The town does Limited existing The settlement There is a large The settlement Few existing The settlement does not provide a allocations. has good amount of does not have allocations. not have good good accessibility but existing good access to access to the wider opportunity for Good green its proximity to development and the wider region Good green network region and is not edge of network the existing to focus on its and has a large opportunities. Main suitable for strategic settlement opportunities SLA and delivery further level of existing deficiencies are around scale allocations. development Main impact on allocations allocations employment land which due to either deficiencies are strategic should be making it less can be rectified through existing around infrastructure avoided. favourable for future development site commitments to employment make it less further large allocations. the east or to land which can favourable for Also some potential

71 the west, the be rectified larger scale scale allocations. school capacity issues relative through future allocations. and local transport remoteness of development issues would need to areas from the site allocations. be further investigated. centre. However Also some development in potential school the town would capacity issues help to assist that would the need to be regeneration of further the town centre. investigated. Sites are not available at present and cannot be relied upon to contribute towards housing land requirement. In the longer term opportunities may arise.

72 Results of settlement Assessment - Considering opportunities for additional development (over and above that already committed through the Local Plans).

North East Fife 1 = favourable, 2 = less favourable 3= not favourable

Settlement St Andrews Guardbridge/ Anstruther Newport/Tayport Newburgh Cupar

Leuchars Wormit

Assessment Criteria

Brownfield Land 3 2 3 2 2 2

There is little land The paper mill in There is only There are few Some brownfield land There is a good available at present Guardbridge offers limited brownfield opportunities for is available towards supply of small but opportunities will opportunities for land available and developing on brownfield the north of the town. brownfield sites in probably arise due to development. most are already land. the town, however the changes allocated for some of these have proposed to housing. been empty for secondary school some time. Potential changes at provision. RAF Leuchars could also have an impact on land availability but the situation around its future remains unclear.

Level of Existing 3 2 3 3 3 3 Commitments The SLA to the west The settlements have a This area was part Although not on one site, The town already has The SLA to the

73 of the town provides large amount of of a Strategic Land a large number of houses significant housing north of the town a supply of land commitments both in Allocation, derived were allocated to this commitments. There provides a supply beyond the lifespan the short and longer from the Fife area through the Local may be scope for of land beyond the of the new LDP and terms although some of Structure Plan. It Plan. This provides a small scale sites. lifespan of the new further allocations of the longer terms sites has a supply of land for the LDP and further Greenfield will have to be proportionately lifetime of the plan allocations of development may reconsidered through large amount of although there may be Greenfield

compromise the the LDP process. The land already opportunities for further development may delivery of this key capacity for the town to allocated and little small scale development compromise the development. accommodate further scope for further that complements the delivery of this key development is limited development. existing allocations. development. and certainly only to small sites.

Infrastructure Capacity 2 2 2 2 2 2

Secondary school There are no major There may be a Secondary school Secondary school Secondary school capacity to transportation issues small amount of capacity is linked to the capacity is linked to capacity appears accommodate small associated with these capacity in both the school provision in St provision in Cupar. very limited. scale development is settlements or the Secondary and Andrews. Primary school available. Primary committed Primary schools in Primary school capacity may be school capacity also development. the area. Primary school capacity capacity may be available to would be available to is limited to available to accommodate accommodate small Secondary Education accommodating existing accommodate further small scale scale additional capacity is associated settlement expansion small scale additional

allocations. with provision at St allocations. allocations. allocations. Andrews.

There are no strategic There are no Some Primary School issues relating to strategic transport

Road infrastructure provision capacity may transport. There are local issues identified in Road infrastructure within the town has be available once and site specific issues the area with the within the town has little capacity. The existing commitments that will need to be main transport little capacity and

74 proposals being have been taken into addressed through intervention being the congestion often implemented as part account. masterplanning. potential new rail halt. occurs at peak of the SLA to the times. The west of the town will There are potential proposals being help to alleviate these waste water capacity implemented as

issues. issues in the area. part of the SLA to the north of the town will address these issues.

Land availability 3 3 3 3 3 3

The towns’ position There are issues to do Coalescence is a Steep slopes and the A92 The coastal location The topography of on the coast, green with flooding, potential issue constrain development and the topography the area restricts belt designation and topography and the along the coast. opportunities in large to the east of the development important landscape MOD base all of which parts of Newport on Tay settlement limits the opportunities in setting severely limit limit the availability of and Wormit. direction and scale of many areas to the any opportunities for land. further development. south of the town. further expansion. There is little scope for However, some The land to the Added to this is the larger edge of settlement opportunities may north is already existing policy allocations but small exist to the east of allocated and the restricting scale opportunities could the town. west and east are development on the possibly be susceptible to southern hillside, a accommodated. flooding. policy which it is intended to maintain.

