Scottish Borders Council Planning and Building Standards Committee

Item No. 4 SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

MINUTE of MEETING of the PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE held in the Council Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells on 8 March 2010 at 10 a.m. ------

Present: - Councillors J. Houston (Chairman), J. Brown, N. Calvert, J. A. Fullarton, J. Hume, T. Jones, G. Logan, J. Mitchell, D. Moffat, C. Riddell-Carre (from para 2), R. Smith, T. Weatherston. Apologies:- Councillor N. Watson. In Attendance: - Development Control Manager (West), Development Control Manager (East), Assistant Road User Manager, Development Negotiator, Managing Solicitor – Commercial Services, Committee and Elections Officer (Fiona Henderson) ------

MINUTE 1. There had been circulated copies of the Minute of the Meeting of 8 February 2010.

DECISION APPROVED for signature by the Chairman.

PLANNING BRIEF - CLOVENFORDS 2. With reference to paragraph 2 of the Minute of 14 September 2010, there had been circulated copies of a report by the Head of Planning and Building Standards seeking approval for the Planning Brief for Clovenfords West. The report explained that the finalised planning brief presented to Committee included access from the A72. The recommendation was made due to the responses received during the public consultation which highlighted constraints related to the access from the B710 over the Caddon Water. SEPA recommended no development to take place on the functional flood plain. To minimise the impact on the environment the finalised brief included only a pedestrian/cycle bridge over the burn. A number of representations from the local community raised roads issues related with access to the B710. The main vehicular access from the A72 was also in line with the Reporter’s recommendation to the Council after the Local Plan Inquiry in 2007. Summarised consultation responses were included in Appendix 2 to the report. Members discussed a number of matters including the sewage infrastructure and the advantages and disadvantages of a roundabout/ junction.

DECISION AGREED to approve the planning brief for Clovenfords West as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report and accept its provision as material considerations in the which will be used as a material consideration in consideration of planning applications.

APPLICATIONS 3. There had been circulated copies of reports by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on applications for planning permission requiring consideration by the Committee.

DECISION DEALT with the applications as detailed in Appendix I to this Minute.

SECTION 75 VARIATION 4. There had been circulated copies of a report by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on a proposed variation of the Section 75 Agreement entered into in November 2007 by Scottish Borders Council and the then owner of Halmyre site, The Trustees of WRE Thomson Children’s Trust. The report explained that an application for the change of use of a steading to eight dwellinghouses and the construction of eight new dwellinghouses was presented with a recommendation to approve subject to conditions and the successful conclusion of a Section 75 Legal Agreement. The Legal Agreement was required to govern development contributions to satisfy Affordable Housing Policy H1 and Developer Contribution Policy G5 and was accepted and confirmed by Committee. Consequently, and in accordance with Committee Members instructions, a S75 legal agreement was entered into between the applicant, The Trustees of WRE Thomson Children’s Trust and Scottish Borders Council (SBC). The agreement governed the settlement of development contributions towards Education and Lifelong Learning (E & LL) and Affordable Housing (AH) provision. The terms governing the scheduling of contribution settlement required 60% of the cumulative total i.e. £68,825, to be settled in advance of the commencement of works. The developer contended that the agreement structure was concluded prior to the subsequent downturn in the housing market, financial markets and economy in general. Subsequent financial lending criterion, the developer contended, had tightened significantly to the effect that forward funded contributions were no longer viable. Consequently, and acknowledging the requirement to fully retain the contribution levels to be settled, the developer sought re-alignment of contribution settlement with unit sales in order to facilitate cash-flow considerations necessitated by financial institutions. They further contend that such a settlement structure would accord with more contemporary legal agreement schedules.

DECISION AGREED to approve the following variation to the Section 75 Agreement:-

(a) a contribution settlement option to the Committee that would assist with the facilitation of the development of this site:

x£28,669 upon the sale of the 2nd house x£28,669 upon the sale of the 6th house x£28,669 upon the sale of the 10th house x£28,668 upon the sale of the 14th house xTotal liability settled £114,675

(b) The developer will pay SBC legal costs up to a value of £250 to cover the variation of the existing agreement

APPEALS AND REVIEWS 6. There had been circulated copies of reports by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on Appeals to the Scottish Ministers and Local Reviews for the month of February.

DECISION NOTED:-

(a) that appeals had been received in respect of:-

(i) the occupation of caravans for holiday purposes, and not for permanent residential use, for up to 11 months in any 12 month period (1 March to 31 January) is lawful by virtue of planning permission 02/00813/COU at Riverview Holiday Park, Mangerton, Newcastleton.

(b) that the Scottish Ministers had dismissed appeals in respect of:-

(i) Erection of dwellinghouse, Smithy Cottage, Main Street, Kirk Yetholm; and

(ii) Erection of Single Dwellinghouse for Kennels Manager, Fingerpost, Hyndsidehil, Westruther; (c) that requests for Reviews had been received in respect of:-

(i) Replacement windows at 2A Crossland Crescent, Peebles; and

(ii) Erection of five dwellinghouses, land north of Hownam School.

(d) that the Local Review Body had sustained appeals in respect of:-

(i) Erection of two dwellinghouses, stable block and associated buidlings and formation of outdoor school/ménage, land east of Monksford Stables House, Newtown St Boswells; and

(ii) Erection of replacement conservatory, Whitelawhaugh, Hawick.

PRIVATE BUSINESS DECISION AGREED under Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public from the meeting during consideration of the business detailed in Appendix II to this Minute on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Act.

SUMMARY OF PRIVATE BUSINESS

Minute 1. The Committee approved the private section of the Minute of the meeting of 8 February 2010.

The meeting concluded at 1.10 p.m. PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE 8 MARCH 2010 APPENDIX I APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

Reference Name and Address Nature of Development Location

09/01638/FUL Mr G Forsyth Erection of 2 No stable Land North Of Per R G Licence Architect blocks and formation of Carnock Manse Road Hillend parking area Gordon Scottish Ednam Borders Kelso Scottish Borders

Decision: approved, subject to the planning conditions listed below:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby consented, the existing agricultural access within the eastern boundary of the site shall be stopped up and use of this access shall thereafter desist. Details of the boundary treatment constituting the stoppage shall first have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The stoppage shall be implemented and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 3. The construction of the site access and car parking area hereby consented shall be completed before the stables buildings hereby consented are used for the stabling of horses. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 4. Details of the extent and location of the car parking area hereby approved shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. The development shall then be implemented, and thereafter maintained, in accordance with the approved details unless written advice to vary these is provided by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the construction and use of the car parking area does not result in the removal of, or any damage to, any of the mature trees adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. 5. The finish(es) of the external walls, doors and windows of the buildings hereby consented shall be refreshed within three months of the buildings being relocated to the site. Details of the finish(es) shall first be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before this aspect of the development is commenced. Reason: The finish of the external walls, doors and windows require to be refreshed to ensure a satisfactory form of development that contributes appropriately to its setting. 6. Stable waste from the site shall not be disposed of by burning. Arrangements for the storage of stable waste from the site shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development. Reason: In the interests of protecting the residential amenity of surrounding dwellinghouses. 7. Details of the enclosure of the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted, is commenced. The approved details shall thereafter be maintained unless written advice to the contrary, is provided by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings and to ensure as far as reasonably practical, the retention of existing boundary features in the interests of nature conservation. 8. No trees within, or on the boundary of, the application site shall be felled, thinned, lopped, topped, lifted or disturbed in any way without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The existing trees represent an important visual feature which should be substantially maintained to enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings. 9. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, measures agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority shall be adopted to protect the root systems and crown spreads of those trees within the site and on, or within the vicinity of, the site boundary. Where necessary, trees to be retained shall be protected by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high, placed at a location agreed with the Local Planning Authority, which shall be removed only when the development has been completed. During the period of construction of the development: (a) No excavations, site works, trenches or channels shall be cut, or pipes or services laid in such a way as to cause damage or injury to the trees by interference with their root structure; (b) No fires shall be lit within the spread of the branches of the trees; (c) No materials or equipment shall be stored within the spread of the branches of the trees; (d) Any accidental damage to the trees shall be cleared back to undamaged wood and be treated with a preservative if appropriate; (e) Ground levels within the spread of the branches of the trees shall not be raised or lowered in relation to the existing ground level, or trenches excavated except in accordance with details shown on the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of preserving the health and vitality of existing trees, the loss of which would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area. 10. Prior to the commencement of the development, an assessment of impacts on grassland interest, including a grassland survey to National Vegetation Classification standard and bryophyte and lichen survey of any rock outcrops, shall be carried out by a suitable qualified person at an appropriate time of year (optimally May-June), and the results shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. In the event that a requirement or requirements, to avoid, mitigate or compensate for damage to the ecological interest is/are identified on the basis of this submission, appropriate measures to safeguard the ecological interest shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, and any works required shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of nature conservation. 11. No development shall take place within the development site until that part of Manse Road between Station Road (A6089) and the site entrance is upgraded to provide a properly compacted smooth and even suitably drained broken stone running surface in accordance with a scheme of details that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development is served by a satisfactory access. 12. No development shall take place within the development site until the junction bellmouth where Manse Road meets Station Road (A6089) is constructed to the following specification, in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority: i. 40mm of 14mm size close graded bituminous surface course to BS 4987 laid on 60mm of 20mm size dense binder course (basecourse) to the same BS laid on 350mm of 100mm broken stone bottoming blinded with sub-base, type 1. Drainage measures to be applied as necessary. ii. The junction radius is to be enlarged on the north side. All of the junction work is to be undertaken by a Council approved contractor. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development is served by a satisfactory access, which does not interfere with the road surface of the adjoining A Class road. Applicant Informative 1. The site features in the Borders Grasslands and Mire Inventory (SNH) and as a Classified Natural Heritage site (‘moderately good meadow’, NT646435). The SNH inventory surveys were carried out between 1997 and 1999. The survey identified areas of unimproved or semi-improved acid grassland (NVC U4b Festuca ovina- Agrostis capillaris-Gallium saxatile grassland), rush pasture (NVC MG10 Holcus lanatus- Juncus effusus rush pasture) and semi-improved neutral grassland (NVC MG6b Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland, Anthoxanthum odoratum sub- community. The site features as a plantation on the 1st edition OS maps. The meadow is known to be a site containing mountain pansy (Viola lutea), which is scarce in the region and bryophyte and lichen communities associated with the basic rock outcrops. The ecological survey is required to assess the significance of impacts arising from the development and to guide suitable avoidance, mitigation and/or compensation. This may take the form of habitat creation and enhancement or protection of habitats, exclusion of areas within the development footprint or compensatory replacement of habitats to offset any loss. In certain circumstances complete avoidance may be required and a recommendation made against development, particularly for habitats of national priority and local scarcity that cannot be easily recreated. Measures for mitigation and compensation may include: • retention or restoration of key habitats and features on the development site • creation of new habitats on or off site • appropriate management and aftercare of habitats on or off site • provision of access for education and awareness. 2. In the event that the development is linked to a change in grazing practice on the wider area of the old meadow to the north of the site, it should be noted that this is an issue of ecological concern for a Habitat of Conservation Concern under the Local Biodiversity Action Plan http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/life/environment/naturalheritage/20784.html. Overgrazing by horses can be damaging to the ecological interest. However, sensitive grazing by horses can be beneficial to both biodiversity and the welfare of horses, maintaining sward height and ecological interest and providing a rich food supply for the horses, further guidance on good practice can be downloaded at: http://naturalengland.etraderstores.com/NaturalEnglandShop/IN52 . 3. It should be noted that land to the immediate west of the site has been designated for housing in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan (BG09D: ‘Larger Glebe’). In order for any future housing development on the designated housing site to be realised, the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) advises that Manse Road would require to be widened to accommodate a new, upgraded road, a new pedestrian footway and public utilities. This would require that a sizeable strip of land adjacent to the existing road in Manse Road would have to be used for this purpose, including land that is within the site boundary. Although any work required to deliver a new, upgraded road, pedestrian footway and public utilities on Manse Road, would necessarily be undertaken at the expense of the developer of the designated housing site, it should be noted that such work would nonetheless impact upon the access to the consented development.

10/00068/FUL George M Brown & Sons Erection of three Land North East Of 1 Per Aitken Turnbull industrial units Mansfield Gardens (Hawick) Hawick Scottish 22 Buccleuch Street Borders Hawick Scottish Borders TD9 0HW

Decision approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

b. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas

c. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density

d. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings. 3. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise the environmental impact of the development. 4. The means of both foul and surface water drainage for both the proposed building, and in the case of surface drainage, the parking and access area are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority prior to the commencement of development. Thereafter the development is to be carried out in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is suitable serviced and in the interests of road safety. 5. Prior to any development commencing on site, a scheme will be submitted by the Developer (at their expense) to identify and assess potential contamination on site. No construction work shall commence until such scheme has been submitted to, and approved, by the Council, and is thereafter implemented to like satisfaction. The scheme shall contain details of proposals to investigate and remediate potential contamination and must include:- a. A desk study and development of a conceptual site model, measurement of pollutant linkages through a detailed investigation of the nature and extent of contamination on site, and assessment of risk such contamination presents. The scope and method of this investigation to be agreed in advance with the Council, and be undertaken in accordance with PAN 33 (2000) and BS10175:2001. b. Remedial Strategy (if required) to treat/remove contamination to ensure that the site is fit for its proposed use (this shall include a method statement, programme of works, and proposed validation plan). c. Submission of a Validation Report (should remedial action be required) by the competent person employed by the developer who will validate and verify the completion of works to a satisfactory standard as agreed with the Council. d. Submission, if necessary, of monitoring statements at periods to be agreed with the Council for such time period as is considered appropriate by the Council. e. Written confirmation from the Council, that the scheme has been implemented completed and (if appropriate), monitoring measures are satisfactorily in place, shall be required by the Developer before any development hereby approved commences. Where remedial measures are required as part of the development construction detail, commencement must be agreed in writing with the Council. Reason: To ensure that the potential for health risk arising from any identified land contamination has been adequately addressed. 6. Notwithstanding the description of the materials in the application, no development shall be commenced until precise details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external walls and roofs of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter no development shall take place except in strict accordance with those details. Reason: The materials require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting. 7. Any gates provided must be hung so as to open inwards and not out over the adjacent road. They must also be fully retractable so as not to interfere with the access and egress Reason: In the interests of road safety within and adjacent to the site. 8. The existing access should be lined and hatched in accordance with a detail first submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority. The detail is to provide for lines (As highlighted in blue on the approved plans) running from either side of the access gate posts to a point on either side of the existing access point where the existing paving block work meets the public road. Reason: In the interests of road safety within and adjacent to the site. 9. The areas allocated for parking are to be retained as such in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of road safety within and adjacent to the site and to ensure suitable parking provision within the site.

Informatives: 1. It is recommended that the applicant adopts water resilient materials and construction methods as appropriate in the facility as advised in PAN 69. As access and egress to the property could be affected by flood waters it is recommended that the applicant arranges to receive local flood alerts and also prepares an action plan to ensure that safe evacuation from the property can be made in times of flood warnings. Additionally, Scottish Borders Council currently offers a free flood warning service covering a number of areas in the Borders. More details can be obtained about the flood warning service by contacting Emergency Planning on 01835 825056. The potential for flooding arising for other sources such as road drainage, overland surface water runoff and surcharged culverts should also be taken into account. 2. Attention is drawn to the enclosed consultation reply from SEPA. 3. The applicant should ensure that no hazardous materials are stored on the ground floor of the proposed units and that water resistant materials and forms of construction are used as appropriate and as outlined in Planning Advice Note: 69.4. The applicant should consult with Scottish Water to ensure a connection to the public sewer is available and whether restrictions at the local sewage treatment works will constrain the development.

09/01660/FUL George M Brown & Sons Erection of nineteen Land North Of Per Gilberts Associates dwellinghouses Chicken Hatchery 39 Grassmarket Clockmill Duns Edinburgh Scottish Borders EH1 2HS

Decision: approved subject to the listed conditions and the conclusion of appropriate legal agreement:

1. The vehicular and pedestrian accesses and parking spaces to be formed in accordance with the approved plans, in particular drawing number 1427-90-01 Rev.B, or a later amended and approved version and to be completed to the specification of the Planning Authority prior to occupation of the first unit. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 2. The section of public road between the Clockmill junction with the A6105 and the south eastern boundary of the site to be upgraded to the specification of the Planning Authority prior to occupation of the first unit. This upgrading shall include the provision of a public footway between the A6105 and the northerly site boundary along this route, the incorporation of street lighting, the resurfacing and widening of the carriageway to 5.5m along the frontage of the site and the installation of adequate drainage. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 3. The roofing material to be natural slate. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area. 4. Sample panels of the external wall finish to be prepared on site for prior approval by the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area. 5. No trees to be felled on site without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 6. A detailed scheme of new tree planting specifying planting size and densities and using native species of local provenance to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority within 2 months of the date of this consent and to be implemented no later than the first planting season following the commencement of construction works and to be retained thereafter to the specification of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 7. Hedgerow planting on the south west boundary to be a species rich thorn hedge with grassland margin and hedgerow trees and to be implemented in the first planting season following the grant of this consent and to be retained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 8. Demolition of buildings and any agreed felling of trees and scrub clearance to be undertaken outwith the March – August breeding bird season to avoid potential impact on breeding birds. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 9. Barn owl nest boxes to be placed to the agreement of the Planning Authority on appropriate mature trees around the site. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 10. All retained trees and hedging to be fenced off and protected in accordance with BS5837-2005 prior to the start of construction work Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 11. The disposal of surface water to comply with the “Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems – Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland” published by CIRA in 2000. Reason: To ensure that adequate and appropriate means are used in the disposal of surface water. 12. The precise setting out of property foundations to be confirmed on site by the Planning Authority prior to the pouring of concrete. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area. 13. The development shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the mitigation relating to ground contamination described in Section 5.0 of the REC report entitled ‘Results of and Environmental Investigation, Clockmill, Duns’, dated July 2008 ‘Final’ version. Reason: In the interests of health and safety, specifically for those users and future inhabitants of the site. 14. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, the developer shall submit to, and have approved in writing by the Planning Authority, an assessment of the impact of the development on local air quality. The assessment must quantify the levels of pollutants likely to arise from the development, with reference to the National Air Quality Objectives. The issues addressed should include pollution arising from the presence of additional road traffic and human occupancy, and the use of any proposed zero carbon/renewable technologies. Reason: In the interests of amenity and safety. 15. Prior to the occupation of the first dwellinghouse, hereby approved, the developer shall submit and have approved in writing by the Planning Authority a scheme for the provision of the play area. Once approved the play area then to be carried out in accordance with the agreed scheme. The scheme so submitted shall include- i. type and location of play equipment, seating, fences, walls and litter bins

ii. surface treatment of the play area

iii. proposals for the implementation/phasing of play area(s) in relation to the construction of houses on the site.

iv. details of the means to ensure the long term maintenance of the play area

Reason: To ensure that proper provision is made for recreational facilities within the site. 16. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies, in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. This should include demonstration of a reduction of 15% in CO2 emissions beyond the 2007 building regulations carbon dioxide emissions standard through incorporation of on-site low or zero carbon technologies (LZCT) where technically feasible. Reason: To ensure the development minimises any environmental impact. Notes: Declaration of Interest 1. Councillor Logan declared an interest in the following item of business in terms of Section 5 of the Councillors Code of Conduct and left the Chamber during the discussion.

2. In terms of Standing Order No. 55(a), the Committee unanimously agreed to suspend Standing Order No. 26 to allow this application to be reconsidered before a period of 6 months had elapsed.

