LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINALISED RESPONSE TO PROPOSED PLAN CONSULTATION – RURAL HOUSING MARKET AREA

There are no unresolved representations in relation to Issue 129 – Chapel of Garioch

Page 1 Issue 130 Garioch Other Land Rural Housing Market Area Section 6 Proposals maps Garioch (p22) Reporter: Schedule 1 Table 5 (p27) Development plan Schedule 2 Table 5 (p32) reference: Volume 3I Supplementary Guidance, Settlement Statements Garioch 2010 (p7) Body or person(s) submitting a representation raising the issue (including reference number):

49 Mr Des Tough 252 Norman P. Lawie Limited on behalf of Mr. Ian Gilbert, 4 Blackhill View, 262 Norman P. Lawie Limited on behalf of D. Duncan, Towmill, Keig, Aberdeenshire 285, 286 Ryden LLP on behalf of Mr & Mrs Skevington 597 James Smith 408, 2876 William Lippe Architects Ltd on behalf of Thomas A Baird 1160, 1161 DDP LLP (Planning Consultants) on behalf of Church of General Treasurer 1887, 1888 Ryden LLP on behalf of Ian Duncan Developments Ltd 1916, 1930 Ryden LLP on behalf of Mr and Mrs Goodwin 2568 Ms Sandra Jesse 2591 Mrs Ruth McMinn 2592 Mr George Wood 2596 Mrs Wilma Smith 2597 Mr Alan Gullan 3032 GH Johnston Building Consultants Ltd on behalf of Monument Leisure Ltd.

Provision of the development plan to Land allocations in and around other which the issue relates: settlements in the Rural Housing Market part of Garioch

Planning Authority’s summary of the representation(s):

Oyne

Site G25 262: Main Issues Report site G25 would allow 12 to 18 residential units with over 1.5 ha of public open space. Development of G25 would enhance the entrance to the village and develop an unused and unattractive area.

Site G126 285, 286: The development of 5-10 houses on the site which is adjacent to the settlement boundary would be suitable. The site would contribute to the housing requirement in the Rural Housing Market Area. There is capacity in the local school and the allocation would support it. The settlement is close to the SGA with its transport links. The site would fit within the landscape.

Site around Archaeolink and Touched by Scotland 408, 2876: The infill site around Archaeolink and Touched by Scotland should be allocated for housing. A small number of units should be allocated to as it is in the to Strategic Growth Area and would sustain the existing community facilities and services. There is capacity at school for additional 26 households. Oyne in on main route for public transport.

Drum of Wartle 49: The Main Issues Report sites G135 and G134 at Drum of Wartle are unsuitable for

Page 2 development: the respondent agrees with the non-allocation of these sites.

Auchleven

597: Support the non-allocation of land at Auchleven (Premnay) as it is already overdeveloped, infrastructure is unable to cope and there are few public transport opportunities.

Site G21 252: Auchleven is a suitable settlement for development. The Main Issues Report proposal G21 should be allocated for around 20 houses and 1.8 ha of land for landscaping an extension to the school playing field.

Site G81 1887, 1888: Object to the failure to allocate land at Main Issues Report site G81, Auchleven. The development could provide a school extension, ensuring the sustainability of the school. 18 of the houses would be affordable. The development would fit well within the landscape. The development would provide enhanced pedestrian connectivity. The site lends itself to a sustainable, low energy development. This would be enhanced through carbon reducing design of the homes. . The re-opening of the shop and provision of other services would increase the sustainability of the settlement. . Development would improve wastewater capacity in the settlement. The settlement would meet the needs of a rural growth and diversification area.

Kirkton of Rayne 1160, 1161: Object to the failure to allocate land at the Glebe in Kirkton of Rayne. The site is located immediately to the west of Kirkton of Rayne. It would fit within the landscape and provide a natural and logical extension to the settlement. The site is highly accessible for pedestrians and vehicles; existing access would be upgraded and maintained. The allocation would meet the need for Local Growth and Diversification and would comply with Scottish Planning Policy, by contributing to the effective 5 year supply of housing land and providing a small scale housing development which supports local services.

Old Leslie 1916, 1930: Object to the failure to allocate land at Old Leslie. The settlement would meet the needs of a settlement in the rural growth and diversification area. The Main Issues Report site G56 should be allocated for 20 units over the course of the Plan. An indicative masterplan has been prepared which shows that the site could accommodate 20 units, servicing, and recreation area. The site is free from constraints and the Council acknowledged this in the Main Issues Report, it is not appropriate to consider the development of the site through the Rural Development policy when there is a clear benefit to the community through this particular allocation and a need to find such sites in the rural growth and diversification area.

Durno 2568, 2591, 2592, 2596, 2597: Support the Plan's approach to development in Durno. Adequate sewerage must be a pre-requisite to any more development, and so not identifying allocations at this stage is the correct approach to take.