Employment land 3 2 3 3 3 2

There is a severe This is not a key The area has a Some employment land This is not a key There is currently a

75 shortage of settlement in FELS and constrained supply was allocated through the settlement in FELS very limited employment land and therefore there is no of employment most recent Local Plan and therefore there is employment land opportunities should current requirement for land. The St but there is still a no current supply in the town. be sought through a 7 year employment Andrews Road site shortage of supply in the requirement for a 7 Adequate new development land supply in these was allocated to area. year employment allocations have proposals to identify settlements (Structure serve the East land supply in this been made through additional Plan). Neuk (FELS). Fife settlement (Structure the most recent employment land Council intervention Plan).There is a site local plan and allocations and to (via Economic currently allocated, these should be develop a strategy Development within a mixed use continued. The through LDP policy to Capital Funding) is development, which future release secure early delivery currently being could deliver the local (2016) of the Fife of employment land explored to employment site Council Depot at through the SDA acquire/service the considered Prestonhall currently allocated appropriate to serve provides land. the town. It is not opportunity to considered that any redevelop the site additional land needs for employment allocated at this time. Fife Council intervention (via Economic Development Capital Funding) is currently being explored to acquire/service the currently allocated land.

Accessibility 2 2 3 2 2 1

Has good links to the Both settlements have As with much of the The potential park and Accessibility to the With a train station

76 area through the A91, good access to St East Neuk, ride facility to the south rest of Fife is limited and good links to A92 and A915 but is Andrews, Cupar and accessibility to the west of the Forgan and access is better the A92, St positioned Dundee and the wider wider parts of Fife Roundabout will also to areas outwith Fife Andrews and A91 geographically distant region through train is limited. increase accessibility to such as Perth. Cupar has good from many services. There is Dundee. Overall accessibility access across NE surrounding limited local provision of would be improved Fife, which reflects settlements, with the services. A proposed rail halt is with the development its historic status as exception of Cupar also identified in the Local of the proposed rail a county town. and the East Neuk. Plan and this will improve halt. accessibility, be it is the longer term.

16 13 17 15 15 13

Conclusions Beyond that already The settlements have This settlement has The settlements have There is some Beyond that allocated for the town good access to the a large level of good access to the local availability of land to already allocated there is no scope for local and wider region. existing committed and wider region. There the east of the town for the town there is expansion of the There is a large amount development that is a large amount of which could no scope for town but of committed will take several committed development accommodate small expansion of the opportunities may development plus years to build out. plus previously identified scale development. town but present themselves previously identified Due to the relative opportunities for further However issues opportunities may for brownfield opportunities for further remoteness of this expansion that, if relating to primary present themselves development during expansion that, if area and the need progressed, will lead to school capacity for brownfield the lifetime of the progressed, will lead to to protect the no capacity for further would need to be development during plan. no capacity for further character of the strategic allocations and addressed. the lifetime of the strategic allocations area there is no little scope for additional plan. and little scope for scope for strategic small scale allocations. additional small scale edge of town allocations. development and little scope for smaller additional

77 allocations.

Appendix 2 – Strategic Policy Comparison

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required Coastal Promoted as single N/A Not mentioned Not carried Proposal did not come to Do not pursue Development geographical entity forward as a fruition as a policy reference. Zone and context for single policy concept due to the lack Strategic Land entity although of cohesion between the Allocations at relevant different areas of coast. Burntisland and Strategic Land Inverkeithing. Allocations are. Strategic Land 15 sites are Identify specific sites The Strategic Strategic Land The Strategic Define what is Allocations mentioned with for Strategic Development Plan Allocations Development Plans do strategic and specific locations and development Areas strategy includes over promoted in not give any specific carry out housing numbers. and allocate land for 24,500 new homes more detail guidance on the new comprehensive Often associated uses set out in Table already allocated in the through the locations for strategic spatial infrastructure is 1 Pg 15. Fife Forth area. Many local plans. development or what assessment, as identified i.e. are divided between the Local plans not constitutes a strategic part of wider education/ following strategic land normally a development. strategy transportation. allocations: South / vehicle for development, to (Strategic Land South West / North identifying identify suitable Allocation1) Dunfermline (4,200 strategic locations for new houses), Lochgelly allocations. strategic scale (1,750 houses), South development. West (1,000 houses) and Important that East Kirkcaldy (2,850 any new houses), Levenmouth assessment takes (1,650 houses) and East into account Glenrothes / Markinch existing Strategic (1,000 houses). Strategic Land Allocation Land Allocations over expansion 1000 units are references in the mentioned in the text of Structure Plan SESplan but not and considers graphically. The scale of their suitability.