09/01644/PPP Mr Martyne D Ramsden Erection of Land North And East Kaimridge dwellinghouse Of Spindrift Cottage Kaimflat Kaimflat Kelso Kelso Scottish Borders Scottish Borders TD5 7QN

Refused for the following reason:

1. The proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of prime agricultural land, and would therefore be contrary to the requirements of Policy R1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008. 2. The proposed development would be inconsistent with the terms of a Section 75 agreement dated 4 March 2006 which seeks to restrict further development on land at Kaimflat on the basis that the building group should not be further extended. The S75 Agreement is a material consideration since it binds the application site and is of such weight as to warrant refusal of this application.

NOTE Vote Councillor Weatherston, seconded by Councillor Moffat, moved that the application be refused in terms of Policy R1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 and that the development would be inconsistent with the terms of a Section 75 agreement on the land at Kaimflat. Councillor Fullarton, seconded by Councillor Mitchell, moved as an amendment that the application be approved as per the recommendations contained in the report.

On a show of hands Members voted as follows:-

Motion - 9 votes Amendment - 3 votes The Motion was accordingly carried.

08/00088/OUT Scottish Borders Council Erection of three Land West Of Quarry per Smith And Garratt affordable Green Bowden Rural Asset dwellinghouses Scottish Borders The Guildhall Ladykirk Scottish Borders TD15 1XL Decision: approved subject to an appropriate legal agreement securing the provision and phasing of the development in relation to the residential development at Faughill Farm Bowden and the provision and long term maintenance of landscaping outwith the site and the following conditions and informative note. The legal agreement should refer specifically to the control of occupancy of the proposed housing to meet the Council’s definition of affordable housing. Members’ agreed that Local Members to be involved in the consideration of the design of the detailed scheme.

As there is an objection from Scottish Natural Heritage in relation to this application, any decision to approve the application will have to be referred to Scottish Ministers.

1. Approval of the details of the layout, siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development, and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 2. Application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision shall be made to the Planning Authority before whichever is the latest of the following: (a) the expiration of three years from the date of this permission, or (b) the expiration of six months from the date on which an earlier application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision notice was refused or dismissed following an appeal. Only one application may be submitted under paragraph (b) of this condition, where such an application is made later than three years after the date of this consent. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development, and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development, and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 4. The dwellinghouses hereby approved shall be provided and occupied only as affordable housing, as defined in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance Number 10: Affordable Housing March 2007 on a means of tenure that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall thereafter not be sold or let on any other tenure arrangement. Reason: To ensure the dwellinghouses remain as affordable units in perpetuity. 5. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise the environmental impact of the development. 6. Details of all proposed means of enclosure around the site and between plots shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before work on the site is commenced. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft landscaping works for the site which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority as part of the approval of matters specified in conditions application for this site, and shall include: i. indication of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration ii. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas

iii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density

iv. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings. 7. Six car parking spaces, excluding garages, must be provided within the site to the specification of the Planning Authority before the dwellinghouses are occupied and retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 8. A detailed drawing to be submitted with the approval of matters specified in conditions application for this development showing how the ditch along the frontage of the site is to be culverted for the approval of the Planning Authority and SEPA. The development then to be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 10. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining a Watching Brief. This will be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow investigation by a contracted archaeologist(s) nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to observe relevant below ground excavation during development, investigate and record features of interest and recover finds and samples if necessary. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Data Structure Report. If significant archaeology is discovered below ground excavation should cease pending further consultation with the Planning Authority. The developer will ensure that any significant data and finds undergo post- excavation analysis, the results of which will be submitted to the Planning Authority Reason: The site is within an area where ground works may interfere with, or result in the destruction of, archaeological remains, and it is therefore desirable to afford a reasonable opportunity to record the history of the site.

Informatives: (1) In respect of condition 8, the Director of Technical Services advises that the parking spaces should be re-located to the eastern boundary of the site and there is a requirement for a short length of pedestrian footway. (2) Members’ agreed that Local Members to be involved in the consideration of the design of the detailed scheme.

08/00088/OUT Director of Technical Formation of all weather Peebles High School Services playing surface, Springwood Road Scottish Borders Council including fenced Peebles Scottish Council Headquarters enclosure and erection Borders EH45 9HB Newtown St. Boswells of 8 No 16m high Melrose floodlighting columns.

Decision: approved subject to the following Conditions and Informatives:

Informatives

1. The installation should be designed in accordance with the guidance produced by The Institution of Lighting Engineers.

09/01193/PPP Aitken Turnbull (Hawick) Residential development Land North West Of 22 Buccleuch Street Hawick Golf Club 09/01194/PPP Hawick (Phase 1) and (Phase Scottish Borders 2)Crumhaughhill TD9 0HW Hawick Scottish Borders

09/01193/PPP Decision: approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes, and subject to conclusion of a legal agreement regarding on-site provision of affordable housing, developer contribution towards education facilities, provision of play facilities, provision of a pedestrian link between phases one and two, provision of structural planting and phasing of development:

1. Notwithstanding the details on the approved application, the permission relates to the principle of residential development only. Approval of the details of the layout, siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 2. Application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision shall be made to the Planning Authority before whichever is the latest of the following: (a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or (b) the expiration of six months from the date on which an earlier application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision notice was refused or dismissed following an appeal. Only one application may be submitted under paragraph (b) of this condition, where such an application is made later than three years after the date of this consent. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 4. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies, in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. This should include demonstration of a reduction of 15% in CO2 emissions beyond the 2007 building regulations carbon dioxide emissions standard through incorporation of on-site low or zero carbon technologies (LZCT) where technically feasible. Reason: To ensure the development minimises any environmental impact 5. Evidence that the development can be connected to the public sewer and mains water supply to be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to each phase of the development being commenced. Reason: To ensure the site is adequately serviced. 6. A detailed sustainable urban drainage (SUDS) scheme to be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval with any detailed planning application or application for approval of matters specified in conditions for this site. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced. 7. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works, which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Details of the scheme shall include: (a) existing and finished ground levels in relation to a fixed datum preferably ordnance; (b) existing landscaping features and vegetation to be retained and, in the case of damage, restored and enhanced and methods of protection; (c) location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas and a schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density; (e) existing and proposed services such as cables, pipelines, sub-stations; (f) other artefacts and structures such as street furniture and street lighting; (g) a programme for completion and subsequent long term maintenance and management of the landscape and woodland areas. (h) a scheme for provision of tree protection in accordance with Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance on Trees and Development. (i) boundary treatments to the exterior of the application site and between house plots. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development. 8. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining an Archaeological Evaluation. This will be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow investigation by a contracted archaeologist(s) nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to conduct a programme of evaluation prior to development. This will include the below ground excavation of evaluation trenches and the full recording of archaeological features and finds. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Data Structure Report. If significant archaeology is discovered the nominated archaeologist(s) will contact the Archaeology Officer for further consultation. The developer will ensure that any significant data and finds undergo post-excavation analysis the results of which will be submitted to the Planning Authority Reason: The site is within an area where ground works may interfere with, or result in the destruction of, archaeological remains, and it is therefore desirable to afford a reasonable opportunity to record the history of the site. 9. The subsequent applications for either full planning permission or for the approval of matters specified in conditions shall incorporate the following unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority: x a site layout plan at a scale of 1:500 showing the position of all buildings, roads, footpaths, parking areas (distinguishing, where appropriate, between private and public spaces), walls and fences and landscaping; x plans and elevations of each house and garage type showing their dimensions and type and colour of external materials; x a landscaping plan at a scale of 1:200 showing the location, species and ground spread of existing and proposed trees, shrubs and hedges, and making provision for structural landscaping along the northern perimeter of the site; x details of the phasing of development; x details of existing and finished ground levels, and finished floor levels, in relation to a fixed datum, preferably ordnance datum. x A detailed Surface Water Drainage Scheme x Specification and location of street lighting x Full details of retaining walls and cut and fill operations across the site. x a longitudinal section of the road giving the levels and gradients. The maximum gradient allowable with frontage access would be 1 in 12. x parking for a minimum of two vehicles, excluding any garage, which must be retained in perpetuity. x Visitor parking shall be required at a level of 25%. This would require a minimum of 5 off-street parking spaces. These must be evenly distributed throughout the development. x Driveway and curtilage parking gradients should be not greater than 1 in 18. x A pedestrian barrier will be required at the end of the link to Phase 2 development to ensure that no pedestrians can come straight out onto the road. x Details shall be required for any retaining structure that will be responsible for retaining any part of the prospective public road. In particular, any feature that is proposed to the rear of properties 11 – 18. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development. 10. Prior to the commencement of development, a site waste management plan to be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority in conjunction with SEPA.] Reason: To ensure consistency with the aims and objectives of the National Waste Plan. 11. The finished floor levels of the building(s) hereby permitted shall be consistent with those indicated on a scheme of details which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall indicate the existing and proposed levels throughout the application site. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not have an adverse effect upon the amenity currently enjoyed by adjoining occupiers.

Applicant Informatives:

1. Subsequent applications for the development of this site should include a clear and comprehensive commitment to placemaking, following the principles as contained within the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance on Placemaking & Design; 2. The applicant is reminded that this permission does not convey approval for works affecting third party rights which may exist on the land or any adjoining. The applicant is therefore advised to seek the approval of any parties having an interest in any land affected by this permission. 3. The applicant is reminded that this permission is subject to the legal agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, requiring development contributions for affordable housing and education provision. 4. Details of the drainage proposals should be submitted at an early stage to ensure that Scottish Water, SEPA and ourselves are all content with the proposals. This will include confirmation of what Scottish Water are going to be responsible for and what the Council are expected to be responsible for. 5. The submitted drawings in support of this application were treated as being for illustrative purposes only. Applications for the approval of matters specified in conditions (particularly in relation to Condition 1) will need to demonstrate that proposed development is appropriate in terms of its access arrangements, number of houses and relationship with existing development.

09/01194/PPP DECISION: approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes, and subject to conclusion of a legal agreement regarding on-site provision of affordable housing, developer contribution towards education facilities, provision of play facilities, provision of a pedestrian link between phases one and two, provision of structural planting and phasing of development: 1. Notwithstanding the details on the approved application, the permission relates to the principle of residential development only. Approval of the details of the layout, siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 2. Application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision shall be made to the Planning Authority before whichever is the latest of the following: (a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or (b) the expiration of six months from the date on which an earlier application for approval of matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision notice was refused or dismissed following an appeal. Only one application may be submitted under paragraph (b) of this condition, where such an application is made later than three years after the date of this consent. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the matters specified in the conditions set out in this decision. Reason: to achieve a satisfactory form of development and to comply with the requirements of Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 4. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. This should include demonstration of a reduction of 15% in CO2 emissions beyond the 2007 building regulations carbon dioxide emissions standard through incorporation of on-site low or zero carbon technologies (LZCT) where technically feasible. Reason: To ensure the development minimises any environmental impact. 5. Evidence that the development can be connected to the public sewer and mains water supply to be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to each phase of the development being commenced. Reason: To ensure the site is adequately serviced. 6. A detailed sustainable urban drainage (SUDS) scheme to be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval with any detailed planning application or application for approval of matters specified in conditions for this site. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced. 7. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works, which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Details of the scheme shall include: (a) existing and finished ground levels in relation to a fixed datum preferably ordnance; (b) existing landscaping features and vegetation to be retained and, in the case of damage, restored and enhanced and methods of protection; (c) location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas and a schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density; (e) existing and proposed services such as cables, pipelines, sub-stations; (f) other artefacts and structures such as street furniture and street lighting; (g) a programme for completion and subsequent long term maintenance and management of the landscape and woodland areas. (h) a scheme for provision of tree protection in accordance with Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance on Trees and Development. (i) boundary treatments to the exterior of the application site and between house plots. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development. 8. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining an Archaeological Evaluation. This will be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow investigation by a contracted archaeologist(s) nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to conduct a programme of evaluation prior to development. This will include the below ground excavation of evaluation trenches and the full recording of archaeological features and finds. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Data Structure Report. If significant archaeology is discovered the nominated archaeologist(s) will contact the Archaeology Officer for further consultation. The developer will ensure that any significant data and finds undergo post-excavation analysis the results of which will be submitted to the Planning Authority Reason: The site is within an area where ground works may interfere with, or result in the destruction of, archaeological remains, and it is therefore desirable to afford a reasonable opportunity to record the history of the site. 9. The subsequent applications for either full planning permission or for the approval of matters specified in conditions shall incorporate the following unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority: x a site layout plan at a scale of 1:500 showing the position of all buildings, roads, footpaths, parking areas (distinguishing, where appropriate, between private and public spaces), walls and fences and landscaping; x plans and elevations of each house and garage type showing their dimensions and type and colour of external materials; x a landscaping plan at a scale of 1:200 showing the location, species and ground spread of existing and proposed trees, shrubs and hedges, and making provision for structural landscaping along the northern perimeter of the site; x details of the phasing of development; x details of existing and finished ground levels, and finished floor levels, in relation to a fixed datum, preferably ordnance datum. x A detailed Surface Water Drainage Scheme x Specification and location of street lighting x Full details of retaining walls and cut and fill operations across the site. x a longitudinal section of the road giving the levels and gradients. The maximum gradient allowable with frontage access would be 1 in 12. x parking for a minimum of two vehicles, excluding any garage, which must be retained in perpetuity. x Visitor parking shall be required at a level of 25%. This would require a minimum of 5 off-street parking spaces. These must be evenly distributed throughout the development. x Driveway and curtilage parking gradients should be not greater than 1 in 18. x A pedestrian barrier will be required at the end of the link to Phase 2 development to ensure that no pedestrians can come straight out onto the road. x Details shall be required for any retaining structure that will be responsible for retaining any part of the prospective public road. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development. 10. Prior to the commencement of development, a site waste management plan to be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority in conjunction with SEPA.] Reason: To ensure consistency with the aims and objectives of the National Waste Plan. 11. The finished floor levels of the building(s) hereby permitted shall be consistent with those indicated on a scheme of details which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall indicate the existing and proposed levels throughout the application site. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not have an adverse effect upon the amenity currently enjoyed by adjoining occupiers. Applicant Informatives:

1. Subsequent applications for the development of this site should include a clear and comprehensive commitment to placemaking, following the principles as contained within the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance on Placemaking & Design; 2. The applicant is reminded that this permission does not convey approval for works affecting third party rights which may exist on the land or any adjoining. The applicant is therefore advised to seek the approval of any parties having an interest in any land affected by this permission. 3. The applicant is reminded that this permission is subject to the legal agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, requiring development contributions for affordable housing and education provision. 4. The roads, footways and pedestrian linkage to the adjacent Phase 2 will require Road Construction Consent. 5. Details of the drainage proposals should be submitted at an early stage to ensure that Scottish Water, SEPA and Scottish Borders Council are all content with the proposals. This should include confirmation of what Scottish Water are responsible for and what the Council would be responsible for. 6. The submitted drawings in support of this application were treated as being for illustrative purposes only. Applications for the approval of matters specified in conditions (particularly in relation to Condition 1) will need to demonstrate that proposed development is appropriate in terms of its access arrangements, number of houses and relationship with existing development.

09/01447/FUL Mr P Connolly Change of use and Land And Building Per Bauman Lyons alterations to form South East Of 14 Architects dwellinghouse and Lower Burnmouth Per Mr Issa Bensalem change of use of land to Burnmouth Scottish 2 Newton Road incorporate into Garden Borders Leeds Ground LS7 4HE

Decision: approved subject to the following conditions and informative and the successful conclusion of a legal agreement covering Education contributions:

INFORMATIVES

1. Full details of new connections to the public sewerage system must be submitted to Scottish Water for approval. Work affecting public sewers must be carried out under Scottish Water supervision. The applicant should contact Scottish Water directly to arrange the necessary inspections. 2. The applicant and future owners of the property are reminded that the site lies immediately adjacent to the Burnmouth Coast Site of Special Scientific Interest and that it is nationally important in terms of its nature conservation value. Work affecting the SSSI should not be carried out without first contacting Scottish Borders Council and Scottish Natural Heritage. Item No. 5(a) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2009

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(a) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00105/FUL

OFFICER: Mr B Fotheringham WARD: Mid/East Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Erection of Poultry Shed and Manure Store SITE: Little Swinton Farm, Swinton APPLICANT: Ian Forbes AGENT: SAC

SITE DESCRIPTION

The application site is currently an arable field located approximately 400m south of Little Swinton and Kersfield Farms. It is a low lying area of land that is bisected by a narrow drainage ditch. It is situated approximately 2km South East of the village of Swinton.

The field is defined by an existing 40m wide shelter belt of largely coniferous trees on the north west boundary, a post and wire fence with coniferous shelter belt beyond on the south west boundary, a post and wire fence on the south east boundary and a combination of post and wire fence and hedging on the north east boundary. The land to the north and south of the application site rises gently allowing the site to nestle in a small bowl within the wider landscape.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

It is proposed to erect a free range poultry shed and manure store on this pasture field. The shed would be located towards to the north of the field and would be accessed from the C Class road to the east of the site. This public road connects to the B5461 Swinton Road just over 1km to the north and the A6112 Coldstream road approximately 2.5km to the east.

The proposed shed would measure 160m long by 15m wide by 5.5m high. It would be of a steel portal framed construction and finished in dark green box profile sheeting. A hardcore apron 7m wide would be provided on all 4 sides. The proposed manure store would be located towards the west of the existing shelter belt and would measure 27.5m long by 10m wide by 5m high and would also be of a steel portal framed construction with green coloured panels and reinforced concrete walls. The store would be accessed via an existing access track to the north of the shelter belt and would incorporate a 10m by 10m concrete hardstanding.

Two free standing feed silos would be located on the north west facing elevation of the poultry unit.

The proposed poultry unit would hold up to 32,000 birds (dependent on customer specification) housed as two separate colonies of 16,000 birds and would produce approximately 9.8 million eggs per annum.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 PLANNING HISTORY

There is no specific planning history associated with this application site although the Planning Authority supplied a screening opinion on 6th August 2009 as to whether or not a full EIA would be required. It was concluded that a full EIA would not be required in this instance.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Nine individual letters of objection and one letter of support were received in connection with this application. Of the 9 letters of objection, four were from the same address. The principal grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

x The anticipated increase in level of heavy traffic x The suitability of the existing road to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic – soft verges, blind corners, blind summits, lack of passing places x Air pollution/smells x Adverse effect on the landscape x Road safety - use of existing road by walkers, cyclists, horse riders x Flooding x Adverse effect on neighbouring properties x Loss of view x Inadequate screening x Contrary to Policies G and H2 of the Local Plan x Vermin

The supporting comments express encouragement for this type of ‘unsupported’ diversification in farming creating much needed new local employment. The storage of manure on site and utilised on nearby farmland will reduce vehicle movements and reduce the amount of inorganic fertilisers that are usually required. The infrequent but planned vehicle movements will not cause additional disruption.

The letters of objections and support can be viewed in full on Public Access.

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant has submitted additional environmental information in support of the application. The environmental statement (ES) is not a full EIA but does cover supplementary issues such as landscape, designated areas, environmental effects, vehicular movements and effects on water courses, flora and fauna.

A traffic statement (TS) was also submitted by SAC on behalf of the applicant in support of this application. The TS covers the numbers and types of vehicles anticipated during the normal 60 week production cycle, including the frequency of deliveries, collections and proposed routes.

The full ES and TS are available to view on-line on the Public Access website.