Pittodrie House 3032: A comprehensive masterplanned mixed use golf / tourism related development with 75 mainstream houses and 85 holiday lodges at Pittodrie House was promoted as a bid to the Main Issues Report but given scant regard. This proposal is deliverable and should be included in the plan

Modifications sought by those submitting representations:

Oyne 262: Allocate Main Issues Report site G24 in Oyne for up to 18 units over the course of the Plan.

285, 286: Allocate site G126 for up to 10 houses.

Page 3

408, 2876 : Allocate site at Oyne for 10 houses in 2007 to 2016

Auchleven 252: Main Issues Report proposal G21 should be allocated for around 20 houses and 1.8 ha of land for landscaping an extension to the school playing field.

1887: Allocate site G81, Auchleven for 71 houses, a village green, recreation area, shop and space for small businesses.

Kirkton of Rayne 1160, 1161: Allocate land for 10 houses on the Glebe, Kirkton of Rayne for development over two phases of the Plan.

Old Leslie 1916, 1930: Allocate Main Issues Report site G56 in Old Leslie for 20 units over the course of the Plan

Pittodrie House 3032: Include an allocation for a 75 mainstream houses and 85 holiday lodges as part of a golf / tourism related development.

Summary of responses (including reasons) by Planning Authority: Overview All these sites are within the Rural Housing Market Area that falls within the “local growth and diversification area.” The strategy within this area is for growth in communities to meet local needs.

Oyne Oyne is not in the Strategic Growth Area. It has few facilities and employment opportunities to support new development. Development located in is more sustainable due to the rail halt and the existing provision of services and employment opportunities. Organic growth through Policy 3 Development in the Countryside is more appropriate for the settlement. No allocation is required in Oyne

Further information on the sites is contained in the Issues and Actions paper (May 2010 Volume 5 page 104 Oyne), which was prepared following consultation on the Main Issues Report, and was produced to inform the allocations in the Proposed Plan.

Site G25/G126 These sites were fully debated following consultation on the Main Issues Report, but following widespread community engagement the Council’s conclusion was to exclude these, due to the issues discussed above, the limited waste water treatment capacity and flood risk.

Site around Archaeolink and Touched by Scotland This site was raised in response to the main issues report consultation, but has not been the subject of public consultation. The site would not be considered as infill development, as it lies on the edge of the settlement,

Drum of Wartle The support for non-allocation of sites in Drum of Wartle is noted.

Auchleven Premnay primary school is forecast to be operating at 163% capacity in 2016 and there is no identified need for development in the village. In addition to this, the scale of development required to address the lack of drainage and school capacity would have to be considerable. Development of this scale would have significant impacts on settlement character. Development at this scale is best directed to more sustainable locations. No allocations are required in Auchleven. However, small scale development through Policy 3 Development in the Countryside could be supported.

Page 4 Further information on the sites is contained in the Issues and Actions paper (May 2010 Volume 5 page 3 Auchleven).

Sites G21/G81 These sites were fully debated following consultation on the Main Issues Report, but following widespread community engagement the Council’s conclusion was to exclude these, due to the issues discussed above, drainage constraints and the lack of capacity at the school.

Kirkton of Rayne This site was not proposed at any previous stage, so there has been no site assessment or public debate on the site. Kirkton of Rayne is a group of approximately 16 houses and there is no need identified in the settlement. The ten units proposed would not deliver substantial planning gain. An allocation is not required in Kirkton of Rayne, but small scale organic growth on unallocated land could be supported through Policy 3 Development in the Countryside.

Further information on the sites is contained in the Issues and Actions paper (May 2010 Volume 5 page 80 Kirkton of Rayne).

Old Leslie Old Leslie is a small rural community comprising only a small group of houses. There are no facilities within the settlement and residents would require to travel by car to access these. There is no identified need within the settlement to support an allocation. Development of site G56 would be significantly out of scale with the existing community and would impact on the character of the village.

Further information on the sites is contained in the Issues and Actions paper (May 2010 Volume 5 page 81 Leslie).

Durno The support for non-allocation of sites in Durno is noted.

Pittodrie House The site was included within the Main Issues Report as site G17 and as such was fully debated and the subject of widespread community engagement, but the Council’s conclusion was to exclude it. The site was given the same level of assessment as other sites. It is more sustainable to direct development to Chapel of Garioch where there is an identified need to support facilities. Development of the type proposed is best pursued through Policy 10 Enabling development. This policy can be applied in exceptional cases in the Rural Housing Market Area. The supplementary guidance for this policy requires enabling development to be the minimum necessary to achieve the use, and the local development plan has not been given sufficient information to be able to make a judgement on this issue. Conclusion None of the modifications sought are supported. The development strategy and land allocations made in the Rural Housing Market Area are already appropriate and sufficient to meet the needs of the settlement strategy.

Any further plan changes commended by the Planning Authority: No changes are commended.

Reporter’s conclusions:

Page 5

Reporter’s recommendations:

Page 6