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required smaller Strategic Land Allocations are not mentioned. Longer term Direct further Outlines a hierarchy Identifies two Strategic N/A More detail as expected As above. A need allocations strategic of settlements where Development Areas due to Strategic for a spatial (beyond 2026) development to the development/ where strategic growth Development Plans strategy to be following Strategic growth should initially should be concentrated. having timeframe further developed to Development be located. Does not Does not identify what is into the future. underpin the Areas…Kirkcaldy, quantify strategic. strategic. Local Dunfermline etc Development Plan strategy which is not simply based on housing numbers. Policies for Settlement Shaping better quality Development Principles - Provides a Both Strategic Revisit the way guiding new Development places - sets out a Includes a brief list of range of Development Plans which appropriate development Strategy wide range of issues requirements that new policies dealing cover the key points, development that development development should with albeit in different levels requirements are should adhere to. adhere to. Covers development in of detail, that are presented to Very comprehensive environmental settlements covered in the Structure concentrate on list which gives protection, respecting and outwith. Plan and local plans. criteria that would direction to the issues and enhancing the built For each good There is a greater make Local Development environment. location and emphasis on climate development Plans should be design are change in each. suitable. addressing. promoted as Particular well as attention should environmental be paid to the protection. requirements set out in TAYplan to ensure all points are covered in policy or guidance. Need

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required to show how new development will counter the impact of climate change and incorporate sustainable construction and layouts. Development Promoting use of Instructs all strategies Does not have a specific Not a specific The lack of a policy on Identify through on brownfield brownfield land and and plans to promote policy on this issue but policy on this issue is not a real the Local land supporting the reuse of promotes the use of brownfield land problem as national Development development that brownfield land over brownfield land as one of but there is guidance promotes Plan promotion of leads to its greenfield sites. its Aims. policy that brownfield land over brownfield land appropriate reuse (Policy 1: Locational guides greenfield. However the development (Policy BL1) Priorities) development to issue will need to be without having a be provided in covered in the new Local separate policy settlement Development Plan. on this issue. boundaries Developer Policy highlighting Achieving the policy A general policy on Developer Although recognised as This is a key Contributions that contributions will aims of this Plan infrastructure (Policy 9) Requirements an issue in both issue that needs be sought (DC1) and requires local which includes a Policy directs Strategic Development to be addressed Policy PDC1 which development plans to reference to pursuing the Council to Plans they provide much as neither of the highlights the establish a delivery through seek less detail than the Strategic requirements from mechanism(s), which developer requirements. appropriate current Structure Plan. Development each of the main may require new contributions Plans give the Strategic Land financial models, to from same detailed Allocations. ensure that these developers to context for the contributions are ensure gathering of achieved and a adequate developer thorough infrastructure requirements and understanding of provision. the local plans infrastructure, service have parts of the

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required and amenity capacity development issues when requirements allocating land for policy only development to included beside implement the the action strategy programme. Would seem appropriate to include developer requirements as Supplementary Planning Guidance to the main Local Development Plan. Infrastructure Contains a policy on Include (or cover in Local Development Infrastructure Not much difference and Can be easily Strategic Supplementary Plans will safeguard land heading which Strategic Development progressed Infrastructure to Planning Guidance) to accommodate new covers a range Plans both provide the through the Local ensure that Strategic development and of issues that context for the Development appropriate Development provide policy guidance would need to continuation of local plan Plan without any infrastructure is Frameworks for to require infrastructure be addressed policy. additional identified and Strategic to be available before alongside background provided at the Development areas. development proceeds. development analysis or policy appropriate time These should reflect proposals. development. the overall policy Could be requirements of amalgamated into TAYplan and from an overall which master plans development will be developed principles policy. reflecting in particular (PAN) 83 & Design Scotland publication

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required design Review: Lessons Learnt from masterplanning (2010). Frameworks shall set out how new sustainable places (PAN 83) are to be implemented. Employment Promotes a seven Prioritise land release Identifies Strategic TAYplan focuses Consider whether Land year supply of land in for development Employment Locations development on 7 year supply is Local Development within principal and aims to maintain the Principal settlements. No still a required Plans and identified a settlements ahead of overall supply of supply period in the policy approach. series of strategic other land; and, employment land. Strategic Development Should we locations where prioritise within each Plans. Strategic identify principal employment land will category, as Development Plans settlements for be provided. appropriate, the promote more focus of reuse of previously sustainable locations for employment land developed land and employment land. (as in TAYplan buildings (particularly and current listed buildings). audit)? Town Centres Support for town The capacity of Improving connectivity Policy in SESplan very Need to consider and Retailing centres, particularly principal settlements across all parts of the general while TAYplan how the policy Main seven centres. to accommodate SESplan area including more detailed than the can be made Inclusion of growth beyond the through high speed structure plan and more robust and Developer Strategic digital networks is promotes sustainable linked into overall Contribution policy Development Areas essential to enable the settlements with strong strategies for guiding retail (Policy 4) will be development of more town centres. settlements. development and considered in more sustainable Currently too promoting the detail by local communities. focussed on retail sequential approach. development plans and not wider functions of town centre. Housing Land Sets out requirement Balance sustaining Requirement incorrectly N/a follows No requirement in Need to create