Following the consultation and neighbour notification processes the applicants agent submitted further supporting information on 1 April 2010. This additional information covers access and traffic issues, environmental health, and various concerns from third party objectors. A copy of this response is available for Members to view on-line through Public Access. Following the consultation and neighbour notification processes the applicants agent submitted further supporting information on 1 April 2010. This additional information covers access and traffic issues, environmental health, and various concerns from third party objectors. A copy of this response is available for Members to view on-line through Public Access.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

Policy N2 – International Sites Policy N3 – National Sites Policy N4 – Precautionary Principal Policy N5 – Local Biodiversity Action Policy N6 – Environmental Impact Policy N7 – Protection of Nature Conservation Interest Policy N8 – River Tweed System Policy N9 – Maintaining Landscape Character Policy N20 – Design Policy E2 – Farm Diversification Policy E16 – Rural Economic Development Policy I15 – Flood Risk Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy G4 – Flooding Policy NE2 – National Nature Conservation Sites Policy NE3 – Local Biodiversity Policy EP5 – Air Quality Policy Inf6 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Policy Inf11 – Developments that Generate Travel Demand Policy D1 – Business, Tourism and Leisure Development in the Countryside

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

SBC SPG – Biodiversity SBC SPG – Landscape and Development

PAN 39 – Farm and Forestry Buildings PAN 51 – Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation PAN 60 – Planning for Natural Heritage PAN 73 – Rural Diversification

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): Following the submission of a traffic report, considers that the only suitable route for serving the development is the minor public road leading from the B6461, but requires some alterations to the route to assist in mitigating the impact of the relatively minor increase in traffic. These include changes to junction design and the introduction of passing places.

Director of Technical Services (EH): If the proposal is approved, it is recommended the following conditions be applied in order to reduce the potential for nuisance being caused to occupants of properties in the area: 1 A written operation schedule should be submitted covering management of the unit to mitigate nuisance arising from odour, flies, feathers or dust.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 2 A waste management plan should be submitted. This to include details of where manure to be spread and frequency of spread. 3 No incineration of dead birds to be permitted on site. 4 Manure to be stored in covered containers in order to minimise odour produced on site. Containers to be kept as clean as possible to reduce possible nuisance from odour and flies. 5. No broiler production to be permitted at site at any time.

Statutory Consultees

SEPA: No objections. It is proposed that surface water from the roof of the building will be discharged to an existing field drain and this would be adequate for the site. Waste water will be directed to a septic tank discharging to soakaway and soil porosity tests will be required. The applicant should contact the Borders EPI Team to discuss. SEPA are satisfied with the proposals for manure which will be removed from the proposed shed on a weekly basis and then spread on land. The site is within a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) therefore The Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (PEPFAA) code should be followed regarding the spreading of manure.

Swinton & Ladykirk Community Council: No objections or observations.

Other Consultees

None.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

The key planning issues with this proposal are:

x The landscape implications of the poultry unit x The impact the associated traffic movements will have on the surrounding road network x The potential impact on the residential amenity of nearby properties x The potential impact on designated areas and biodiversity.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

PRINCIPLE/POLICY

Policy E2 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan encourages farming related diversification including alternative crops, organics, tourist related development or other rurally based business opportunities. These forms of rural diversification help to maintain the farming unit, conserve high quality farmland and are most likely to meet the aspirations of farmers. Employment-generating development proposals associated with farm diversification will be supported in principle provided they meet certain criteria under Policy E2 and D1 of the Local Plan.

The proposed free range poultry unit developed by GRF Poultry would be a new business venture operated by the applicant Mr Forbes, which will be run in partnership with GRF Property Ltd who owns the land. This business/diversification opportunity will be used directly for agricultural operations which by their nature are appropriate to the rural character of the area and would be a complementary use to the existing agricultural activities currently carried out at Little Swinton and would be appropriate in principle for this area.

LANDSCAPE

The proposed site for this free range poultry unit is not considered to be prime quality agricultural land and is not located within a designated area such as an Area of Great Landscape Value or National Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Scenic Area. However, the landscape character and attractiveness of the surrounding area should not be overlooked because there is no landscape designation.

The application site is a large open field with very low external inter-visibility to sensitive receptors and the development, although large, is not atypical of modern agricultural buildings. The site sits in a shallow hollow in the landscape and is protected by existing shelter belts to the north and west and a mature, albeit patchy, hedgerow along the road side boundary. Slightly elevated land to the north and south provide further seclusion from the perspective of visual impact with only a small number of dwellings being visible from the site. There is an opportunity, however, to ensure that the existing vegetation along the road side boundary is strengthened by planting up the gaps in the existing hedge (as per landscape guidance note 3) and by supplementing this with some hedgerow trees at 10m centres.

The properties known as Kersfield to the north and Trasnagh Cottage to the south (some 600m) would have some views of the proposed poultry unit, but taking into account the existing shelter belts and additional planting it is considered that the visual effect will be minimal and would not have significant adverse effect on the wider landscape quality or character of the area. The shed will also be visible from a distance at just over a kilometre from properties at Ruthven to the south west of the site. Due to the low lying nature of the site and building, as well as the colour and surrounding landscape, the shed will be difficult to see from these receptors.

ACCESS

It is proposed to access the site from the C Class minor road to the east. The three minor public roads leading to this site are single track in nature with limited passing opportunities. The public road leading from Simprim (to the south-east) is problematic in terms of blind summits and blind corners. Whilst it is accepted that the number of vehicle trips that are likely to be generated by the proposal are low in numbers, the concern is more in relation to the size of the vehicles being proposed and their interaction with other road users on the these minor roads. Following consultation with the Director of Technical Services, a request was made to the applicant for additional traffic information specifically, numbers and types of vehicles and anticipated travel routes.

During the normal 60 week production cycle of the poultry shed, heavy vehicle movements will be low in number. There will be one feed delivery every week delivered in a single HGV and eggs will be collected twice per week using short wheel base lorries/vans of up to 7.5 tonnes capacity. Manure will not be removed in HGV’s. Manure belts in the shed will be emptied approximately once a week into a traditional farm trailer and transported the short distance to the manure store without the need to travel on the public road.

It is anticipated that staff will travel to work by car, perhaps two cars arriving in the morning and leaving at night.

At the start of each production cycle the pullets will be delivered by lorry over a period of one or two days. This will require approximately 4 loads using a specialist light articulated vehicle. The birds will be removed at the end of the cycle using the same vehicles over the same period of time.

Of the three accesses serving this site, the short 1.2km stretch of C class road to the B6461 (to the north) is the most suitable and most direct. The road is approximately 4m wide but the wide verges give good visibility with the exception of the small blind summit. The road would benefit from additional passing places.

Following further consultation with the Director of Technical Services confirms that the suggested route along the minor public road (D21/6) leading from the B6461 and passing through Little Swinton Farm is the only suitable route for serving this development. However, this route will require the Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 provision of 3 passing places to help mitigate the minor impact the additional traffic will produce. The Director will require HGV and short wheel based lorries associated with the development o be restricted to the route along the minor public road between the site and the B class road. The formation of 3 passing places and details of a new private junction are also required along with swept path analysis of larger vehicles and details of road construction. These matters can be dealt with suitably worded conditions and informatives should members be minded to support this application.

FLOODING

There is suggestion in the letters of objection that the application site is at risk of flooding from the open vegetated drainage ditch that runs across the field. Members will note that SEPA were consulted on this application and did not object to the proposed poultry unit. Furthermore, it is worth noting that flooding was not identified as a constraint when the application was submitted and the SEPA flood maps which can be viewed on-line do not identify this area as at risk of flooding. In this instance the site can be considered free from flood risk and in compliance with Policy G4 of the Local Plan and Policy I15 of the Structure Plan.

RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

Policy H2 of the Local Plan is particularly relevant in established residential areas and is used to ensure that development does not have an adverse effect on the amenity of these areas. However, the basic principles can be applied to rural situations, particularly where residential units may be affected. The application site, as mentioned earlier in this report, is located approximately 400m south of the closest residential property (Kersfield) not associated with the proposed poultry unit. Whilst the shed will be partially visible from Kersfield there will be little affect on the amenity of this property. Kersfield Farmhouse is associated with the adjacent Kersfield Farm and is located immediately adjacent to the existing agricultural buildings at Kersfield Farm. The close association with the existing operation at the farm already has an effect on the residential amenity of this property as a result of noise, smells, farm traffic etc and it is considered that this will not be exacerbated by the proposed poultry unit at Little Swinton.

Trasnagh Cottage to the south (some 600m) would be affected visually by the erection of the poultry unit, but the low lying nature of the site and building, coupled with the proposed external materials and distance between the buildings would not have a significant adverse effect on the visual amenity of this property. The proposed transport routes to and from the poultry unit would not conflict with the access to Trasnagh and would not result in an unacceptable increase in traffic to the detriment of road safety. It is accepted that there will be an effect on the residential amenity of nearby dwellings but the distance between properties the relatively low frequency of HGV movements would not have a significant adverse effect on residential amenity. Members will note that neighbours are concerned by potential smells but the use of fans and filters in the sheds will help to minimise this. Environmental Health regulations would be better placed to control noise and smell nuisance and this will be discussed further below.

POLLUTION/SMELLS

As with all proposals for free range poultry units there are concerns about potential air and noise pollution as well as smells emanating from the shed and from the surrounding fields following manure spreading. The main atmospheric emissions from poultry housing are ammonia, odours and dust and these can be greatly reduced by rapidly drying the manure. By maintaining a clean unit and by good design of ventilations systems, the effects can be minimised.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 The proposed shed will contain up to 32,000 birds therefore the proposal falls below The Pollution Prevention Control (Scotland) Regulations 2000 threshold of 40,000 birds and SEPA will not be in a position to regulate the development under these controls.

However, the measures proposed to be adopted for the drying and removal of manure, for mitigating odours, dust and noise and the measures proposed for utilising the manure will have a low environmental significance on this site. The Code of Practice for the Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (The PEPFAA Code) will be adopted particularly where ammonia, odours and dust are concerned.

Provided the PEPFAA Code is followed the proposed shed should not give rise to nuisance to the occupants of nearby properties. However, the Council’s Environmental Health section recommends that a number of conditions are added to any grant of consent which can be applied in order to reduce the potential for nuisance. This would include an operation schedule covering the management of the unit to mitigate nuisance from odour, flies, feathers or dust; a waste management plan; no incineration of birds on site; manure to be stored in covered containers; and no broiler production on site. Should members be minded to support this application, these matters can be covered by suitably worded conditions.

DESIGNATED AREAS

The application site lies in an area that is not covered by any specific land designation, other than Edinburgh, East Lothian and Borders Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ). The River Tweed SAC/SSSI is located approximately 4.7km to the south and the Blackadder Water (a tributary of the Tweed) is located approximately 5.5km to the north of the application site and at these distances the proposed poultry unit is unlikely to have any affect as a result of any emissions. Policy N8 of the structure Plan and Policies NE1 and NE2 of the local plan are unlikely to be affected. As the site is located within a NVZ the Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (PEPFAA) code should be followed regarding the spreading of manure.

DRAINAGE

Members will note from the consultation responses that SEPA has no objections to this proposal. Surface water from the building will be discharged to an existing field drain and open ditch and this is considered to be an acceptable solution. Waste water drainage will be taken to a septic tank discharging to a soakaway. Soil porosity tests will be required and the applicant is advised to contact SEPA directly to discuss this. This matter can be covered by informative. Any waste water and water supply proposals may require authorisation under Controlled Activities (CAR) Regulations.

Proposals for the removal of manure from the shed on a fortnightly basis and then spread onto land are accepted by SEPA. As already noted, the site is located within a NVZ and the PEPFAA code should be followed. The applicant is fully aware of the governing rules and regulations that apply over and above planning legislation and he is fully committed to applying them. However, an applicant informative could be added to any grant of consent advising the applicant to follow the PEPFAA code.

The proposed methods of treating surface water and foul water drainage would appear to be acceptable and appropriate for this site and in accordance with development plan policy.

BIODIVERSITY/ECOLOGY

The proposed development site is relatively small and will only affect approximately 0.5ha of improved grassland and is unlikely to have an adverse effect on the biodiversity of the area. There is no evidence to suggest that an important habitat or species exists on the site and the supporting environmental statement confirms that no badger setts were found in the development site during an Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 earlier survey. The statement also gives assurances that open trenches etc during the construction phases will not be left open.

The impacts, if any, on habitats and species are not significant and would not warrant refusal of the application. The site is not identified in the regional listings in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan as having habitats or species of Conservation Concern and as such would comply with the terms of Policy NE3 of the Local Plan.

CONCLUSION

Members will note from the third party representations (available on-line through Public Access) that the principal grounds of objection relate to site access and vehicular movements. The anticipated vehicular movements, particularly those of HGVs associated with the poultry unit are low and infrequent and are unlikely to have a significant adverse effect on road safety on the surrounding roads. The supporting information and comments received from the Director of Technical Services suggest that the minor public road between the site and the B6462 is the most suitable route and provided that improvements are made, this would be the primary route to the site for all vehicles.

It is considered that the low lying nature of the site, existing shelter belt planting coupled with appropriate additional landscaping would ensure that the shed can sit comfortably within the landscape. It would be located a significant distance away from ‘protected’ buildings that not associated with the poultry unit application site and would not result in a significant adverse effect on the residential amenity of these dwellings.

The regulatory bodies, particularly SEPA, are comfortable with the proposals and provided appropriately worded conditions to address the issues discussed above are added, the proposed development would be acceptable and in accordance with development plan policy particularly E2 and E16 of the Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILIDNG STANDARDS

I recommend that the application is approved subject to the following conditions and informatives:

2. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3. The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be completed in the materials shown on the plan hereby approved, and no other materials shall be used without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

4. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft landscaping works along the roadside boundary (north east), which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall include (as appropriate): i. indication of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration ii. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 iii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density iv. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

5. All Heavy Goods Vehicles and short wheel based lorries associated with the development shall be restricted to the route along the minor public road (D21/6) between the site and the B6461 and no other routes shall be used without the prior written consent of the planning authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

6. Prior to the occupation of the building 3 No. passing places shall be constructed in accordance with approved specification DC-1 along the minor public road (D21/6) at locations to be agreed on site with the planning authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

7. Details of the new private junction to be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority prior to commencement of development. Details to include swept path analysis showing how the larger vehicles can access the site without damaging the public road verge. Swept path analysis should also demonstrate how the larger vehicles can turn within the site, thus ensuring they rejoin the public road in a forward gear. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure that the site can be accessed by larger vehicles.

8. No incineration of dead birds shall be permitted on site. Reason: In the interests of public health.

9. Prior to the commencement of development a written operation schedule shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The schedule shall cover management of the unit to mitigate nuisance arising from odour, flies, feathers or dust. Reason: In order to ensure proper management of the unit and to mitigate potential nuisance to nearby properties.

10. Prior to the commencement of development a waste management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The waste management plan shall include details of where the manure will be spread and the frequency of spread. Reason: In order to ensure proper management of the unit and to mitigate potential nuisance to nearby properties.

11. Manure shall be stored in covered containers only when not stored in the purpose built manure store. The containers to be kept as clean as possible to reduce possible nuisance from odour and flies. Reason: In order to minimise odour produced on site

12. No broiler production to be permitted on site at any time. Reason: In order to avoid nuisance to nearby residential properties.

Informatives

1. The first 15 metres of the private access to be constructed to the following specification '40mm of 14mm size close graded bituminous surface course to BS4987 laid on 60mm of 20mm size dense binder course to the same BS laid on 350mm of 100mm broken stone bottoming blinded with sub- base, type 1'

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 2. The remainder of private access road beyond the first 15 metres to be constructed in a manner which provides a free draining smooth running surface, which should be maintained as such during the life span of the development.

3. The junction and private access road must be designed in a manner which prevents associated surface water from reaching the public road.

4. The Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (PEPFAA) code should be followed regarding the spreading of manure.

5. The applicant should note that soil porosity tests will be required for the proposed septic tank and soakaway and they should contact the SEPA Borders EPI Team to discuss (tel: 01896 754797).

6. Any waste water and water supply proposals may require authorisation under The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (as amended) (CAR).

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Barry Fotheringham Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Item No. 5(b) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12TH APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(b) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00170/FUL

OFFICER: Stuart Herkes WARD: Leaderdale and Melrose PROPOSAL: Change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services SITE: Land North West and South of Fire Station, Whitlaw Road Industrial Estate, Lauder APPLICANT: Scottish Borders Council AGENT: Director of Planning & Economic Development

CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

This planning application is presented to Members for determination in accordance with new provisions in Part 2 Section 4 the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. These provisions require that applications relating to land in the ownership of the Planning Authority, or land in which the Planning Authority has a financial interest, cannot be determined under delegated powers by “the appointed officer” under the Scheme of Delegation.

In the event of Members approving the application, it is considered that the decision should be referred to Scottish Ministers in accordance with the advice of Planning Circular 3/2009, Paragraph 13. This advises that planning decisions relating to developments in which the Planning Authority has an interest, should be referred to Scottish Ministers where these would involve a significant departure from the development plan. Whilst a debate may be had about whether the proposal represents a “significant” departure, given that the site is not yet allocated in the adopted plan, it is considered that referral would be prudent.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is:

x agricultural land to the immediate northwest of the Whitlaw Road Industrial Estate, and x land within the verge of the public road to the south and southeast of the Fire Station in Whitlaw Road, Lauder.

In total, it is slightly under 2ha in extent.

Location

The site lies both within, and to the northwest of, the Whitlaw Road Industrial Estate.

The Whitlaw Road Industrial Estate is a Designated Employment Land Safeguarding (zEL61 ‘Lauder Industrial Estate’) in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan. It lies within the north of Lauder, within the Development Boundary, and is accessible off Whitlaw Road, which is itself directly accessible from Edinburgh Road (A68). The Fire Station lies at the northwestern extremity of the Industrial Estate. To the east of the Fire Station, and north of the access road, are business Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 premises also within the Industrial Estate. To the southeast of the Fire Station, and south of the access road, but still within the Industrial Estate, are the sheds of a poultry farm.

Northwest of the Fire Station, the public road terminates in two farm tracks, one of which is surfaced and continues directly to the northwest (Local Promoted Path), while the other branches off to the northeast, before continuing in a northwestern direction, along the route of a dismantled railway (Core Path).

Land Outwith the Development Boundary

The part of the application site which is currently agricultural land, lies out with the Development Boundary at Lauder, and is essentially the southeastern part of a much larger field, which lies to the northwest of the Industrial Estate. It is also situated between the two aforementioned farm tracks, which lie to the southwest and northeast. This part of the application site corresponds closely to the site that is currently being proposed as a designated employment site within the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment (BLAUD002: North Lauder Industrial Estate). (The only significant difference is that while the application site excludes an existing shelter belt to the immediate southeast of the field, this is included within the proposed designated employment site).

Although the land within the field slopes perceptibly downwards towards the northern corner of the field, the part within the application site is by contrast relatively level. The northwestern boundary of this part of the application site is open field. Its northeastern, southeastern and southwestern boundaries essentially correspond to existing field boundaries, which are denoted by dry stone walls (southwestern boundary and a small section of the northeastern boundary) and post and wire fencing (southeastern boundary and the greater part of the northeastern boundary).

The aforementioned shelter belt to the southeast of the field, screens views into the field from this direction, but otherwise there is no existing planting within the immediate vicinity of the field boundaries. Wooded areas further to the northwest, northeast, east and southeast provide some screening in these directions.

Land Within the Development Boundary

The part of the application site which encompasses the road verge in Whitlaw Road, lies within the Development Boundary at Lauder, and within Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Designated Employment Land Safeguarding zEL61 ‘Lauder Industrial Estate’.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of a new vehicular access and services, to serve the proposed employment site.

Since the site is under 2 ha in extent, the application falls into the category of ‘Local Development’ in the Hierarchy of Development established in Planning Circular 5 of 2009 and the Planning etc Scotland Act 2006 and did not need to be the subject of pre-application consultation.

Although the applicant has provided a Notional Development Layout showing an indicative plot layout and landscaping treatment, the planning application only relates to the change of use of the site, and the construction of the road and footway to enable the employment site to be accessed by vehicles and pedestrians. The latter incorporate works to widen a section of the existing public road and provide a footway adjacent to this section. The construction of the proposed access road would require the removal of the southern portion of the existing woodland shelter belt to the southeast of the site.

In the event of planning approval, an additional planning application, or additional planning applications, would be required, in order to secure the agreement of the Planning Authority as to the plot layout and the design and use of any buildings on the site. Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 PLANNING HISTORY

The site has not previously been the subject of a planning application but corresponds closely to the site that is currently being proposed as a designated employment site within the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment (BLAUD002: North Lauder Industrial Estate).

At the time of the public consultation on the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment, the designation of this site for employment use was the subject of two objections. Both were made on the following grounds:

x Proposed Designated Employment Site BLAUD002 should be extended to include the remaining 2ha of the field in which it is located, to ensure that sufficient land is safeguarded for future expansion; and x The northwest boundary of Proposed Designated Employment Site BLAUD002 should not be landscaped because this work would be wasted when further expansion is permitted.

The Finalised Local Plan Amendment advises of the following site requirements for Proposed Designated Employment Site BLAUD002:

x Vehicular access to the site from the industrial estate’s existing access road; x Creation of woodland buffer along boundaries of site, including the northeast to screen it from the A68 (T), and manage existing woodland south of the site; x Retention of existing paths around the site; x Evaluation and mitigation of potentially contaminated land from nearby former tip; x Siting and design of development should take the proximity of the Poultry Farm to the southeast into consideration; x Long term maintenance of landscaped areas to be addressed.

The erection of the Fire Station was consented by Planning Consent 99/00950/FUL.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

No representations have been received from any members of the public.

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

In addition to the supporting drawings, the applicant has submitted a ‘Notional Development Layout’ of the site, showing eight plots and landscaping. The latter includes ‘proposed woodland screening’ adjacent to the southwest, northwest and northeast boundaries of the site, linking to the existing woodland area to the southeast.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads & Fleet Management): has drawn attention to the type of concerns that the proposed development raises. These relate to the need to ensure that appropriate provision for parking, foul drainage, surface water drainage and sustainable surface water drainage systems, can be properly accommodated on the site; the need for all engineering details relating to the roads and footways to be submitted and approved prior to any works commencing on site in the absence of a Roads Construction Consent (RCC) application; the need for all adoptable roadwork to be constructed by a Council approved contractor; and the need for the developer to comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs. In the event of planning approval, it is recommended that a planning condition is attached to ensure that all of the above concerns are appropriately addressed. Additionally, notes of guidance are attached to explain all

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 the details required for an RCC application. It is advised that these should be passed on with any approval.

Statutory Consultees

Lauder Community Council: was consulted, but has not responded to the public consultation.

Other Consultees

None

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

Policy E12 – Employment Land Supply Policy I11 – Parking Provision in New Development Policy I14 – Surface Water Policy N20 – Design

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy G8 – Development Outwith Development Boundaries Policy Inf2 – Protection of Access Routes Policy Inf3 – Road Adoption Standards Policy Inf4 – Parking Provisions and Standards Policy Inf5 – Waste Water Treatment Standards Policy Inf6 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Policy NE4 – Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy ED1 – Protection of Employment Land

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Scottish Government, Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010)

Scottish Government, Planning Circular 3/2009

Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment

Policy ED1 – Protection of Employment Land

Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance Notes x Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance on Landscape and Development, approved March 2008 x Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance on Trees and Development, approved March 2008

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The main planning issues with this application are:

x Whether or not the proposal can be supported as a departure from the statutory development plan x Whether or not the proposal complies with planning policy on economic development x Whether or not the proposed development represents a logical extension to the settlement boundary at Lauder Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 x Whether or not the proposed development can be accommodated within the landscape without having any unacceptable visual impact

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

The site lies outwith the Development Boundary at Lauder and has no designated land use within the adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan. However, it is a material consideration that it is being proposed as a Designated Employment Site within the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment, as well as for inclusion within the settlement boundary at Lauder, again within the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment. The proposal must therefore be considered against the Council’s planning policies pertaining to economic development, and then against all other policies within the Statutory Development Plan. In particular, consideration needs to be given to its impacts upon road safety, existing trees, and the appearance of the landscape.

Planning Principle

The proposed use of the site as employment land would be contrary to the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan. However, the identification of the site as a Designated Employment Site within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment is a material consideration. Also material, is Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010) which is supportive of the principle of development that provides new employment opportunities and enhances local competitiveness where such development can be appropriately located in terms of accessibility and the use of land.

Given that the site has been identified as an appropriate location for employment use through the Local Plan Amendment and continues to be supported for this use within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment, it is considered that in principle, this site accords well with the description of the type of site that Scottish Planning Policy seeks to promote for employment use, and accordingly that the proposal to change the use of the site to employment use is acceptable in principle.

With regard to the ongoing Local Plan Amendment process, it is noted that neither of the objectors to the Finalised Local Plan Amendment have objected to the principle of the site being allocated for employment use. (In fact, their shared view that the site should be enlarged to include another 2ha, concedes the point that the site is in principle suitable for employment use).

Although the proposed change of use from agriculture to employment land is technically inconsistent with the Adopted Local Plan in that the site lies outwith the development boundary, it is considered that both Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010) and the Finalised Local Plan Amendment are sufficiently significant material considerations to allow the development to be supported in principle.

Land Use

Since the proposed change of use is to employment land and the site has been identified within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment, the proposal is also given some support within Adopted Local Plan Policy ED1 – Protection of Employment Land, which explicitly supports “industrial and business uses (Use Classes 4, 5 and 6) on strategic and other employment sites, including new land use proposals for employment land”. However, this policy advises that in order for the development of a site for industrial and business uses to be supported, it must also be compatible with neighbouring employment uses; respect the character and amenity of the surrounding area and be landscaped accordingly.

In the event of planning permission being granted, other planning applications would be required to establish the precise use of each section of the site, but it is not considered that the proposed development would in itself, be liable to accommodate any uses that would be incompatible with neighbouring employment uses. For the same reason, there would not be any concerns that there would be any conflict between the proposed use of the site and the operation of existing business premises or the Fire Station. However, and in the event of approval, it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition explicitly restricting the use of the site to Use Classes 4, 5 and 6. This Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 is considered necessary to ensure that the development would be consistent with the provisions of Adopted Local Plan Policy ED1.

The extent to which the proposed development would be able to be appropriately landscaped in order to be sympathetic to the character and amenity of the surrounding area, is considered below.

Access and Parking

The proposed development includes the construction of a new access road and services to allow the proposed employment site to be accessed directly from Whitlaw Road.

Although the development would not actually require to be the subject of a Roads Construction Consent Application if, in the event of planning approval, it were to be progressed by the Council, the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has nonetheless advised that an equivalent standard would be sought and have to be met by the development. Accordingly, he has drawn attention to the type of concerns that the proposed development raises. These relate to:

x the need to ensure that appropriate provision for parking, foul drainage, surface water drainage and sustainable surface water drainage systems, can be properly accommodated on the site; x the need for all engineering details relating to the roads and footways to be submitted and approved prior to any works commencing on site in the absence of a Roads Construction Consent application; x the need for all adoptable roadwork to be constructed by a Council approved contractor; and x the need for the developer to comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs.

In the event of planning approval, it is recommended that a planning condition should be attached to ensure that all of the above concerns are appropriately addressed. Additionally, it is advised that notes of guidance should be attached to explain the details that would be required in support of a Roads Construction Consent application. An informative might also usefully be attached to advise the developer to refer to these notes of guidance.

Landscaping

The site is a logical extension to the industrial estate but its inclusion within the development boundary would extend the settlement at Lauder northwards. This would increase the visibility of the northern end of Lauder when viewed from the west, north and east, especially from surrounding higher ground.

There is an existing woodland area to the southeast, and the applicant has, through the ‘Notional Site Layout’, indicated an intention to plant woodland on the northwest, southwest and northeast boundaries, consistent with the requirements of the Local Plan Amendment allocation. Since the land within the site drops away to the north, there is potentially a concern that new planting along the northwest and northeast boundaries may not be effective in reducing the visual impact of new business units in the landscape. However, it is not considered that these concerns are sufficient to make the proposal unacceptable, but it is advised that in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that details of the landscaping treatment of the site should be submitted to, and agreed with the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development (that is, prior to the commencement of the construction of the proposed access road). It is considered that these details might be appropriately supported by a photomontage to show what the visual impact of the development would be from the north and east, and to illustrate the mitigating effect of screen planting.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 In the event of planning approval, it is further considered that the planting and maintenance required to realise the landscaping treatment of the boundaries of the site and road verges, should be undertaken as a condition of the consent.

Trees

There is an existing area of woodland to the immediate southeast of the site. This provides the only area of established screening of the interior of the site. The construction of the proposed access road would require the removal of the southern extremity of this shelter belt. The loss of these trees is not considered to be significant, particularly if the landscaping of the site would see a greater number of trees established along the site boundaries, but a concern would be to minimise the damage to the existing trees. In this regard, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that any trees for removal should first be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before any trees are removed from the site. Further, it would also be advisable to require that appropriate measures to protect the trees for retention, should also be agreed prior to the commencement of the development.

Right of Way

The unsurfaced farm track to the northeast of the site is a Core Path; the surfaced access road to the southwest is a Local Promoted Path.

It is not considered that the proposed development would impact upon the amenity of either of these routes, while the provision of pavements adjacent to the existing public road would bring a benefit in terms of the public gaining access to both the Core Path and Local Promoted Path.

Archaeology

There are no archaeological implications associated with the proposed development.

Finalised Local Plan Amendment Site Requirements

The Finalised Local Plan Amendment advises of the following site requirements for Proposed Designated Employment Site BLAUD002:

It is considered that the requirement that the site should be accessed from the existing access road can be met by the proposed development.

It is considered that an appropriate planning condition could be attached to ensure that the site could be landscaped appropriately.

Existing paths around the site would be retained. Access to these paths from the Industrial Estate would be upgraded.

It is understood that former tips are located 30m southwest of, and 130m south of the site. The Council’s Contaminated Land Officer has now been contacted with regard to the need for the applicant to evaluate and mitigate potentially contaminated land. A response was not available at the time of writing, but it is anticipated that any requirement that might be identified could appropriately be made the subject of a suitable planning condition, with any requirement for a site Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 assessment being undertaken prior to the commencement of development. A verbal report of the response of the Contaminated Land Officer will be made to the Committee on the day of the meeting, with the likely effect that an additional condition to deal with the issue will be attached.

The nearest shed of the poultry farm lies within around 60m, and to the southeast of, the proposed employment site and the relationship between the two is noted as a matter for consideration in the Local Plan Amendment. The prevailing wind direction is from the southwest, and therefore it is not anticipated that the operation of the poultry farm would be liable to have any unacceptable impact upon the amenity of the proposed employment site. In terms of the impact of the proposed development upon the amenity of the poultry farm, it is noted that there are already a number of business premises to the northeast of it, and the Fire Station to the north.

It is not therefore considered that the proposed development would, in principle, be liable to have any unacceptable impacts upon the amenity of the poultry farm, especially because other planning applications would be required to establish the design and use of any buildings to be located on the site. In the event of permission being granted, it would be appropriate to reconsider the detail at the time of the determination of any subsequent planning applications for development on the employment site. However, given that attention has been drawn within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment to a concern relating to the siting and design of development on the site, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to advise of this concern within an informative.

It is considered that an appropriate planning condition could be attached to ensure the long-term maintenance of the landscaping.

CONCLUSION

The principle of locating the proposed development on the site is considered to be acceptable, provided appropriate planning conditions and informatives are attached to any planning consent issued, to address the concerns highlighted above.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved, subject to the planning conditions listed below, and referral to Scottish Ministers in accordance with the provisions of Part 2 Section 4 the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008:

2. Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: i. Engineering details of the proposed road(s) and footway(s) showing levels and geometry. ii. Drainage layout and details, including Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). This is to ensure that all drains within the public road(s) are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road(s) or footway(s) other than drains crossing the road(s). iii. Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv. Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v. Construction details for the road(s) and footway(s). Thereafter, the road(s) and footway(s) is/are to be constructed by a Council approved contractor in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 Reason: In the interests of Road Safety and to ensure the construction of adoptable standard roads.

3. No trees within the site, or on the boundary of the site, shall be felled, thinned, lopped, topped, lifted or disturbed in any way without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The existing trees represent an important visual feature which should be substantially maintained to enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

4. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, measures agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority shall be adopted to protect the root systems and crown spreads of those trees within the site and on, or within the vicinity of, the site boundary. Where necessary, trees to be retained shall be protected by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high, placed at a location agreed with the Local Planning Authority, which shall be removed only when the development has been completed. During the period of construction of the development: i. No excavations, site works, trenches or channels shall be cut, or pipes or services laid in such a way as to cause damage or injury to the trees by interference with their root structure; ii. No fires shall be lit within the spread of the branches of the trees; iii. No materials or equipment shall be stored within the spread of the branches of the trees; iv. Any accidental damage to the trees shall be cleared back to undamaged wood and be treated with a preservative if appropriate; v. Ground levels within the spread of the branches of the trees shall not be raised or lowered in relation to the existing ground level, or trenches excavated except in accordance with details shown on the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of preserving the health and vitality of existing trees, the loss of which would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area.

5. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft landscaping works, which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development, and shall include: i. indication of existing trees to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration ii. location of new planting iii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density iv. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance v. photomontage showing what the visual impact of the development would be from the north and east, and the mitigating effect of screen planting. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

6. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development, and shall be maintained thereafter and replaced as may be necessary for a period of two years from the date of completion of the planting, seeding or turfing. Reason: To ensure that the proposed landscaping is carried out as approved.

7. Excluding the consented works to upgrade the existing public road and services, the use of the site shall be limited to Classes 4, 5 & 6 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Use Classes Order 1997, as amended, and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that the use of the site is appropriate for this locality.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Applicant Informative

With regard to the requirements of Planning Condition Number 2 please see the attached guidance note, Scottish Borders Council Technical Services Department Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, Section 21, Construction Consent – Notes for Guidance of Applicants.

It should be noted for future reference, that the siting and design of any development on the site, should take account of the proximity of the poultry farm within the Industrial Estate.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Stuart Herkes Assistant Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Item No. 5(c) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(c) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00171/FUL

OFFICER: Andrew Evans WARD: Mid Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services SITE: Land East Of Industrial Estate, Station Road, Duns APPLICANT: Scottish Borders Council AGENT: Director of Planning & Economic Development

CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

This application is presented to Members for determination due to new provisions in Part 2 Section 4 the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. These provisions outline that applications relating to land in the ownership of the planning authority, or land in which the planning authority have a financial interest, cannot be determined via the normal delegation to the Appointed Officer under the Scheme of Delegation.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site comprises 0.98 ha of agricultural land. This application would comprise the first phase of development of the site. Being under 2 ha in size, the application falls into the category of “Local Development” in the Hierarchy of Development established in Planning Circular 5 of 2009 and the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

The application site is bounded as follows:

x To the north of the site lies a footpath, on the route of the dismantled Berwickshire Railway line.

x To the west of the application field lies a country lane, running along the outside edge of the existing Station Road Industrial Estate and leading to Peelrig Farm. Farne Trout and Salmon are the nearest premises to the application site. It is proposed that access into the site be taken from the existing road-end adjacent to the Farne Trout and Salmon car park and storage yard.

x To the south and east of the application site is agricultural land, with the buildings of Peelrig Farm being located to the south east of the application site.

The site is allocated for Employment Land in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan, being part of allocated employment site zEL8 – Peelrig Farm. The site is immediately to the east of Safeguarded Employment Land Site zEL26 – Cheeklaw (perhaps better known as Station Road Industrial Estate). Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

It is proposed to change the use of the land to employment land and to obtain full planning permission for the construction of an access road, extending out from the existing industrial estate. The submitted application site comprises 0.98 hectares of land. Ultimately, a larger site would potentially be developed, encompassing a total of 3.56 ha of land. That larger site is not however the subject of this planning application. A small section of structural planting strip adjacent to Farne Salmon and Trout’s premises would be removed in order for the existing road and footway to be extended into the application site.

PLANNING HISTORY

x 10/00101/PAN – 1st February 2010 - Proposal of Application Notice submitted under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008, advising of an intention to submit and application for a large scale extension to the industrial estate, extending to 3.56Ha in area, and falling into the category of Major Development.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

No objections or representations have been received to these proposals from any neighbours, members of the public or third parties.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Statement on Planning Application Form as follows:

It is proposed to provide new employment land for the town of Duns on land identified and zoned for employment use in the Local Plan – Adopted 2008. The intention is to extend, from the existing access road, and develop the site incrementally. The Business Park will be extended over number of years, using a part looped road system and will allow the site to be developed with a mix of uses. It is proposed to create new woodland planting to enclose shelter and enhance the ecology and environment of the site, introduce sustainable drainage and create an open aspect to the footpath along the former railway line. The sketch layout shows a possible plot and building layout, but this will be determined by enquiries in due course.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2001-2018 Principle S1- Environmental Impact Principle S2- Development Strategy Policy N20- Design Policy E12- Employment Land Supply Policy C8- Access Network Policy I1- Transportation and Development Policy I11- Parking Provision in New Development

Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2008 Policy G1: Quality Standards for New Development Policy G7: Infill Development Policy ED1: Protection of Employment Land Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity Policy H3: Land Use Allocations Policy Inf4: Parking Standards Policy Inf6: Sustainable Urban Drainage Policy NE3: Local Biodiversity Policy NE4: Trees Woodland and Hedgerows

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment Draft 2008 Policy G7: Infill Development Policy ED1: Protection of Employment Land Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010)

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): I am pleased to note the connection of the existing two industrial estate roads. Whilst I have no objections in principle to this proposal, there are several matters that shall have to be addressed to my satisfaction either prior to any approval being issued or via appropriate conditions. 1. The roads and footways within the development shall require Road Construction Consent. It should be noted that although not anticipated, should acceptable geometry and gradients for the road network not be achievable, Road Construction Consent for the development may be refused. 2. The footway provision in the north western corner of the site must be extended to tie in with the exiting footway. 3. Junction visibility may be an issue in the vicinity of plot 3. This will be addressed via any application relating to this plot but it may hinder the land available within the plot for the location of buildings and limit the types of boundary treatments suitable. 4. Parking is a concern within developments such as these and consideration will be given to this when any application is forthcoming for the individual plots. As well as the normal level of parking associated with the size and proposed use of each plot, consideration will also be given to future expansion within the plot and this should be considered by the estate manager when plots are sized for sale/rent. 5. Foul drainage, surface water drainage and sustainable surface water drainage systems (SUDS) need to be considered at this stage. This is to ensure a drainage system can be designed to the satisfaction of all interested parties and to ensure there will be no private drainage within the road boundary other than drains crossing the road. It must be confirmed at this time that the areas allocated for SUDS are appropriately sited and of adequate scale. The roads within the development shall require Road Construction Consent prior to any works commencing on the site and this should be confirmed in an informative.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 Generically, the following advice applies:

1. Parking is a concern within developments such as this as any individual site could have the potential to cause overspill parking and so consideration will be given to this when any applications are forthcoming for the individual plots. As well as the normal level of parking associated with the size and proposed use of each plot, consideration will be given to potential future expansion and parking within the plot and this should be considered by the estate manager when plots are sized for sale/rent. It would be ideal if areas could be identified for possible future general public parking for the proposal as a whole to cater for any overspill parking from the various individual sites although I realise it may be unreasonable to expect such provision unless it could be accommodated as part of the landscaping provision. 2. Foul drainage, surface water drainage and sustainable surface water drainage systems (SUDS) need to be considered at this stage. This is to ensure a drainage system can be designed to the satisfaction of all interested parties and to ensure there will be no private drainage within the road boundary other than drains crossing the road. It must be confirmed at this time that the areas allocated for SUDS are appropriately sited and of adequate scale. 3. The roads and footways associated with the proposal would require Roads Construction Consent (RCC) were they not being built by the Council. As such, all engineering details that would be required via an RCC application would have to be submitted and approved prior to any works commencing on site. I have attached our notes for guidance which explain all the details required for an RCC and these should be passed on with any approval. A suitably worded condition requiring the relevant engineering details to be submitted and approved prior to works commencing on site is required. 4. All adoptable roadwork must be constructed by a Council approved contractor - List 13 (DC- 8). 5. As the service road will be prospectively adoptable, the developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs.