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required Requirement by Housing Market rural economies with referenced in Plan. Need requirement SESplan, need to requirement in Area and overall Fife need to protect the to devise requirement information consider what changes SESplan area Requirement. countryside by based on figures in from Structure will be made through the that reflects allowing some SESplan. Plan. Examination process. TAYplan developments in TAYplan provides annual principles and small settlements requirement but does not provides flexibility (not principle settles) calculate figures for and requirement shortfalls etc by Housing Market Areas across Fife. Need to address housing land calculation and ensure consistency of data across Fife. Housing Release of sites for Cupar North Strategic Local Development Plan Currently Both Strategic Suggest that Phasing new housing will be Development Area - will allocate sites to meet determined by Development Plans Local managed in a 1,400 homes, 10ha of housing land the Structure recognise the Development planned way, employment land and requirement over the Plan for importance of having Plan does not prioritising brownfield bulky goods retail; period 2019 to 2024 to Strategic sites. suitable phasing and that need to go into sites, supports St Andrews West & accommodate an Local Development detail of site infrastructure, Science Park - 1,090 additional 1000 new Plans and Local phasing beyond including community homes, 10ha of homes. Land for 800 Authorities should keep the overall facilities and employment land and new homes will also phasing up to date to housing figures of transport improves, 10ha for a science identified outwith the two ensure 5 year supply 7 and 12 years. ensures it is co- park Strategic Development and delivery. ordinated with new Areas for smaller scale housing proposals 6,700 developments, committed houses, 1800 supports delivery of proposed housing 2009- affordable housing 2024. Local components and is Development Plans will

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required supportive of the indicate the phasing and Structure Plan mix of uses as strategy. Where a appropriate to secure the significant shortfall or provision and delivery of surplus is identified infrastructure to phasing accommodate any arrangements will be development. Local reviewed. Development Plan to identify relevant criteria for consideration of re- phasing the allocations specified for the Strategic Development Areas. See Policy 6 for timescales. Affordable Policy which Recognises need but Recommends Reflects Structure Plan much Need to consider Housing identifies specific left to Local benchmark of 25% as Structure Plan more detailed and area best method of requirements for Development Plans per national guidance. percentages specific than Strategic retaining detailed each Housing Market to produce detailed and Development Plans. policy. Continue Area sub areas. requirements. Supplementary with Based on outputs of Planning Supplementary detailed housing Guidance Planning study. policy. Guidance? Housing Below 25 per ha will Ensure that the Relate density and type Appropriate Structure Plan has Density should be Density be discouraged. arrangement, layout, of developments to density of specific density figures, considered in Higher densities design, density and public transport developments both Strategic relation to scale encouraged within or mix of developments accessibility. through criteria Development Plans do and setting in in close vicinity to and its connections identified in the not. Both plans settlements. town centres and/or are the result of Local specifically mention the Need to have public transport meeting the Development varying densities that will more variable interchanges/corridor requirements of Plan? be required in different approach. Should s. Masterplans will Scottish locations depending on we continue with indicate 25 per ha on Governments sustainability. average density

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required sites of 5 units or Designing Places and figure? more, avoid uniform Designing Streets. density developments, provide range house types & layouts which improve access to facilities/public transport Transport Walking and cycling Ensure integration of Ensure integration of Policy aimed at Policy approach the No action but encouraged. transport and land transport and land use. reducing car same across all strategic need to be Integrate land use use. Reduce need to Reduce need to travel travel, plans. referenced in the planning with travel and encourage and encourage cycling, increasing use plan. May not transportation. cycling, walking and walking and public of public merit individual public transport. Use transport. Use existing transport, policy. Should be existing infrastructure. Safeguard walking and aim of plan and infrastructure. land for future cycling. fundamental Safeguard land for infrastructure provision. element in future infrastructure Contributions to be identifying future provision. sought for new locations for Contributions to be development include development. sought for new transport infrastructure development include and facilities. transport infrastructure and facilities. Transport See Proposal PT1: Most transport Upgrade Redhouse Reflects Little difference as all Local Proposals Transport Proposals proposals have roundabout. Make information in relevant schemes carried Development (various) including already been provision for the priority the Structure forward into the Strategic Plan must ensure replacement Forth allocated in previous strategic interventions Plan. Development Plans. it takes into crossing. plans and strategies and identify additional account Segregated public or have planning local projects to facilitate infrastructure transport corridors, a permission. the Strategic requirements.

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required passenger ferry Development Plan - Should be linking Levenmouth Rail link, included in the Kirkcaldy/Burntisland light rail links, Redhouse, spatial strategy with Leith/Granton. Cross Forth hovercraft, assessment, Land protected Dunfermline northern through local plans. relief road, Dunfermline/Alloa passenger rail link, Dunfermline Western distributor road, Halbeath and Rosyth Park and Ride, Halbeath/Inverkeithing Rail Spur, West Coast Rail Line Improvements. Rosyth A European/World N/A Development of Not a policy in SESplan Do we still need gateway. Continue to international container but is referenced as specific policy on develop waterfront as business and other port being of strategic this? Do we need an international port, related activities. Rosyth importance. As such little to add any more transport hub and Park and Ride. Ferry to difference in support. detail in the Local economic growth Zebrugge. Offshore Development area. Supports the renewable energy Plan? Rosyth bypass. New developments. continental ferry services promoted. Promote development of multi- modal freight distribution facilities Transport of Encourage Reduce the need to Container terminal at Little difference apart No action. May Freight movement of freight travel and support a Rosyth, transport freight from detail in the policy. not merit by rail and water. shift from car and by sea rather than road. individual policy. Promote road-based freight Should be aim of

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required development of multi- transport in favour of plan and modal freight more sustainable fundamental distribution facilities modes. element in at Rosyth. Locations identifying future with good access to locations for the primary road development. network (motorways and principal roads) Wind Turbines Defined areas of Suitable locations will Consideration of Less detail and no areas Policy should be search where wind be identified through location, landscape, of search. reviewed and turbines suitable. Fife Local Development environmental quality simplified through Landscape Character Plans. and community impacts the Main Issues study will help inform will be required for Report process. areas of search in onshore developments. Existing areas of local plans. Local Development Plan search from should undertake an Structure Plan will assessment of no longer be cumulative impact of relevant and a developments. different starting point can be devised. Mineral Safeguard deposits Suitable locations for Review need to identify N/A Policies much less Need to consider Extraction from sterilisation. energy and areas of search for detailed in the Strategic how to progress Supported if resource waste/resource aggregate minerals and Development Plans areas of search required to meet Fife management coal. Set out the criteria particularly due to the and ensure policy market need or the infrastructure and to be addressed when presence of the Minerals coverage remains resource is required minerals extraction assessing individual Local Plan. the same. to meet needs of will be identified proposals. Safeguard Possibly review overlapping market through local mineral resources from and transfer areas or need cannot development plans. sterilisation. Need for some of polices be met from recycling safeguarding should be from Structure or secondary sources considered alongside the Plan into Local or by use of more developments strategy Development

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required sustain ably sourced for the area. Support Plan. Consider alternative materials extraction of onshore producing gas including coal bed Supplementary methane subject to local Planning planning considerations. Guidance. Construction New or extended Safeguard minerals Extraction of aggregates N/A Little difference but again Make sure detail Aggregates quarries only for a minimum of 10 outwith areas of search more detail in the current not lost in Local supported only where years supply of should be restricted to Minerals Local Plan. Development production doesn’t aggregates extensions of existing Plan. Consider exceed the assessed sites or small scale producing landbank requirement proposals. Support and Supplementary to meet market encourage use of Planning needs. 10 year secondary/recycled Guidance. landbank maintained aggregates at all times. Opencast Coal Supported provided No mention. Review need to identify N/A As above As above Operations they are within Areas areas of search. Set out of Search or criteria to be addressed previously unknown when assessing shallow coal deposits individual proposals. where extraction Presumption against would not prejudice surface coal extraction development plan outwith an area of strategy. search. Local Development Plan should support onshore gas Strategic Waste A strategic network of Many sites have Westfield identified as TAYplan specific on no Need to reference Management waste management additional capacity. site for strategic waste additional need required, waste sites will be No requirement for management. SESplan less so. Both management developed/ identified new landfill sites generally cover Structure facilities but in the Local identified before Plan policy. scope to extend Development Plan. 2024. Strategic sites further into policy