I would suggest that a condition of consent be applied to cover the above points generally as below:

Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority: i) Engineering details of the proposed road(s) and footway(s) showing levels and geometry. ii) Drainage layout and details, including Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). This is to ensure that all drains within the public road(s) are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road(s) or footway(s) other than drains crossing the road(s). iii) Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv) Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v) Construction details for the road(s) and footway(s). Thereafter, the road(s) and footway(s) is/are to be constructed by a Council approved contractor in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. The developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs. Reason: In the interests of Road Safety and to ensure the construction of adoptable standard roads.

Archaeology Officer: There are no archaeological implications for this proposal.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Statutory Consultees

Duns Community Council: We support this application and would like to suggest that in the medium term one of the sites be used as a lorry park.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Other Consultees:

None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

The main determining issues with this application are whether the proposals comply with planning policy on economic development,

Specific regard should be given to: x Policy considerations, principally whether the principle of the proposed development complies with SBC land-use policies; x The details of the proposed development; x The consultation replies received.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

Planning Policy

The application seeks consent for “Change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services”. The site is located within the Employment Land allocation zEL8 (Peelrig Farm) in the adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan (2008). Policy H3 (Land Use Allocations) of the Adopted Local Plan states that development will be approved in principle for the land use allocated in the plan. The Development of the site as industrial land would be consistent with its adopted local plan designation.

This application must also be assessed against policy N20 and E12 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018, policies G1, G7, ED1, H2 and H2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008, and revised policies G7, ED1 and H2 of the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009.

Scope of Application

The application seeks consent for change of use of land to form employment land and construction of a new access road and services. Employment Land is taken as being a Class 5 (General Industrial) Use in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1992, which would permit use for industrial processes. Permitted development changes in use rights would allow for use of the premises for Class 4 uses (Office, R&D, Light Industry) or Class 6 uses (Storage or Distribution). Subsequent planning applications would however be required for any buildings or structures to be erected on the site.

Landscape

The site is gently undulating arable land on the south eastern outskirts of Duns. It is part of a larger industrial estate expansion that is illustrated on the submitted ‘Notional Development Layout’ which is dated received on 12 February 2010. The south west side of the site is an existing track to Peelrig and there are 2 large mature beech on its west side that are worthy of retention.

The proposed planting works should provide adequate screening from most viewpoints. However, the 2 beech trees mentioned above have not been identified on the drawings. These need to be accurately surveyed (plus an adjoining ash tree) and assessed according to BS5837:2005 so that their condition can be confirmed and their root protection areas identified. Once this information is Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 available, retention can be confirmed. A planning condition to survey and plot existing mature trees as described above is therefore considered necessary, and this survey should then inform the landscaping proposals, including the potential for the retention of these trees.

It should be noted that in the longer term (phase 2, outwith the scope of this application) some additional screening along the northern boundary will be desirable as this is the direction of view from residential properties to the north and there are also recreational users of the track itself. This will be highlighted in an applicant informative.

Rights of Way

The Access service has confirmed that there are no objections to the proposed development. The route of the former rail line is now a footpath. It is unaffected by this application, as it is located outwith the site. The track to the west of the application site, serves only Peelrig Farm. Whilst the new road would break through the western track, the track would still join with the new road brought in from the industrial estate to the south of Farne Trout and Salmon. In any case, it should be noted that Peelrig farm is also served by a second access to the east of the farm.

Residential Amenities

The nearest residential dwellings are located to the north of the site at Trinity Park and Hawthorn Bank. Given that the proposed use is consistent with the land use allocation of the site in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan, it is not considered that there would be an unacceptable conflict between land uses. Many of these houses are separated from the site by the existing industrial estate – or another field – in any event. No objections or representations have been received to the application, though it is of note that the nearest residential properties are outwith the consultation distances set in Scottish Government planning legislation.

Subsequent applications for the development of the site would also permit assessment of the impacts of development on nearby residential amenity. The site is however considered acceptable for classes 4, 5 and 6 uses in the use class order, evidenced by its allocation in the adopted local plan.

Access and Parking

The Council’s adopted planning policies require satisfactory access and parking to serve a site. The Director of Technical Services advises that there are no objections in principle to the proposed development. The indicative plots shown on the submitted plan are all of a sufficient size as to be able to accommodate parking within curtilage. These matters will however be considered in more detail at the time of any subsequent applications for the development of plots. There are a number of matters raised by the Director of Technical Services that will require imposition of planning conditions and applicant informatives.

Developer Contributions

No developer contributions are required towards education facilities or affordable housing in respect of this development.

CONCLUSION

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006, requires that the determination of planning applications be made in accordance with the provision of the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable. The site lies with an area allocated for employment development, and it is considered that there would not be such adverse impact on neighbouring amenities as to warrant refusal. The proposals are considered to comply with policies N20 and E12 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018, policies G1, G7, ED1, H2 and H3 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008, and revised policies G7, ED1 and H2 of the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009. A series of Planning Conditions and Applicant Informatives are however considered necessary.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

2. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works, which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Details of the scheme shall include (as appropriate): i. existing and finished ground levels in relation to a fixed datum preferably ordnance ii. existing landscaping features and vegetation to be retained and, in the case of damage, restored iii. location and design, including materials, of walls, fences and gates iv. soft and hard landscaping works v. existing and proposed services such as cables, pipelines, sub-stations vi. A programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development.

3. No open storage shall take place within the boundary of the site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual appearance of the area.

4. The site shall be used for Classes 4, 5 and 6 of The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997, or any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order. Reason: To ensure that the use remains compatible within the site.

5. The change of use will not take place until the access roads and footpaths shown on the approved plans have been built to the specification of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that adequate access to the site for pedestrians and vehicles is provided and is at all times properly maintained.

6. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in strict accordance with a programme of phasing which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development of the estate proceeds in an orderly manner.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 7. Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority: i) Engineering details of the proposed road(s) and footway(s) showing levels and geometry. ii) Drainage layout and details, including Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). This is to ensure that all drains within the public road(s) are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road(s) or footway(s) other than drains crossing the road(s). iii) Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv) Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v) Construction details for the road(s) and footway(s). Thereafter, the roads and footways are to be constructed by a Council approved contractor in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: In the interests of Road Safety and to ensure the construction of adoptable standard roads.

8. Prior to the commencement of development an accurate trees survey in accordance with BS5837:2005 is to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority, covering the 2 large mature beech and adjoining ash tree on the west side of the existing track to Peelrig. Reason: To comply with adopted planning guidance on Trees and Development.

9. No tree within the application boundary is to be lopped or felled unless first agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: To maintain effective control over the development.

Informatives:

1. The application site is of an area (over 500m2) subject to the requirements of Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance no.18 – Renewable Energy. The council requires all developments with a cumulative floorspace of 500m2 or above to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) by 15% beyond the 2007 Building Regulation carbon dioxide emission levels. To achieve this 15% reduction, in subsequent applications for buildings on the site, consideration should first be given to energy efficiency and building design measures.

2. In the longer term (phase 2) some additional screen planting along the northern boundary will be desirable as this is the direction of view from residential properties to the north and there are also recreational users of the track itself.

3. Attention is drawn to the enclosed consultation reply in which the Community Council have made a suggestion that the site be used in the medium term as a lorry park.

4. Attention is drawn to the Consultation Reply of the Director of Technical Services (Roads), enclosed.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Andrew Evans Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Item No. 5(d) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(d) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00173/FUL

OFFICER: Andrew Evans WARD: Mid Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services SITE: Land North Of 47 Lennel Mount, Coldstream APPLICANT: Scottish Borders Council AGENT: Director of Planning & Economic Development

CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

This application is presented to Members for determination due to the provisions in Part 2 Section 4 the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. These provisions outline that applications relating to land in the ownership of the planning authority, or land in which the planning authority have a financial interest, cannot be determined via the normal delegation to “the appointed officer” under the Scheme of Delegation.

In the event of Members approving the application, the decision should be referred to Scottish Ministers in accordance with the advice of Planning Circular 3 of 2009, Paragraph 13. This advises that planning decisions relating to developments in which the planning authority has an interest, should be referred to Scottish Ministers where these would involve a significant departure from the authority's own (adopted) development plan. Whilst a debate may be had about whether the proposal represents a “significant” departure, given that the site is not yet allocated in the adopted plan, it is considered that referral would be prudent.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located on the northern edge of Coldstream, and to the North East of the existing Hillview Industrial Estate. The main access is via the Duns Road (A6112) on the eastern boundary of the site.

The site comprises 1.04 ha of land in total. The application site boundary has an irregular eastern edge as it includes the existing road verge and planting on the roadside, required for formation of a visibility splay. The site is currently an arable field with hedgerow and fenced boundaries to the north and east. The application site comprises the eastern edge of the field where it meets the Duns Road. A field drain / ditch is located on the northern boundary of the site, with a culvert running under the A6112.

To the north and west of the site lies further agricultural land. To the south of the site is a planting belt, with the residential houses of Lennel Mount, and Hillview Industrial Estate beyond. A pedestrian

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 footpath runs through the planting belt to the south, running from the A6112 along the rear of the houses at Lennel Mount.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Planning permission is sought for the change of use of agricultural land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services. Subsequent detailed planning applications would be required for the development of units within the site.

A notional layout for the remainder of the site has been submitted in support of the application. The scope of this application would however only extend to the red line boundary indicated on the submitted plans for this smaller 1.04ha area.

PLANNING HISTORY

10/00102/PAN – A Proposal of Application Notice was received by the planning authority on 01.02.2010 under requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008, for application sites over 2ha in area. The notice was in relation to proposals for creation of employment land and formation of new access road on a larger site, including the current application site, and extending to a total of 7.2 hectares.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

This application was advertised by means of a notice in the Berwickshire News, and by the direct statutory notification of 2 neighbouring properties.

At the time of writing this report, a total of 6 letters of objection had been received to this application. The objections can be viewed in full via the PublicAccess website, and can be summarised as follows:

Traffic x The finalised amendment to the Local Plan published in October 2009 stated the site would have: "Vehicular access from the A6112 and Hillview. Improvements to the A6112/Coldstream Mains Farm road junction…A sense of arrival should be created at the entrance from the A6112" The above points have not been addressed in the proposed plans. The height of the road should be reduced to aid the sight lines; The current 30mph speed limit should be extended beyond the Coldstream Mains Farm access road. x Consideration should be given to moving the location of the Business Park north-west to behind the current Hillview Industrial Estate/HGV Park so access can be taken from the existing road network. x The A6112 has limited capacity for heavy and increased traffic. The access into Coldstream High Street is a hazardous T-junction from the A6112 turning left onto the A967 south bound, also from the south turning right onto the A6112. Heavy Goods Vehicles already find this junction a problem. x Increased traffic volume, heavy or otherwise, from the ultimately proposed 31 units, would increase the congestion and risk of an accident. There will also be a conflict of interest between the existing farm traffic and the employment site traffic, all vying for access and road space. x Lennel is already a busy road particularly at important farming seasons where the level of traffic is fairly heavy for the size and state of the road. x Increased usage will impinge on funeral corteges making their way to the local Cemetery.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 x The increase in traffic will make the junction with the High Street, at the Police Station, a traffic nightmare and a considerable safety hazard with lorries having to go over to the other side of a main traffic route between England and Scotland to execute a turn to Berwick upon Tweed. This will cause congestion on the High Street. x The quality of life in the High Street for residents and shoppers will be markedly affected with increased heavy duty vehicle exhaust emissions. Any suggestion of limiting parking to accommodate better through traffic would have a detrimental effect on local shopping and residents. x The increased heavy goods traffic will cause a break down in the quality of road surfacing and in turn lead to inconvenience to residents of Coldstream as any repairs, without a suitable by-pass, are already very irritating. x There would likely be an increase in pot holes with consequential damage to cars. x It seems likely that heavy traffic would seek alternative routes on some of the minor surrounding roads. This already happens as evidenced by the move by the Council to put up notices indicating the roads are unsuitable for heavy vehicles. x Money would be better spent on a by-pass for the town than on this development.

Farming x This is prime agricultural land and Coldstream Mains is one of the central farming units. x The Development may cause Disruption at Harvest Time and other peak times. x The land in question is Prime Agricultural Land, how can this use be so easily overturned for industrial use? The land would be better used for Agriculture. x Any housing built near the farm would no doubt experience intolerable noise levels from the dryers at harvest and lead to conflict between residents and the farm.

Habitat x The paths and woodlands are an important local amenity for walkers and dog-walkers. Their safety and air quality would be compromised. x There would be disruption to wild life. x The Native Woodland area behind Lennel Mount contains a public footpath and is a well inhabited wildlife habitat. Rare and common birds are repeatedly seen here, there is a strong possibility of loss of wildlife, especially the bird life due to building work disturbance if this proposal goes ahead. (RSPB notes birdlife decline is mainly due to habitat loss through change of land use.)

Commercial Considerations x The present Industrial Unit in the town is underused. Spare capacity exists in the existing employment site. x There is an alternative site on the Kelso Road (going out of town) that would involve easier access, less expense and no disruption. x Contended that the largest employer in the area would rather expand at another site, on fields opposite the Dental Centre on the western side of Coldstream.

Neighbouring Amenity and Safety x The development of this site could have adverse impacts on child safety given proximity of neighbouring play area and housing. x We hear noise from the current (small) industrial park; we also hear heavy vehicle traffic to and from Coldstream town. The increase of traffic to and from the proposed site would hugely Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 magnify the existing noise levels. This affects many of the Lennel Mount residents who, as retired people, are in their homes during the working day. x The existing woodland would be inadequate to screen Lennel Mount from the site and would not be adequate to reduce any of the increase in noise, especially from October to April when the foliage is sparse. x No one seems to know what nature of businesses would be operating from this site. What restrictions and safeguards would be put in place? Hours of work – 24hour businesses? Chemical related production? Pollution & Smells? Height restrictions of buildings?

Town Boundaries x The development would extend beyond the boundary of trees planted to mark the edge of the town’s development. x The area of the application is outwith the town development boundary and the A6112, 30 mile per hour speed limit zone.

Alternative Sites x Have any other sites been truly considered. The field opposite the New Dental Surgery could be considered and the access would be onto the A697, a wider, straighter road for any vehicle access, with the entrance and exit readily visible to all approaching traffic, within the town 30mph limit. This too could be aesthetically screened using native plants. This site would have limited impact on local residents and the town junctions/traffic.

Other x Dissatisfaction with the planning system. x Concern that objectors not directly notified as neighbours. There seems to be haste to push this particular site through planning with little information/consultation with local residents, again. Concern that SBC applies to itself for this planning application.

One of the objectors expresses disappointment that “local residents were not individually informed of current intentions, particularly when freedom of information might make this incumbent upon local representatives”. It is stressed to members that neighbour notification requirements on this planning application have been followed in full. All notifiable neighbours within 20m of the site have been appropriately notified, either in the form of letters sent directly to postal addresses or in the form of a newspaper advertisement. The required procedure has therefore been followed.

As a notified neighbour, Scottish Power Energy Networks submitted an objection to the application on 3rd March 2010. Scottish Power has operational 11kv overhead line and underground cable within the proposed development. Scottish Power stated in their objection letter that they have received no approach from the applicant concerning how the proposed development will affect their infrastructure.

The objection from Scottish Power Energy Networks was subsequently removed on 23rd March. Scottish Power have now confirmed that the Applicants Agent has been in contact with them, and SP Distribution Ltd are satisfied that their “requirements in relation to existing apparatus within the development site will be met”.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Statement on Planning Application Form as follows: Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 It is proposed to provide new employment land for the town of Coldstream on land identified and zoned of employment use in the Local Plan Amendment – Finalised Plan 2009. The intention is to create a new junction and access road from the Lennel Road (A6612), and to develop the site incrementally. The Business Park will be extended over a number of years, using a looped road system and will allow the site to be developed with a mix of uses. It is proposed to create new woodland planting to enclose shelter and enhance the ecology and environment of the site, introduce sustainable drainage and create and area of open space adjacent to the existing wood. The sketch layout shows a possible plot and building layout, but this will be determined by enquiries received in due course.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2008 Policy G1: Quality Standards for New Development Policy G7: Infill Development Policy ED1: Protection of Employment Land Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity Policy H3: Land Use Allocations Policy Inf4: Parking Standards Policy Inf6: Sustainable Urban Drainage Policy NE3: Local Biodiversity Policy NE4: Trees Woodland and Hedgerows

Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009 Policy G7: Infill Development Policy ED1: Protection of Employment Land Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010)

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Director of Technical Services (Roads & Fleet Management): the following observations apply:

1. Parking is a concern within developments such as this as any individual site could have the potential to cause overspill parking and so consideration will be given to this when any applications are forthcoming for the individual plots. As well as the normal level of parking associated with the size and proposed use of each plot, consideration will be given to potential future expansion and parking within the plot and this should be considered by the estate manager when plots are sized for sale/rent. It would be ideal if areas could be identified for possible future general public parking for the proposal as a whole to cater for any overspill parking from the various individual sites although I realise it may be unreasonable to expect such provision unless it could be accommodated as part of the landscaping provision. 2. Foul drainage, surface water drainage and sustainable surface water drainage systems (SUDS) need to be considered at this stage. This is to ensure a drainage system can be designed to the satisfaction of all interested parties and to ensure there will be no private drainage within the road boundary other than drains crossing the road. It must be confirmed at this time that the areas allocated for SUDS are appropriately sited and of adequate scale. 3. The roads and footways associated with the proposal would require Roads Construction Consent (RCC) were they not being built by the Council. As such, all engineering details that would be required via an RCC application would have to be submitted and approved prior to any works commencing on site. I have attached our notes for guidance which explain all the details required for an RCC and these should be passed on with any approval. A suitably worded condition requiring the relevant engineering details to be submitted and approved prior to works commencing on site is required. 4. All adoptable roadwork must be constructed by a Council approved contractor - List 13 (DC-8). 5. As the service road will be prospectively adoptable, the developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs.

I would suggest that a condition of consent be applied to cover the above points generally as below:

1. Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority: i) Engineering details of the proposed road(s) and footway(s) showing levels and geometry. ii) Drainage layout and details, including Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). This is to ensure that all drains within the public road(s) are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road(s) or footway(s) other than drains crossing the road(s). iii) Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv) Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v) Construction details for the road(s) and footway(s). Thereafter, the road(s) and footway(s) is/are to be constructed by a Council approved contractor in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. The developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs. Reason: In the interests of Road Safety and to ensure the construction of adoptable standard roads.

Archaeology Officer: There are no archaeological implications for this proposal.

Statutory Consultees

Community Council: The general feeling of Community Councillors is that we have been put in a difficult position. We are being asked for our observations on one small part of what will be a major Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 development for Coldstream, without first being given a chance to engage in a public discussion and gauge local opinion about the development of a new, 7 hectare business park for the town.

It had been our understanding that having received a Proposal of Application Notice earlier this year about the 7.20 hectare site the next step would be an advert indicating when a public event would take place which would allow public discussion about the development. However, because a planning application has been drawn up covering less than 2 hectares of the proposed business park we are now being asked for observations, by March 24, on just that one small section and the public event to discuss the business park as a whole will be held at a later date. We were not even clear about this scenario at the time of the meeting and it was only on contacting the planning officer afterward that we have since discovered why we are faced with this planning application before the full consultation about the business park as a whole.