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required Preference given to directed towards is limited. Need to developments Dundee & Perth Core consider whether proposals at Areas. it is a real issue Lochhead, Melville for Main Issues Wood and Westfield. Report. Provision of any ancillary landfill will only accommodate residual waste. Green Belts Ensure stable green Limit the type of uses Developments will not Local No difference, both Define green belt belt boundaries for that can occur within undermine Green Belt Development Green Belts supported and set policy for the next 20-40 years the St Andrews objectives. Define Plan defines and Local Development development at Dunfermline and St Green Belt to assist appropriate Green Belts at Plan to defined detail within. Little need Andrews. Protect the in protecting the developments. Define St Andrews and appropriate uses. for a Main Issues historic setting/views. setting and historic and maintain Green Belt and Report question Local plans define core south west Dunfermline. Dunfermline. on this. boundaries. Identify Provide opportunities for Determine acceptable green belt access to open space acceptable uses. and the countryside. uses within Opportunities for Green Belts. contributing to Central Scotland Green Network identified. Nature National designations National designations Ensure no significant Policy in Strategic Need to Conservation and guidelines and guidelines impacts on integrity of Development Plans recognise followed. Major followed. Ensure international/national/ more general, importance of consideration in any plans for managed Local designations. particularly in SESplan nature application in terms realignment of coast but as with Structure conservation as of minimising and other coastal Plan rely on existing overall aim of /mitigating impact. management are designation. SESplan plan and link sites devised in liaison with links sites to Green into wider Green Scottish Natural Network. Network. Green Heritage and Marine Networks not

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required Scotland. covered in Structure Plan so need to be addressed in Local Development Plan site assessment, also extended into TAYplan who do not identify Green Network. Built Provide protection Shaping better quality Conserve and enhance All cover basic same Needs to be Environment character/appearanc places and measures natural and built protection policy. covered but e/setting of to achieve this. environment maybe not as designated (Policy 2). Ensure policy. built/cultural heritage climate change Importance of sites resilience built into cultural heritage built environment. and value to tourism need to be recognised. Forestry The Indicative Protect new and Local Development Plan N/A All plans recognise Do we need to Forestry Strategy existing forestry a key route for the importance of forestry. include Indicative contained in the areas and carbon rich Central Scotland Green Local Development Forestry Strategy Report of Survey. soils (where Network and Plans left to identify in Local identified) where the mechanisms for its strategy, based in Development advantages of delivery such as Forestry context of national Plan? Need to developments do not and Woodland strategy and Central incorporate outweigh the loss of Strategies will be Scotland Green Network. Forestry Strategy productive land. identified. in Spatial Strategy. Countryside New developments Safeguard the Provide opportunities for Little in the Strategic Landscape not in and Access that maintains & countryside from access to open space Development Plans and the Structure

Subject Structure Plan TAYplan SESplan Local Plans Commentary Action Required extends strategic encroachment. and the countryside. Structure Plan on this Plan. Needs to be long distance and/or issue. considered in local path networks spatial strategy identified by the Core and possible Paths Plan. Linking need for policy to other tourist approach in attractions relation to encouraged. Strategic Land Allocations. Flooding Settlement Avoidance of Avoidance of No difference, as per Needs to be Development - development in areas development in areas at national guidance. considered in avoidance of at risk of flooding risk of flooding and/or spatial strategy development in areas and/or coastal coastal erosion assessment and at risk of flooding erosion as consideration and/or coastal in considering erosion developments.

14 Appendix 3 – FIFEplan Local Development Plan Policy Monitor

The issues presented in the Main Issues Report are arranged in topic order under the themes of People, Economy and Place and this general format is repeated here.

People Economy Place

The policy topic area linkages to Fife’s Community Plan 2011-2020 – High Level Outcomes are also shown. The related, more detailed, Long Term Outcomes are indicated in the table below for further information .

High Level Outcome Long Term Outcome 1 Making Fife’s communities safer Reducing Inequalities Meeting the need for suitable housing choices Reducing low income households Increasing the capability of Fifers to take action and make difference to their communities Strengthening communities through regeneration Raising educational attainment and reducing educational inequality Improving early years development of children in Fife Improving the health of Fifers and narrowing the health inequality gap 2 Extending employment and skills opportunities Increasing employment More dynamic businesses Development a modern business infrastructure Improving the knowledge and research base Growing businesses and employment in key sectors including investment in renewables and tourism) 3 Adapting to climate change Tackling climate change Reducing carbon emissions (including reducing energy use, more sustainable transport and less waste)

Note : In ‘Update required*’ Column - these include minor amendments arising from changes from national and strategic policy, plan examinations, and Council decisions. Significant changes will also be identified in the Local Development Plan Main Issues Report.

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 1

Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes PEOPLE

LAND SUPPLY H* Maintaining an 1 Introduce new policy from Local Plan examination effective 5 year land recommendations. Subject for SPG. supply at all times AFFORDABLE HOUSING H1 Affordable and 1 Consider review to ensure policy continues to support Special Needs Housing delivery in current economic climate. Current Affordable Housing SPG (2011). GYPSY TRAVELLERS H3 Gypsy Travellers and 1 Review policy to address the allocation of stopover sites in Travelling Showpeople the Proposed LDP. HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION H2 Houses in Multiple 1 SPG has been prepared for the Central St Andrews Occupation Conservation Area. The planning policy position for the LDP, and policy detail, will be reviewed ahead of the Proposed Plan as agreed by North East Fife Area Committee on 8 June 2011.

Policy rewording to clarify ambiguity in reference to flats and ‘shared access or stair’. ECONOMY

INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING D1 1,2,3 SPG is being prepared ahead of the Proposed LDP. Review Developer Contributions policy in light of SPG including consideration of retail development contributing to strategic infrastructure.

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 2 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes D2 1,2 Review need for policy in light of SPG on Developer Local Employment Contributions/Financial Framework. Potential to integrate Agreements tool for achieving Local Employment Agreements outlined in policy D1. TRANSPORT T1 1,3 Consider deleting policy and including policy objective in The Transport Network new policy relating to ‘Design of New Development’. ENERGY AND RENEWABLES I1 1,2,3 SPG on Renewable Energy (2008) requires updating. SPG Renewable Energy on Wind Energy (2011) currently under review. Consider I2 revision to policies in light of current issues, including Combined Heat and encouragement and promotion of district heating schemes. Power

Heat mapping 3 Consider a new policy to safeguard future opportunities to develop and install district heating schemes and on site renewable energy generation as part of new development.

Propose a new policy to identify proposed or existing developments that would produce surplus heat that could provide a source of heat for existing or new developments. The SEA process will assist in the consideration of appropriate sites.

The location of new infrastructure that would produce waste heat should be influenced by potential heat users. The Council is exploring the preparation of a heat map of

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 3 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes existing sources of waste heat which will be used to influence the location of new heat users MINERALS Minerals 2,3 Review policy in relation to identifying Areas of Search for (currently contained mineral extraction and maintaining a landbank for within Fife Structure construction aggregates. Consider SPG to provide detailed Plan, Fife Minerals guidance. Subject Local Plan 2004, Alteration 2011) TOURISM B5 2 Review policy to ensure protection of existing tourist Tourism and Hotel facilities, consideration of tourist areas at capacity and Developments opportunity for further development and in light of Fife Tourism Strategy (2010) and the potential identification of strategic tourism sites. EMPLOYMENT LAND B1 1,2,3 Review policies to provide appropriate level of protection for Established Employment established employment land and improve deliverability of Areas – Safeguarding employment land in current economic climate. B2 Revision of Fife Employment Land Strategy as SPG in Protecting Existing advance of proposed LDP. Employment/Tourism/Lo cal Community Facilities TOWN CENTRES AND SHOPPING R1 1,2,3 Review policies to give emphasis to protecting the role and Retail Centres function of town centres, but reconsidering the range of R2 functions fulfilled in town centres, giving support for town Convenience Retail centres based on greater range of land uses, but ensuring Outwith Town or Local greater flexibility does not lead to imbalance of uses. Centres

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 4 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes R3 Comparison Retail Outwith Town or Local Centres R4 1,2,3 Consider if there is continued need for separate policy on Factory Shops this topic. B6 2,3 Consider need for review of policy in terms of function of Commercial Leisure town centres and approach to employment land. Development OTHER ECONOMY RELATED POLICIES B3 1,2,3 Current policy reason states detailed guidance notes to be Working From Home produced. B4 1,2,3 There is some indication that where areas of mixed use Areas of Mixed Use include housing the anticipated value of residential development inhibits investment in non-residential uses. Plan policies may have to be clearer about the mix of uses expected. I6 1,2,3 Review policy in light of most up to date guidance and Electronic industry information. Communications Network PLACE BUILT AND NATURAL HERITAGE AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE E1 Development Outwith 2,3 Review policy in context of all other changes to policy set. Town and Village Envelopes E2 Development Within Town and Village Envelopes