There was a 12 strong delegation of residents from Lennel Mount at our meeting and the overall feeling of these residents was that they were against the development, citing .traffic issues and loss of agricultural land as their main concerns. Councillor Moffat, who has been notified as a neighbour, also indicated his opposition to the proposal and together with the other residents argued that the land north of Lennel Mount was not the right place for such a development.

Community Councillors are very much in favour of the development of employment land and the prospect of increased employment opportunities within the town. We are also conscious of the fact that the wider Coldstream community would expect us to recognise the regeneration needs of the town. However, we have a number of questions that would require to be answered by planning officials before we could confidently come to a conclusion about this particular application. For instance were other sites around Coldstream considered and what was the criteria used for determining this as the best site for a business park? Has an alternative access into and out of the proposed site been considered?

When discussing this application there was a presumption made that this application was possibly time critical and formed part of a grant application for EU funding, but again without such information about that, or any details regarding the overall 7.2 hectare, we struggled to reach a conclusion at this stage and feel that we are being asked for observations about something we have minimal information about but has major Implications for the future of Coldstream.

Other Consultees: None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

The main determining issues with this application are whether the proposals comply with planning policies on economic development, development of employment land, and neighbouring amenity.

Specific regard should be given to: x Policy considerations, principally whether the principle of the proposed development complies with Scottish Government Planning Policy and Scottish Borders Council Planning Policies; x The details of the proposed development; x The consultation replies received and correspondence received as a result of neighbour notification and advertisement.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

Planning Policy

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 The application is submitted in full and seeks consent for the change of use of land to form employment land and construction of a new access road and services. An indicative layout has been submitted with the proposals, though subsequent applications for planning permission would be required for the erection of any buildings on the site.

The site is allocated within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment for employment use (site Lennel Mount North BCOLD001). The proposals comply in principle with the Finalised Local Plan Amendment, which is now a material planning consideration. The site requirements set out in the Coldstream settlement profile of the Finalised Local Plan Amendment must be duly considered.

The Finalised Local Plan Amendment Settlement Statement for Coldstream states that:

“The approved Scottish Borders Structure Plan (2002) identifies Coldstream as an Area Regeneration priority. As such the town can expect to absorb a significant proportion of the housing land shortfall identified for the Berwickshire Housing Market Area. Employment generating opportunities will also be encouraged in the town in accordance with its status as a regeneration priority. Employment land is also constrained within the settlement and further land is required to ensure the retention of businesses within the town. The settlement map allocates an employment area on the north eastern side of the town. Landscaping is also indicated on these sites and would need to be incorporated into any development scheme.”

With specific reference to this site (called “Lennel Mount North BCOLD001” in the plan), the Local Plan Amendment states that the Site has the following requirements:

x “A site incorporating land for both long and short term class 4, 5 and 6 employment use x Vehicular access from the A6112 and Hill View. Improvements to the A6112/ Coldstream Mains Farm road junction. x A sense of arrival should be created at the entrance from the A6112. x Enhancement to existing woodland south of the site which provides amenity space and will act as a buffer between the existing residential areas and employment uses. x Enhance existing footpaths. Create new footpath linkages through the site and links to the potential longer term housing area to the west. x Establishment of structural planting/ landscaping, including woodland, to create a setting for employment uses, shelter the site and create a new settlement boundary. This will also provide a buffer between the site and surrounding uses, including the potential longer term housing to the west. x Focus general employment uses in the centre of the site and office, business and lighter employment uses along the edges, which are in closer proximity to existing and potential longer term housing areas. x Design the site to relate to the potential longer term housing area to the west. x The long term maintenance of landscaped areas must be addressed.”

The site is also mentioned in the section of the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment on Areas for Longer Term Expansion and Protection in Coldstream, which states:

“The Adopted Local Plan identifies the land north of the existing Hillview Industrial Estate for long term development subject to further detailed assessment. Therefore site SCOLD001 has been identified for potential longer term housing development. Site SCOLD002 has also been identified. This would require further assessment and a detailed Masterplan of the whole area to ensure integration and sustainability. This will include the following requirements:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 x Vehicular access from Duns Road, Hill View, the A6112, via site BCOLD001 and a minor link from Priory Bank. Improvements to the A6112/ Coldstream Mains Farm road junction. x Path/cycle linkages to the existing network within Coldstream, particularly linking new open spaces. x New structure planting/ landscaping, including woodland, to improve the setting of the areas, screen and shelter development. Establish single trees in association with field boundaries and access routes. x Conserve the existing tree belt to the south of the site and reinforce it with new planting. x Provide open space to serve the site and wider settlement. Locate open space along the eastern boundary of the site to provide a buffer between this area and the employment allocation BCOLD001. x Archaeological investigation of the site. x Investigate need for diversion of water main in eastern part of site SCOLD002. x The long term maintenance of landscaped areas must be addressed. x The incorporation of employment allocation BCOLD001 into the Masterplan.

The area between the Lees and the River Tweed should be protected from development on the grounds of flood risk.”

Scottish Government Planning Policy is contained in the Document “Scottish Planning Policy”, published in February 2010. On the topic of Economic Development, it states that:

Authorities should respond to the diverse needs and locational requirements of different sectors and sizes of businesses and take a flexible approach to ensure that changing circumstances can be accommodated and new economic opportunities realised. Removing unnecessary planning barriers to business development and providing scope for expansion and growth is essential.

The planning system should support economic development in all areas by: x taking account of the economic benefits of proposed development in development plans and development management decisions, x promoting development in sustainable locations, particularly in terms of accessibility, x promoting regeneration and the full and appropriate use of land, buildings and infrastructure, x supporting development which will provide new employment opportunities and enhance local competitiveness, and x promoting the integration of employment generation opportunities with supporting infrastructure and housing development. The planning system should also be responsive and sufficiently flexible to accommodate the requirements of inward investment and growing indigenous firms.

It further advises that planning authorities should ensure that there is a range and choice of marketable sites and locations for businesses allocated in development plans, including opportunities for mixed use development, to meet anticipated requirements and a variety of size and quality requirements.

Scottish Planning Policy goes on to state that:

Marketable land should meet business requirements, be serviced or serviceable within 5 years, be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport, and have a secure planning status. The supply of marketable sites should be regularly reviewed. New sites should be brought forward where existing allocations do not meet current and anticipated market expectations. Where identified sites are no longer considered appropriate or marketable, they Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 should be reallocated for another use through the development plan. The specific needs of different businesses should be taken into account in development plans and development management decisions, including the importance of access to the strategic road and rail network and opportunities for transport by water for manufacturing, warehousing and distribution uses.

Local Plan Status

Members will have noted that the application site is not an allocated development site in the Adopted version of the Scottish Borders Local Plan (from 2008), and that the site does however appear in the Finalised Local Plan Amendment (from 2009).

Members should be mindful to the outstanding objections to the Finalised Local Plan Amendment when determining this current application for planning permission. The following responses have been received during the process of the public consultation relating to the Finalised Local Plan Amendment:

Lennel Estate / WYG Planning & Design, (Plans & Research Reference 276) Support the allocation of BCOLD001 (Lennel Mount North, Coldstream) for employment, broadly supporting the future growth of Coldstream to the north. It is suggested that a mixed use designation, including employment and residential uses, would be more appropriate within BCOLD001 (Lennel Mount North, Coldstream), as previously suggested within the Consultative Draft Amendment. The Council states that the site will be designated solely for employment purposes as ‘the site is physically separated from existing houses and the sole use of employment on the site will ensure there is minimum conflict of uses with adjoining housing land”. It is considered that through a careful master planned approach and appropriate landscaping, a mixed use development at this location could be achieved at this location without prejudice to residential amenity, either in respect of existing or future housing. This could be controlled by the Site Requirements. A review of employment land supply across the Borders (Ryden, May 2008) identifies three priority areas for any future employment land supply being small office premises/ business centres; high amenity serviced sites to underpin speculative and bespoke development for both industrial and office markets, including mixed use schemes; and company expansion sites. The report highlights a move away from larger industrial units to smaller, high amenity sites, with demand being concentrated within the principal Borders town, particularly the Central Hub. Given that Coldstream lies outwith the Central Hub, demand would most likely be for smaller start-up units or office premises within Use Classes 4 and 5. Subject to careful layout and design, it is contended that such uses would be wholly appropriate as part of a mixed use development. Indeed, the Council stated “the site can be designed to serve both residential and employment land … the impact of noise from employment land will be regulated by the Environmental Health Department”.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 There is a clear recognition that any additional housing land required within Coldstream should be located to the north of the settlement. The provision of a mixed use designation at Lennel Mount North (BCOLD001), including an allowance for short-term residential development, would be preferable to the proposed residential site at ACOLD004 (South of West Paddock, Coldstream) on the western edge of the town. The land at this location was promoted for residential development during the Finalised Local Plan Inquiry Although the Reporter noted no physical infrastructural constraints, significant concern was raised with regard to the landscape and visual impact of development at this elevated location on the periphery of the town. The Reporter concluded ‘if the Council is of the view that there is a need for further housing land allocations in Coldstream…I would recommend now looking at other directions for growth…I would anticipate that the search area is likely to focus on the north of the town. At least growth in that direction would be less visible from most vantage points and would counterbalance the substantial growth which has recently taken place on the site adjoining BCS5B’. Failing provision for residential development as part of a mixed use scheme at Lennel Mount North (BCOLD001), the designation of part of the land at SCOLD001 (Land North of Hillview Industrial Estate) for short-term development would be more appropriate.

Whilst the local plan process proceeds, there remains a duty upon the Planning Authority to continue to determine planning applications in the meantime. The sole objector to the Finalised Local Plan allocation of this site (Lennel Estate) contends that the site should be developed for a mixture of uses including employment and housing.

As this current application extends to only a 1.04ha part of the 7.2ha overall allocation in the finalised local plan amendment, it is considered that the planning committee can proceed to determine the current application for planning permission. The Local Plan objection can still be heard, and the determination of this current planning application would not undermine the position of a Local Plan Reporter who would still be in a position to determine whether a mixed use development can take place on the remainder of the 7.2ha site in the Local Plan Amendment.

It is contended that the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment now constitutes a significant material consideration in the determination of planning applications.

Scope of Application

Residential Amenities

Objections to the application have been received from a number of nearby households. The nearest residential dwellings are located to the south of the site, separated by an existing mature planting belt. This current application would extend into the existing field to the north of these neighbouring dwellings. The nearest of the proposed industrial plots (plot 3) would be located 80m from the nearest residential property.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Members must note that the indicative layout plans submitted with this application are not part of the details that would benefit from a grant of planning permission. Only the land included within the red- line boundary of the planning application is subject to the application. The indicative plans showing a potential layout for the remainder of the field, extending towards the objectors properties, are not subject to the application.

Given that the proposed use is consistent with the land use allocation of the site in the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment, and given that control would remain over development on the site that was outwith classes 4, 5 and 6; it is not considered that there would be an unacceptable conflict between land uses arising should consent be forthcoming.

Access and Parking

The Council’s adopted planning policies require satisfactory access and parking to serve a site.

Objectors to the application have commented that they consider the existing access to the site to be substandard, and that the development would have a detrimental and dangerous impact on road safety at both the application site, and elsewhere around Coldstream because of the constrained nature of existing junctions on the route to the application site from the centre of the Town.

The Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has accepted that the site can be developed, subject to a planning condition requiring confirmation of details for the construction of roads and footways, drainage lighting, and public utilities.

The site has also been considered via the Local Plan Amendment process, and is considered to be suitable for development of the nature proposed in this application.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 Outdoor Access

It is recommended that pavements in this development should connect with the adjoining rural path routes to provide safe access by foot for local residents in neighbouring residential areas. An applicant informative is proposed in this regard.

Landscape

The advice of the Council Landscape Architect was received during the processing of this application. The site is a terrace of gently undulating, almost level arable ground to the north of the boundary woodland that presently defines the northern outskirts of Coldstream. It is outwith the visual envelope of the town. It is proposed to develop a business park in phases with some new perimeter planting. There are some concerns about this allocation because it will effectively extend the built up area of Coldstream into a new visual envelope which is currently unspoilt rural countryside. However, the existing policy woodland structure does provide a ready made setting and a high degree of screening and the visual impacts associated with the proposal should therefore be acceptable provided new planting is also established along the lines indicated on Ironside Farrar’s ‘Notional Development Layout’ dated received 15 Feb 2010.

One particular issue that needs further consideration is the effect on existing vegetation of sightlines for the proposed road junction. This involves the removal of a length of mature hedgerow. Although this will in time be replaced by new tree screening, it will be more effective if this is also supplemented by a new hedgerow, planted behind the sightlines, to retain the existing character along the A6112. Three is also the concern that the screening along the A6112 road frontage may be inadequate. In addition, the building at plot 2 is so close to the proposed woodland that the trees may not be allowed to grow adequately. One way to resolve this may be to reconsider the depths of the screen strips along the road side and along the northern boundary. (This might potentially also release some additional land for development purposes) It is therefore considered that a further review of the notional development layout should be undertaken in advance of further planning applications being submitted for the development of the wider site. Another issue for design development is the placing of trees at the site entrance.

It is considered that matters of detailed site layout as noted above should be considered again before translating the ‘Notional Development Layout’ into a detailed site plan.

The application will extend the built up area of Coldstream into a new visual envelope. This will be acceptable on the basis that existing woodland structure is retained as intended and strengthened where possible.

Developer Contributions

No developer contributions are required towards in respect of this development.

CONCLUSION

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006, requires that the determination of planning applications be made in accordance with the provision of the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 G1, G4, ED1 and H2 of the adopted Local Plan. A series of Planning Conditions and Applicant Informatives are however considered necessary.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

2. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft landscaping works for the site which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall include: I. indication of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration II. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas III. provision of a hedgerow on the inside edge of the new visibility splays to the new access into the site from the A6112 IV. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density V. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

3. The proposed development shall incorporate measures to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable building techniques and renewable energy technologies in accordance with a scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise the environmental impact of the development.

4. No open storage shall take place within the boundary of the site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual appearance of the area.

5. The site shall be used for Classes 4, 5 and 6 of The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997, or any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order. Reason: To ensure that the use remains compatible within the site.

6. The change of use will not take place until the access roads and footpaths shown on the approved plans have been built to the specification of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that adequate access to the site for pedestrians and vehicles is provided and is at all times properly maintained.

7. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in strict accordance with a programme of phasing which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development of the estate proceeds in an orderly manner.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 8. Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority: i) Engineering details of the proposed road showing levels and geometry. ii) Drainage layout and details. This is to ensure that all drains within the public road are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road or footway. iii) Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv) Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v) Construction details for the road and footway. Thereafter, the development is to be carried out in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: In the interests of Road Safety.

Informatives:

1. The application site is of an area (over 500m2) and subsequent applications for construction of buildings will be subject to the requirements of Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance no.18 – Renewable Energy. The council requires all developments with a 2 cumulative floor space of 500m or above to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) by 15% beyond the 2007 Building Regulation carbon dioxide emission levels. To achieve this 15% reduction, in subsequent applications for buildings on the site, consideration should first be given to energy efficiency and building design measures.

2. With regards to condition 8 above, note that the developer and their contractor must comply with the Council’s ‘Inspection procedures for Developments’ and agree to meet the associated site supervision and materials testing costs.

3. It is recommended that reconsideration of the depths of the screen strips along the road side and along the northern boundary is carried out prior to the submission of detailed planning applications for the development of any plots within the site. (This may potentially also release some additional land for development purposes). A review of the notional development layout should be undertaken to look at this issues, as well as the placing of trees at the site entrance, and the connectivity with neighbouring footpaths.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Andrew Evans Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 Item No. 5(e) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(e) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00174/FUL

OFFICER: Andrew Evans WARD: Hawick and Denholm PROPOSAL: Change of use of land to form employment land and construction of new access road and services SITE: Land South East Of Barrie Knitwear, Burnfoot Industrial Estate Hawick APPLICANT: Scottish Borders Council AGENT: Director of Planning & Economic Development

CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

This application is presented to Members for determination due to the provisions in Part 2 Section 4 the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. These provisions outline that applications relating to land in the ownership of the planning authority, or land in which the planning authority have a financial interest, cannot be determined via the normal delegation to the Appointed Officer under the Scheme of Delegation.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site comprises 1.96 ha of vacant land. The application therefore falls into the category of Local Development in the Hierarchy of development.

The proposed development site is located to the south of Hamilton Road, above and to the north of the River Teviot. The site has previously been partly platformed with an embankment of between 4.5 to 9 metres in height separating the site from the level of Hamilton Road.

The site is bounded by the Hamilton Road to the North West. Beyond the road lies Barrie Knitwear and 2 recently constructed general industrial buildings, the nearest being occupied by Howden’s Joinery / Kitchens. The site is bounded to the east by existing industrial units, their rear loading doors, yards and parking areas, and a mobile phone transmitter mast. To the south east of the site lies an area of sloping planting belt, with Mansfield Road Industrial estate beyond.

There are two distinct parts to the site:

x The north eastern half of the site is drained level land, having previously been subject to cut and fill engineering operations to create a level platform at the rear of the existing

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 industrial buildings to the north. This part of the site is broadly rectangular in shape. An existing access to this part of the site exists, running along of the side of the “Dove Building Materials” premises.

x The south western half of the site retains the original sloping ground and falls by over 10m from north to south. This part of the site is partly covered in self-sown scrub. This part of the site narrows in width to its western extremity.

The land is currently unused with open boundaries, and there is evidence of an informal path passing through the lower parts of the site. Visually and physically, the site belongs to the Industrial Estate, and is well separated from the nearest housing in Hamilton Road by distance, by ground level, and by the curvature of the road.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The application is submitted in full and seeks consent for the change of use of land to form employment land and construction of a new access road and services. An indicative layout is submitted with the proposals, though subsequent applications for planning permission would be required for the erection of any buildings on the site.

The level application site would no longer be accessed via the access running down the side of the Dove Building Materials Building. A new access would be taken from Hamilton Road, across the sloping part of the site, and into the level part of the site. Access to the rear of the Dove / McLeod Glass Building would be retained, as there is a gap of 22-28m between the rear of this building and the start of the proposed application site.

Whilst some re-grading of land will be necessary for the development of the site access, at present it is not known as to the level of deposition of material required. The hillside slope next to Hamilton road will however be re-graded to suit the new access road.

PLANNING HISTORY

x Under application reference 98/00261/OUT, and outline application for residential development on the site South West of the Bantel factory was refused by the Planning & Building Standards Committee on 11.05.1998. This site encompassed all of the land in the south western (sloping) half of the current application site, The reason for refusal was as follows:

“The proposal would be contrary to Policy 23 of the Roxburgh Local Plan in that the site is zoned for development and expansion of industrial uses.”

x An appeal against this refusal was subsequently dismissed by the then Scottish Office Reporter (Appeal Decision P/PPA/140/68, issued 20 October 1998), the Reporter finding that there were sound reasons for the site being retained for industrial development in the longer term.

x The north eastern part of the site has at some stage in the past been levelled and drained, however no specific record of a planning application exists for this work. It is known that these works were not carried out in the last 20 years, and suspected that

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 these works may date from the time of the construction of the adjoining industrial building to the north which is on the same level and appears to date from around the 1950s and 1960s.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

No objections or representations have been received to these proposals from any neighbours, members of the public or third parties.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Statement on Planning Application Form as follows:

It is proposed to provide new employment land for the town of Hawick on land identified and safeguarded for employment use in the Local Plan – Adopted 2008. The intention is to extend the existing platformed land and develop the site, over a period of time, using a central road system with a turning head, and allow the site to be developed with a mixture of business uses. It is proposed to create new woodland planting to enclose, shelter, and enhance the ecology and environment of the site as well as screen it form the surrounding land, and also introduce sustainable drainage. The sketch layout shows a possible plot layout, but this will be determined by enquiries received in due course.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment Draft 2008 Policy G7: Infill Development Policy ED1: Protection of Employment Land Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010)

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): Reply Dated 24th February 2010: I have no objections to this proposal. The roads and footways will require road construction consent. Details shall also be required of the drainage proposals and what is to be adopted by Scottish Water. There must be no drainage within the curtilage of the prospective public road that is to remain private upon completion. I would have liked visitor parking to have been provided outwith the plots but accept that this may be excessive at this stage. However, all applications for the individual sites must ensure that there is adequate parking for the proposed use. It should be noted that allowances for possible extensions to the businesses may also have to be included within individual applications.

Reply Dated 4th March 2010: Further to my previous comments, I would wish to add the following. Although the roads within the development shall require construction consent, given that the application is for FULL planning permission, the following details must be submitted for my approval in writing prior to any works carried out on the site. 1. Engineering details of the proposed road showing levels and geometry. 2. Drainage layout and details. This is to ensure that all drains within the public road are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road or footway. 3. Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. 4. Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. 5. Construction details for the road and footway. The above information shall also be required as part of the construction consent application. I note that the boundary for the site does not coincide with the boundary of the public road and whilst that does not create an issue at the moment, should the ownership of the site under consideration change, steps should be taken to ensure that no ownership issues arise during any title transfer.

Statutory Consultees

Hawick Community Council: Consultation expired 16.03.2010. No comments received.

Other Consultees: None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

The main determining issues with this application are whether the proposals comply with planning policy on economic development and protection of employment land. Specific regard should be given to:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 x Policy considerations, principally whether the principle of the proposed development complies with SBC land-use policies; x The details of the proposed development; x The consultation replies received.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

Planning Policy

The site is allocated for Employment Land in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan, being part of Safeguarded Employment Land Site zEL49 – Burnfoot. This application must be assessed against policy N20 and E12 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018, policies G1, G7, ED1, H2 and H2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008, and revised policies G7, ED1 and H2 of the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009.

The principle of the development of this site for the proposed uses is therefore established by this allocation, and thus there is no objection to the principle on policy gorunds.

Scope of Application

Landscaping

The proposal includes landscaping which would limit the visual impact of buildings on the proposed plots, especially coming from the south-west. The existing tree belt should have the same effect on views from the south. Specific advice on landscaping was sought from the Council’s Countryside and Heritage section who advise that the site is in 2 distinct parts – a rectangular area of derelict industrial brownfield land on the north east side and an adjoining, roughly triangular shaped area of open space which is currently rough ground with some developing woodland scrub. The Council Landscape Architect is content with the provisions of the submitted landscape plan prepared by Ian White Associates (drawing no. SBC/Hawick/001 dated December 2008).

The proposed development is entirely appropriate on existing brownfield industrial land. The part of the development on open space should also be acceptable given the surrounding land uses and visual sensitivities and on the basis of the submitted landscape plan, to provide an appropriate setting and screening from Hamilton Road to the north west of the site.

It is recommend that the submitted landscape plan forms the basis of a more detailed landscape proposal which should be submitted for approval before development proceeds.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Rights of Way

From the records held by the council, it is apparent that this application has no conflict with known Rights of Way or countryside access. For information it should be noted that a Core Path is adjacent to the site on public footway. There is also some informal access around the perimeter of the southern part of the site.

The proposed development is appropriate on existing Brownfield industrial land. The part of the development on open space is adjacent to informal routes used by people for informal recreation. It is recommended that an informal route for informal outdoor access around the southern edge of the site is allowed to continue.

Residential Amenities

There are no residential properties in the vicinity of the site. Given that the proposed use is consistent with the land use allocation of the site in the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan, it is not considered that there would be an unacceptable conflict between land uses. No objections or representations have been received to the application from any members of the public or neighbours. The proposals are considered to comply with adopted local plan policy H2, and with policy H2 of the Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009.

Access and Parking

The Council’s adopted planning policies require satisfactory access and parking to serve a site. The application is accompanied by chainage drawings and cross sections through the proposed road. In road and linear infrastructure construction, chainage is established, generally to correspond with a centre line of a proposed road or similar. The chainage drawings establish in this case that a suitable access can be achieved into the application site. The Director of Technical Services advises that there are no objections in principle to the proposed development. The indicative plots shown on the submitted plan are all of a sufficient size as to be able to accommodate parking within curtilage. These matters will however be considered in more detail at the time of any subsequent applications for the development of plots.

Drainage

The drainage scheme proposed must be to the satisfaction of Scottish Environmental Protection Agency and the Council and also comply with Local Plan Policy Inf6 Sustainable Urban Drainage. A planning condition will ensure that suitable drainage arrangements are confirmed and implemented.

Developer Contributions

No developer contributions are required towards education facilities or affordable housing in respect of this development.

CONCLUSION

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006, requires that the determination of planning applications be made in accordance with the provision of the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

3. No open storage shall take place within the boundary of the site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual appearance of the area.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 6. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in strict accordance with a programme of phasing which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development of the estate proceeds in an orderly manner.

7. Prior to the commencement of development, the following details are to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority: i) Engineering details of the proposed road showing levels and geometry. ii) Drainage layout and details. This is to ensure that all drains within the public road are prospectively public. No private drains will be allowed within the boundary of the prospective public road or footway. iii) Details, including layout, of the proposed lighting. iv) Details, including layout, of the proposed public utility provision. v) Construction details for the road and footway. Thereafter, the development is to be carried out in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: In the interests of Road Safety.

Informatives:

1. The application site is of an area (over 500m2) and subsequent applications for construction of buildings will be subject to the requirements of Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance no.18 – Renewable Energy. The council requires all developments with a cumulative floor space of 500m2 or above to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) by 15% beyond the 2007 Building Regulation carbon dioxide emission levels. To achieve this 15% reduction, in subsequent applications for buildings on the site, consideration should first be given to energy efficiency and building design measures.

2. With regards to condition 8, please note that the above information shall also be required as part of the construction consent application. Note that the boundary for the site does not coincide with the boundary of the public road and whilst that does not create an issue at the moment, should the ownership of the site under consideration change, steps should be taken to ensure that no ownership issues arise during any title transfer.

3. It is recommended that an informal route for informal outdoor access around the southern edge of the site is allowed.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s)

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 Name Designation Andrew Evans Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Item No. 5(f) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(f) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00098/FUL

OFFICER: Julie Hayward WARD: Jedburgh and District PROPOSAL: Erection of railings to enclose beer garden to rear SITE: Carters Rest Abbey Place Jedburgh APPLICANT: Karen Johnston AGENT: Siobhan McDermott Department of Planning and Economic Development Scottish Borders Council

SITE DESCRIPTION

Carters Rest is a public house situated on the corner of Abbey Place and Dean’s Close within the Jedburgh Conservation Area. There is currently a painted brick wall with a timber fence on top around the beer garden. There is a play area to the east and the abbey is to the south.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposal is to remove the existing fence and to render the wall a terracotta colour. A set of railings would be erected on top of the wall. The railings would be 1.5m high. The existing wooden gates would be replaced with metal gates to match the railings.

PLANNING HISTORY

04/01493/ADV: New signage, information boards and spotlights. Approved 1st April 2004.

08/00498/ADV: New illuminated signage. Approved 30th April 2008.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

One representation has been received. This is available for Members to view on the Public Access System. The following planning issues have been raised:

x Scottish Power has no objections in principle to this proposal but there are high and low voltage underground cables which may or may not be situated in the direct line of the new construction. A plan is attached for the Council’s information.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

None

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2001-2018

N18: Development Affecting Conservation Areas N20: Design

Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2008

G1: Quality Standards for New Development ED5: Town Centres BE4: Conservation Areas

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

None

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): No objections.

Statutory Consultees

Jedburgh Community Council: No Objections.

Other Consultees:

None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

Whether the proposal protects and enhances the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

Planning Policy

The site is situated within the town centre, as defined in the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008. Policy ED5 states that outwith the ground floor level of defined Prime Retail Frontages the Council will support a wide range of uses appropriate to a town centre. Policy G1 states that the development should be compatible with and respect the character of the surrounding area, neighbouring uses and neighbouring built form.

Policy N18 of the Approved Structure Plan states that development affecting Conservation Area will only be supported which will preserve and enhance the special character and appearance of Conservation Areas. Policy BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that development within or adjacent to a Conservation Area that would have an unacceptable adverse impact on its character and appearance will be refused. All new development must be located and

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 designed to preserve or enhance the special architectural or historic character of the Conservation Area.

Impact of the Conservation Area

The proposal is to remove the existing fence and to render the wall a terracotta colour. A set of railings would be erected on top of the wall. The existing wooden gates would be replaced with metal gates to match the railings.

The proposal is part of the Council’s enhancement programme for Jedburgh town centre and the railings would match those around the adjacent play area. It is considered that the proposal would enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Design

Policy N20 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 states that the Council will encourage a high quality of layout, design and materials in new development. Policy G1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 requires development to be of a scale, massing, height and density that is appropriate to its surroundings and requires external finishes that complements the highest quality of architecture in the locality.

The railings would replace a timber fence which contributes little to the visual amenities of the area. The proposed railings are of a simple design and would be in keeping with the character of the area.

Residential Amenities

There are no residential properties adjacent to the site that would be affected by the proposal.

CONCLUSION

The proposal complies with policies N18 and N20 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policies G1 and BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 in that the proposal is of an acceptable design and would not harm the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following condition:

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 Name Designation Julie Hayward Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Item No. 5(g) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(g) REFERENCE NUMBER: 09/00516/FUL

OFFICER: J Hiscox WARD: East Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Erection of three wind turbines, associated sub-station building and formation of access track. SITE: Land South-West of Brockholes Farm, Grantshouse, Berwickshire. APPLICANT: Mr J Prentice AGENT: Green Cat Renewables Ltd

SITE DESCRIPTION:

The application site is situated in hilly farmland close to the village of Grantshouse, in Berwickshire. The land is situated within the farm known as Brockholes, a mixed farm with grazed stock. Brockholes Farm is 0.8m as the crow flies to the south-west of the A1 trunk road at South Renton. The site itself is a further 0.4km south-west from the farm building group at Brockholes.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:

Erection of 3 no. wind turbines (hub height 60m, tip height 84m) and associated development to generate electricity which would enter the national grid.

The application has been accompanied by an Environmental Report of June 2009, which has been updated during the consideration of this application.

Each of the three turbines would generate 0.8-0.9 Megawatts (MW) of power and would have a rotor diameter of 48m. Site tracks would be provided or upgraded to enable access to each turbine for maintenance and other vehicles. Mild restoration works would take place following installation of the turbines on the tracks and crane hardstandings.

PLANNING HISTORY:

Other than information submitted at pre-application stage, which at one time related to the siting of a single large turbine at Brockholes, there is no planning history of relevance to the current proposal.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY:

Between the submission of the application, in April 2009, and January 2010, two letters of representation had been received in respect of the planning application. More recently – indeed, since 31st January 2010 – a further 57 have been received, all but one raising objection to the application. The letters can be viewed in full on Public Access; however, a summary of the issues that have been raised in objection, which are material to the consideration of this application, would be as follows:

x noise disturbance would be caused to nearby residents, who would be downwind of the direction from which the prevailing wind comes Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 x due to height and prominence and the nature of the turbines the development would give rise to an adverse impact on the landscape character of the area, the setting of the Lammermuir Hills Area of Great Landscape Value and countryside amenity – contrary to policies N9 and N11 of the SBC Structure Plan x scale and height of turbines make them incompatible with any other items in the local landscape x development would signal entrance to Borders landscape increasingly characterised/industrialised by wind farms, taking into account the cumulative visual impact of this and other wind energy developments in the area, which would include pre-application proposals at scoping stage x development would add to ‘turbine creep’ out of the Lammermuirs and towards the coast x development would have detrimental cumulative visual impact, having regard to existing wind energy developments and the consented scheme at Drone Hill – contrary to Structure Plan Policy I20 x development proposal conflicts with Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 6, and Structure Plan Policy I20 because turbines are too close to/within 2km of a number of properties x cumulative impact of this, and other wind energy developments would have detrimental impact upon the tourism economy, because less tourists (including walkers) would be attracted to the area with the imposition of the turbines upon the local landscape and associated turbine noise x development would conflict with archaeology and cultural heritage of the locality, contrary to policy N14 of the SBC Structure Plan/impact adversely on setting of Edin’s Hall Broch x development would cause harm to local wildlife and habitat including badgers, bats, migrating birds and flying insects x level of visual impact disproportionate to level of energy that would be provided (not in accord with Government’s energy production objectives) x local landscape’s capacity to absorb turbines associated with wind energy developments has been exceeded x submitted ZTV information is deficient and does not show the full picture of the cumulative impact of this development with other consented wind energy developments x concern that noise information supplied may be inaccurate and that residential amenity could be prejudiced by the development x concern that turbines can otherwise cause adverse effects upon human health x development could give rise to local flooding due to construction infrastructure necessary x low frequency vibrations produced by turbines damaging to local environment x could cause danger to road users by distracting drivers.

The letter of support makes general reference to the Government’s objectives in respect of renewable energy provision, and the relationship of this project with farm diversification.

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

The application is supported by an Environmental Statement, which includes:

x Landscape and Visual Assessment (LVIA) comprising: o Landscape Character Type map o Landscape Planning Designations Map o Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) maps at 1:200,000 scale (x2) o ZTV maps at 1:100,000 scale (x4) o Map showing wind projects in planning at 1:400,000 scale o Cumulative ZTV maps at 1:200,000 scale (x7) o Photographic and Wireframe montages showing proposed viewpoints to wind turbines from 23 (stated) various locations

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Submitted after the initial application are the following documents, which now form part of the planning application:

x ‘Possible Passing Places’ map received 12.10.09 x Detailed ZTV map at Scale 1:50,000

Supporting letter:

On 25th January 2010, the agent submitted a letter of support for the application, on the applicant’s behalf. This submission is intended primarily to respond to matters arising in the SBC Landscape Architect’s consultation response of 24th November 2009. The document submitted can be viewed in full on Public Access. However, a clear summary of the main issues raised would be as follows:

x SBC landscape position weighs landscape impact against economic benefit but does not take adequate account of other relevant information x SBC landscape position does not reflect positive approach of national and local policy x SBC landscape officer is only consultee of 13 consultees to object – remainder of positive responses should outweigh this single response – circumstances would suggest it would be controversial to refuse under delegated powers solely on this issue x Low level of public representation against the development proposal

The submission attempts to provide further detailed justification for the proposal in the light of national planning policy, local planning policy, the nature and level of consultation/public responses and the economic benefits of the scheme. An overview of national policy (SPPs, NPPG) is given, discussing:

x Government aspirations to create sustainable economic growth; x Conformity of the information in the ES with the requirements of planning policy x Compatibility of the project with rural economic development objectives x Attitude of Scottish Natural Heritage in relation to the proposal in context of ecological and landscape impact (natural heritage)

Similarly, the project is assessed in detail in relation to local planning policy – summary as follows:

x All criteria of Local Plan Policy D4 (Commercial Wind Farms criteria 1-5 inclusive and principles 1 and 2) are met due to the nature and location of the development, despite the opinion of the SBC landscape officer

An overview of the consultation responses received in respect of the application has been submitted, giving detailed coverage to the position of each and notes that the SBC Landscape Officer and SNH views are at odds with each other.

The letter goes on to discuss the details contained within the two letters of objection that had been received at the time of writing, challenging the adverse comments submitted in respect of environmental impact.

Lastly, the letter discusses economic benefits that would arise for two local (farm) businesses and for a section of the local community (intention to make percentage share of profit returns available for community council).

Additional Supporting Correspondence:

On 23rd March 2010, a letter confirming the developer’s intention to reduce the height of the turbines by 5m was received. This is as a result of reflection on the landscape concerns raised by SBC’s landscape specialist. The reduction by 5m is an attempt to address visual impact concerns by compromise, to an extent which would not unreasonably impact on the viability of the project.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees:

Director of Technical Services - Road User Manager: No objection to the principle, but lists areas of concern relating to the use of the local road network by vehicles used to bring the turbines to the site, and requirements for the developer to consider to mitigate against these concerns.

Director of Technical Services – Environmental Health Officer: No objection to principle, but makes recommendations relating to noise output (different for night and day).

Statutory Consultees:

Scottish Natural Heritage: No objection.

Historic Scotland: No objection.

Scottish Environmental Protection Agency: No objection. Recommends planning conditions be considered in relation to:

x handling of surface water x protection of watercourses x storage of chemicals x disposal of waste materials x construction management plan x road construction

Scottish Water: No objection.

Health and Safety Executive: No comments.

Transport Scotland: No objection.

Grantshouse Community Council: No response.

Other Consultees

Scottish Badgers: Not objecting, but identifies shortcomings in the ES. Would recommend that further survey work in relation to badgers be undertaken, plus mitigation to deal with development impact.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018:

Policy N5 – Local Biodiversity Action Policy N9 – Maintaining Landscape Character Policy N16 – Archaeology Policy N20 – Design Policy E16 – Rural Economic Development Policy I19 – Renewable Energy Policy I20 – Wind Energy Developments

Scottish Borders Local Plan: September 2008:

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy BE2 – Archaeological Sites Policy NE3 – Local Biodiversity Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy D1 – Business, Tourism and Leisure Developments in the Countryside Policy D4 – Renewable Energy Development

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance:

x Landscape and Development (approved March 2008) x Local Biodiversity Action Plan (launched June 2001) x Renewable energy (approved March 2007) x Visibility mapping for Wind farm Development (approved October 2003)

Government Policy and Guidance:

x SPP 1 ‘The Planning System’ x SPP 6 ‘Renewable Energy’ x SPP 15 ‘Planning for Rural Development’ x NPPG 14 ‘Natural Heritage’

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

x landscape and visual impact x cumulative landscape and visual impact x ecological impact x relationship with the water environment (hydrology) x noise output x shadow flicker x archaeological and cultural heritage impact x cultural heritage x road safety/traffic impact x issues raised in representations

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Landscape and Visual Impact:

From static viewpoints:

The upper sections of two of the three turbines plus the sweeping blade of one of the turbines would be clearly visible from the higher part of Grantshouse village (for example, in the public playing field),

It is unlikely that the cluster would be seen, from Houndwood village, although it would be seen, distantly, from Houndwood House.

From Horseley Hill, approximately 2km to the south-east of the site, the turbines would be visible fully in the local landscape, with the upper section of the blades rotating above the distant hillbrow. Other wind farms are also visible from this position (successive – turning through 3600).

Although existing vegetation would obscure two of the turbines, one would clearly be seen from close by at Berryhill Cottage.

All other viewpoints conclude that the turbines would not be visible in the longer landscape or would be seen from a great distance, sometimes in association with other, larger wind energy developments (existing).

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Landscape impact might be considered to be significant, and to affect a number of receptors; in theory, this might appear to offset the sustainability benefits arising from the development. However, this landscape impact would only be experienced very locally, but potential cumulative visual impact with larger wind energy proposals at Drone Hill (approved), Penmanshiel Moor and Blackburn Farm (pre-application stage) must also be considered (next section).

Cumulative Visual Impact:

SPP 6 makes it very clear that cumulative impact of wind energy developments must be carefully considered, and also that smaller wind energy projects may contribute to such an impact.

In this instance, the issue of cumulative visual impact will be key to the formulation of the planning recommendation.

The Environmental Statement (ES) explains that a 25km Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) with a radius of 25km (from the centre of the site) has guided the selection of potential viewpoints to and through the development, as shown in the graphical information forming part of the ES (wireframes/photomontages). It also makes it clear that projects at pre-application stage have not been given coverage in the cumulative assessment – it has been limited to those projects either with consent or with ‘live’ applications relating to them.

On page 54 of the ES there is confirmation that the Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA) assesses sequential cumulative impact in addition to viewpoint assessment.