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 5 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes E3 Development Quality 1,3 Review all policies and combine into new policy relating to – Environmental Impact ‘Design of New Development’. Prepare related SPG. E4 Development Quality – Design Consider review of relevant policies to ensure new E5 Housing housing/business is future proofed for broadband Development and Open development. Space E6 Contaminated Land Consider deleting policy as its content only deals with and Potentially Unstable procedure. Consider inclusion of detail in ‘Design of New Land Development’ SPG and in supporting text of other related policies. E7 Conservation Areas Review and consolidate policies to avoid repetition and take E8 Listed Buildings account of most up to date national policy and guidance E9 Demolition of Listed Buildings E10 Protection of Orchards and Riggs Consider whether Orchards/Riggs protection better E11 Historic Gardens addressed as SPG for relevant settlements. and Designed Landscapes E12 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites E13 Street Furniture 1 Consider deleting policy and Incorporate updated policy objective into new policy relating to ‘Design of New Development’. E14 Public Art 1 Consider deleting policy and incorporate updated policy objective into new policy relating to ‘Design of New Development’.

Review level of contribution in order to achieve a reasonable

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 6 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes level of development financial contributions during the current period of economic constraints to development. Review mechanism for contribution. Consider update of related SPG (Jan 2012)

E15 Development in the 1,2,3 Revise/supplement policy to assist in defining the approach Countryside to housing, business and other development in the E16 Housing countryside. Clarify approach to housing linked to rural Development in the businesses and the appropriate use of occupancy Countryside restrictions. Consider need for related SPG. E17 Green Belt Review policy to take account of up to date strategic direction. Clarify in relation to ‘countryside’ policy. E18 Protection of Revise policy to clarify in relation to national policy and Agricultural Land guidance. Consider scarcity of local food supply. E19 Special Landscape Now renamed Local Landscape Areas. Consider SPG to Areas contain more detailed assessment of Fife’s designated landscapes to assist in understanding the impact of proposed development on the Areas’ special character and qualities. E20 Watercourses and Revise policies to address up to date objectives relating to Wetlands the Green Network agenda. E21 European Protected Consider in relation to proposed Green Infrastructure SPG. Sites E22 Local Biodiversity and Geodiversity Sites E23 Protection of Biodiversity E24 Tree Preservation Consider deleting policy as content relates to designation of Orders TPOs and tree management, with no reference to

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 7 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes development proposals. Consider including relevant development requirements in other relevant policy and detail in SPG. E25 - Trees on Consider deleting policies and incorporate updated policy Development Sites objectives into new policy relating to ‘Design of New E26 - New Tree Planting Development’. Include objectives relating to Green Network agenda. Consider in relation to proposed Green Infrastructure SPG. E28 Landfill 3 No change to presumption against new landfill but review E29 Waste Management policy to reflect new strategic objectives including Sites developing links between waste and energy and safeguarding Westfield for waste resource recovery facilities. Micro planning for household waste also to be considered, potentially in new policy on ‘Design of New Development’. C1 Community and 1,2,3 Consider review in view of guidance and other policy Leisure Facilities changes. Consider in relation to Green Network Agenda and Green Infrastructure SPG. C2 Sports Facilities 1,2,3 Consider review in relation to most up to date strategic within Settlements guidance. C3 Sports and 1,2,3 Consider need for separate policy or opportunity to include Recreational Facilities in policy objective with ‘Development in the Countryside’ the Countryside policy. C4 Open Space and 1,3 Review policies to address up to date objectives relating to Urban Park Green Network agenda. Consider potential combining of C5 Public Open Space policies. Consider in relation to Development Contributions C6 Allotments D1. C7 School and Further Content to be considered in relation to proposed Green Education Establishment Infrastructure SPG. Ground

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 8 Policy topic Continue Link to Update New policy Topic for Comment from Community required?* required? SPG? adopted Plan High Local Level Plans? Outcomes C8 Footpaths/Cycleways/ Bridleways T1 The Transport 1,3 Consider deleting policy and include updated policy Network objective into new policy relating to ‘Design of New T2 Traffic Safety in New Development’. Development Content to be considered in relation to proposed Green I3 Water and Sewerage Infrastructure SPG and Design of New Development SPG I4 Flooding and Water Quality I5 Sustainable Urban Drainage THE COAST E27 The Coast 1,2,3 Requirement to define the coast and highlight areas subject to significant constraints. Revise policy to properly reflect national guidance re locations for enhancement/regeneration, coastal erosion and flooding and public access. Include TAYplan requirement (and extend Fife wide) to include policies for the management of safeguarded areas of undeveloped coast unsuitable for development. Consider whether policy requires to address renewable energy considerations. I7 Health and Safety Delete policy as refers solely to procedure. Consultation Zones

S:\U00 Planning n Building Control\U05 DevPlan\06 LDP\Monitoring Statement\MS - section 7 - appendix 3 - v1.doc 9