- Standing in viewpoint and turning through 3600 - Travelling through on major routes - Looking forwards through sites from viewpoints (no turning)

However, the distance between the existing wind farms at Crystal Rig, Aikengall and Blackhill and the application site is greater than the distance with those mentioned in the next part of this report. In addition, the good containment of the site, combined with the intervening landforms supports the case made in the ES, which demonstrates that the potential impact of cumulative wind energy developments at these existing sites with Brockholes is relatively low.

Relationship between Drone Hill and Brockholes:

The most significant pairing of wind energy projects, in the context of this report, is likely to be that between Brockholes and the consented Drone Hill project at Coldingham Moor. The ES confirms, in particular in its latter stages, that the two projects would be visible at the same time from some places, in particular when viewed sequentially, travelling in either direction on the A1, or in an easterly direction on the A6112 (and from other lower receptors, such as the Quixwood Moor route between the A6112 and Cockburnspath). It may be accepted that there will be cumulative impact between these sites if both are built. However, the Drone Hill project has different complexities and is situated within an exposed moorland landscape close to the A1107 tourist route (straddling it). The magnitude of that development would be far greater than the Brockholes project, and by comparison would operate on a more intense visual level.

It may be argued that the Drone Hill wind farm would be a high, more nationally significant energy project and therefore of more strategic importance, diminishing the energy value of the 2.7MW Brockholes scheme and bringing its sustainability value into question. But proportionally the relationship between the two wind farms would be fair in terms of their size, scale and visual impact. They would be far enough apart to be viewed as separate entities on most occasions and would be contained by different landscapes. It would not be reasonable to resist the development on the basis of cumulative, or sequential cumulative visual impact, primarily because the landscape would from many directions ‘break up’ the joint impact of these two schemes. Furthermore, there is no apparent ‘bulk’ relating to this cluster of three turbines, as there would be on the Drone Hill project.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 Relationship between Blackburn Farm and Brockholes:

There is no firm application for a wind energy project at Blackburn Farm, approximately 5km to the north-west of the Brockholes site. There is, however, an emerging pre-application proposal to site 14 turbines, with a potential tip height of 125m. Planning permission has been granted for an anemometry mast at Blackburn, and Council Officers have been in correspondence with representatives of a potential developer. It is understood that preparatory work, in advance of submission of a planning application (perhaps late in 2010) are under way. For the most part, landscape specialists have been in discussion about potential viewpoints to the site, to aid preparation of visual information to form part of an ES. A draft of visual information has been submitted at pre-application stage and within this the Brockholes project may be observed as part of the landscape impact assessment.

At the time of submission of the Brockholes application, little was known about the weight of the thrust for that project to be brought forward and still, to date, productive/pro-active dialogue is not prevalent and no obvious sense of momentum is evident. For several months, no significant contact has been made between SBC and the developer.

It is not possible to fully foresee the tangible visual impact, cumulative and individual, of the Blackburn Farm proposal. However, Blackburn Farm is much closer to the edge of the Lammermuir Hills AGLV and because of this, has the potential to occupy landscape in a more insensitive and obvious way. It would have the potential to cause a ‘link’ between projects within the eastern fringes of the Lammermuirs (Aikengall, Crystal Rig) and the consented project at Drone Hill. Its scale and size are commensurate with these larger wind farms and would give it the potential to ‘plug the gap’ in the landscape from west to east, promoting a wider landscape characterised to some extent by wind energy developments.

The cumulative impact of the Brockholes and Blackburn projects would be tangible and would have the potential to be observed from the A1 when travelling both in a northerly and a southerly direction. However, the greatest part of this impact would be due to the Blackburn project and not Brockholes. Even without Brockholes, it is likely that the environmental, and specifically visual impact of Blackburn would be substantial, giving rise to definite cumulative views of the development.

Considering the time lapse between the Brockholes submission and the lack of certainty relating to the Blackburn project, and the scale of each of these developments, it would be just to give them a position in a hierarchy which includes both, but which takes the Brockholes proposal on its merits (and much earlier submission) and leaves consideration of the Blackburn project, both individually and cumulatively, to a point in the future. At such a point, if it should occur, Blackburn’s ES can consider its additional impact to other wind energy projects. Consideration of the Brockholes proposal must not be unreasonably compromised by the potential for Blackburn Farm to come forward and to deliver high-magnitude cumulative visual impact in the area.

Relationship between Penmanshiel and Brockholes:

This pre-application proposal gives rise to a similar circumstance to that of Blackburn/Brockholes, in respect of cumulative visual impact. Penmanshiel (Moor) is approximately 4km to the north of the Brockholes site and there it is suggested that 19 turbines with a potential tip height of 125m might be installed.

The Penmanshiel proposal is more recent than the Blackburn Farm proposal and as yet no montages or wireframes appear to have been developed. But it seems likely that both as an entity and as a landscape component considered with Blackburn, Drone Hill, Aikengall and Crystal Rig, its impact would be highly noticeable and would again potentially plug the gap between other built or consented projects in the longer landscape.

Summary of Cumulative Impact Position:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 The Brockholes project might be described as operating on a significantly different level than all other wind energy projects being drawn into the debate in this report. Its size, scale and general developmental impact would be considerably less than that of other more strategically important projects.

Furthermore, it is the first of its kind known to this part of the Scottish Borders, is not within a designated landscape area and would not in itself create a landscape characterised by wind farms/turbines.

Ecology:

There are no overriding planning concerns relating to ecological issues. In its current form, planning conditions would adequately deal with ecology, requiring further surveys and habitat enhancement.

Hydrology:

This matter is covered in Section 3.7 of the submitted ES, and is primarily the basis of the SEPA consultation response. The ES has addressed the hydrology issue sufficiently to enable SEPA to recommend conditions only relating to hydrology issues and not to raise an objection, which would be the norm if any significant issues would be outstanding.

Noise Output:

Consultation with the local authority’s noise specialist, within the Directorate of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has not identified noise as a planning concern. Maximum noise output levels are recommended in the consultation responses which, if planning permission is granted, would form part of an enforceable planning condition. This would also require a noise monitoring condition to be applied.

Shadow Flicker:

The subject of shadow flicker has not been identified as a planning concern by the SBC Environmental Health officer. The conclusions of the ES in this regard are considered to be reasonable, in that the level of shadow flicker occurring would be low and would primarily affect two properties within the applicant’s ownership (including his primary residence).

Public Access:

The proposal does not have the potential to interact with, or impact upon the use of the public access network. It is accepted that the turbines would be visible from public vantage points on public rights of way, in particular in view from Horseley Hill to the south. This indirect access matter is dealt with in the previous section of this report, relating to cumulative visual impact.

Archaeology/Cultural Heritage:

Deficiencies in the archaeological information submitted with the ES have caused some concern, because the potential for the locality to include archaeological remains has not fully been recognised. Works associated with the development have the potential to disturb significant remains.

Conditions would be applied in the event of planning permission being granted, which would seek to bring about the delivery of a comprehensive archaeological appraisal of the site and environs.

Community Benefit:

It would be difficult to argue that the development itself would benefit the local community directly. The installation of the turbines would generate electricity for the national grid network rather than Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 for local properties. The physical effect of the development would have no tangible community benefit and is unlikely to promote additional economic activity in the locality (for example, tourists/visitors).

There may be indirect, associated benefits arising in the form of environmental grants linked with a unilateral undertaking by any applicant for this type of development. It is recognised, however, that this is not influential in the planning process unless the project is a fully fledged community energy scheme.

Road Safety/Traffic Impact:

Although there are no overriding issues relating to road safety and traffic impact which would preclude support of the application, it would be necessary to impose robust conditions in the event of planning permission being granted. The detail of these is set out within the consultation response of the SBC Road User Manager.

Issues raised in representations:

Several of the issues raised in representation have already been given coverage under previous sections of this assessment. However, the following comments are made in relation to specific topics:

Proximity to Dwellings:

The ‘as the crow flies’ distance between the site and the nearest noise sensitive dwellings outwith control of the applicant is approximately 0.7km (Berryhill Cottage). This distance is not in itself so small as to preclude the installation of turbines. Proposals must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and with the response of the SBC noise specialist and the change in height above ground level between this dwelling and the turbine site, it is considered that the distance from nearby dwellings to the nearest turbines would be adequate.

Impact on tourism economy:

It is difficult to predict the level of impact this development is likely to have on the tourism economy of the region. Concern is apparent regarding the more widespread installation of wind energy development in the Lammermuirs and Berwickshire area(s). Cumulatively, there may be a case to be made about the change in attractiveness of a geographical area for tourists if it changes a landscape character from one kind to another.

If the introduction of wind energy development is perceived as a negative item, as it is in many of the representations submitted in recent weeks, it may be argued that the Brockholes Farm site is less of a threat to the tourism economy than some of the sites prominent within or adjacent to Areas of Great Landscape Value, such as the Lammermuir Hills where the landscape is distinctive and widely revered. Conversely, it may be argued that the cumulative impact of wind farms in the wider area including the Lammermuir Hills and sites such as Brockholes is in itself influential on the tourism economy because they would link with, or between other larger, consented sites.

PAN 45: Renewable Energy Technologies confirms that “Tourism is a well established and valuable contributor to the rural economy…mainly associated with Scotland’s natural and scenic and cultural heritage.” It is therefore material to consider the potential detrimental impact the windfarm would have on tourism in the locality.

Some of the representations received highlight concerns that the development will have a significant impact on local tourism businesses and more generally the attractiveness of the Scottish Borders as a tourist destination. It is difficult to determine precisely the potential impact the development will have on tourism in the Scottish Borders. The case for objecting to the development on tourism grounds is difficult to fully justify and the evidence from both sides in this debate is inconclusive and subjective. Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Effects on human health:

There is no qualifying information provided in relation to this matter. Effects on human health as a direct result of the installation of wind is unlikely to be an overriding planning consideration, having regard to the reasonable relationship between the development and nearby residences, and the absence of concerns from any specialist consultee with an interest in the protection of human health..

CONCLUSION:

This is a very finely balanced application, its outcome dependent in the main on matters relating to landscape and visual impact.

National Planning Policy is clear in its message regarding renewable energy development and sustainable economic growth – both must be supported in principle and viewed positively within the planning process. The specific impact, both individual and cumulative must be at the heart of any planning recommendations made.

Although it is unlikely that the available option to reduce hub height by 5m (stated in the supporting correspondence from the agent on 23.3.10) would overcome the specified concerns of the Council’s landscape specialist, the willingness of the developer to compromise and to seek to reduce the overall impact is helpful and has been given due regard. In the event of planning permission being granted, the identified height reduction would be secured by planning condition.

The views of the Council’s landscape section are acknowledged, and the issue of landscape and visual impact are clearly significant issues for consideration in the determination of this proposal. However, these concerns should be balanced against the wider range of planning issues, including policy support for renewable energy schemes and while the benefit, in national terms, might not be significant, there are still benefits that the development would bring in terms of a genuine attempt to achieve sustainable energy production at local level.

Against that background, and having regard to the relatively contained nature of the development, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in planning terms.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend the application is approved for the following reason:

The development would meet the objectives of development plan policy relating to landscape and wind energy developments, because the impact in relation to a variety of environmental concerns would be proportionate to the locale and would not give rise to an unacceptable level of adverse visual or other developmental impact.

Commencement and Conformity:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.

2 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the plans, specifications, requirements and obligations as set out in the Environmental Statement submitted as part of the application. Any variation thereto must be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reduce Height of Turbines:

3 Notwithstanding the information contained within the submitted Environmental Statement and other papers forming part of this planning permission, the hub height of the turbines shall not exceed 55m and the blade tip height shall not exceed 79m, as referred to in the submitted letter from Green Cat Renewables dated 23.3.10.

Reason: The reduction in height is required to reduce the overall visual impact of the proposed turbines in the landscape.

Safety:

4 All turbines and components installed shall meet the safety standards set by British Standard BS EN 61400-1: 2004 “Wind turbine generator systems. Safety requirements’ or International Electro-technical Commission IEC 16400.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

Financial bond:

5 At least one month prior to the commencement of development, the developer shall provide to the planning authority details of the bond or other financial provision which it proposes to put in place to cover decommissioning and site restoration costs arising on the expiry of this permission, in accordance with the Decommissioning Method Statement. The amount of the bond or other financial provision shall reflect the reasonable estimate of costs, taking into account reasonable assumptions for the resale or scrap value of the plant, equipment and materials removed.

No work shall commence on the site until the developer has provided documentary evidence that the proposed bond or other financial provision is in place and written confirmation has been given by the planning authority that the proposed bond or financial provision is satisfactory. The developer shall ensure that the approved bond or other financial provision is maintained throughout the duration of this consent.

At 5 yearly intervals, an independent review of the sufficiency of the bond or financial provision shall be submitted for the written approval of the planning authority, and, where necessary, the bond or financial provision shall be amended to ensure that it reflects contemporary costs.

Reason: in the interest of the amenity of the area and to ensure the site is satisfactorily restored after decommissioning.

Decommissioning:

6 This permission shall be for a period of 25 years from the date of final commissioning. No later than 18 months prior to the end of the period of this planning permission, or by such later date as may be agreed by the Planning Authority, unless a further planning application is submitted and approved, the applicants shall submit a method statement for the decommissioning of the windfarm and the restoration of the application site for the approval of the Planning Authority. Decommissioning in accordance with the approved method statement shall be completed within 6 months of the end of the period of this planning permission or any alternative timescale agreed with the Planning Authority in writing and shall include the dismantling and removal from the site of all turbines, buildings and ancillary development.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Reason: To ensure an indicative scheme is submitted by the developer and approved by the Planning Authority for the decommissioning of the wind farm at the end of its 25 year proposed lifespan.

7 Within 24 months following the end of the period of the consent, all wind turbines, ancillary equipment and buildings shall be dismantled and removed from the site, and the land shall be restored and subject to aftercare, in accordance with a restoration and aftercare scheme that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority. For the purposes of this condition 'restored' means the removal of all wind turbines, initial layer of turbine foundations, and all buildings and ancillary development. Reason: to ensure that a plan is in place for the restoration of the site and to provide for changes in circumstances relating to best practice towards the end of the life of the development.

Turbine Failure/Removal:

8 In the event of any wind turbine failing to produce electricity supplied to the local grid for a continuous period of 12 months, not due to it being under repair or replacement then it will be deemed to have ceased to be required, and unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, wind turbine foundation to a depth of 1.2m below ground level, the wind turbine and its ancillary equipment shall be dismantled and removed from the site and the site restored to a condition to be agreed by the Planning Authority. The restoration of the land to be completed within 6 months of the removal of the turbine, or any such longer period agreed by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the area

Ministry of Defence Notification:

9 No development shall commence on site until the applicant has provided the Ministry of Defence with the following information:

x The date of commencement of the construction; x The height above ground level of the tallest structure; x The maximum extension height of any construction equipment; and x If the site will be lit.

Reason: To ensure that the Ministry of Defence is informed of activities that may potentially affect its interests in respect of overflight of the site.

Design and Siting:

11 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984, no symbols, signs, logos or other lettering (other than those required for health and safety reasons) shall be displayed on the turbines, other buildings or structures within the site without the written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: to prevent advertisements being displayed on the turbines, buildings and structures, in order to protect the visual amenity of the area.

12 Details of the turbines, including make, model, design, size, blade rotation direction, external colouring, transformer location/colour of housing, power rating, anemometer masts and associated apparatus, shall be provided to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. The Development shall be implemented in

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 accordance with the approved details, unless further written consent is given by the Planning Authority in these respects. Reason: to protect visual amenity.

13 Prior to the commencement of development a plan for the treatment of crane hardstandings and areas of ground affected by cut or fill will be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval. Reason: to protect visual amenity

Hydrology/Drainage:

14 Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit to, and have approved in writing by the planning authority, full details relating to the handling of surface water arising from the site and development. Any submissions in response to this condition must be based on the principles of SUDS (Sustainable Drainage Systems) and accord with SEPA best practice. Said scheme shall provide details relating to site preparation in advance of the development, details of a strategy to manage water during construction and details of a long-term solution for the dispersal of surface water during the lifespan of the development. Thereafter, the development shall be undertaken in strict accordance with any details agreed in the documents submitted in relation to this condition.

Reason: to ensure that adequate protection is afforded to the water environment, to prevent pollution and to minimise the risk of flooding.

Construction:

15 Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant shall prepare, for the approval of the planning authority a Construction Method Statement, which shall comprise:

x Details of all on-site construction, and construction of access tracks, including crane hard standing areas, drainage, mitigation, post-construction restoration, and reinstatement work, as well as the timetables for such work; x Details of the phasing/timing of construction of turbines; x Details of water supply; x Details of any temporary on-site diversions of rights of way and associated signage; x Details of foul drainage measures to comply with national guidance on pollution prevention; x Details of the (waste) management of materials, including recycling and use of secondary aggregate; x Details of surface water drainage measures to comply with national guidance on pollution prevention, including surface water run off from internal access roads; x Details of the arrangement for the on-site storage of chemicals and fuel oil; x Details of measures to reduce soil erosion; x Details relating to minimisation of the environmental impact of road construction; x Details of any water course engineering works and measures for the implementation of buffer zones around existing water courses and features; x Details and timescale for the restoration of the site, including the site compound and the crane hard standing areas; x Details of the method, frequency and duration of ecological monitoring, potentially through the engagement of a suitably qualified scientist, particularly of watercourses, over the construction period of the windfarm development; x Details of contingency planning in the event of accidental release of materials which could cause harm to the environment.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the Statement, as agreed in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area, to ensure the site is developed in accordance with best environmental practice safeguarding water courses/sources during the construction phase of the wind farm and that the site is satisfactorily restored.

Grid Connection:

18 Prior to commencement of development, precise details of the proposed method and apparatus to be utilised for connection to the electricity grid shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority. Thereafter, the connection shall only be made in accordance with the agreed details.

Reason: This element of the development has not yet been clarified and may have the potential to introduce further items into the local visual setting or underground.

Noise:

17 Noise levels at any noise sensitive premises where the proprietor or the occupier of the property has no financial interest in the development, shall not exceed an external free-field level LA90,10 min of 35dB(A) during amenity hours and 38dB(A) during night hours for any 10m height wind speed up to 12m/s. Furthermore, there shall be no tonal character to the noise from the development audible within any noise sensitive premises.

Reason: in the interests of the amenity of the occupiers of noise sensitive premises.

18 Noise monitoring of the proposed turbines shall be undertaken in strict accordance with a programme of work to be agreed with the Planning Authority during the lifespan of the wind farm. The programme shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to the installation of the turbines.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of occupiers/users of properties in the adjacent area.

Archaeology:

19 No development shall take place until the applicant has secured a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) outlining a watching brief. This will be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the planning authority. Access shall be afforded to allow investigation by a contracted archaeologist(s) nominated by the developer and agreed to by the planning authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to observe relevant below ground excavation during development, investigate and record features of interest and recover finds and samples if necessary. Results will be submitted to the planning authority for review in the form of a Data Structure Report (DSR). If significant archaeology is discovered below ground excavation should cease pending further consultation with the Planning Authority. The developer shall ensure that any significant data and finds undergo post-excavation analysis the results of which will be submitted to the Planning Authority

Reason: The site is within an area where ground works may interfere with, or result in the destruction of, archaeological remains, and it is therefore necessary to afford a reasonable opportunity to record the history of the site.

20 No development shall take place until fencing has been erected, in a manner to be agreed in writing by the planning authority, about the identified area of archaeological interest and no works shall take place within the area inside that fencing without the prior written consent of the planning authority. Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 Reason: To safeguard a site of archaeological interest.

21 The developer shall give a minimum of two weeks notice of the commencement of the approved archaeological works in writing to the nominated archaeological contractor and to the planning authority. No works shall commence until the two week notice period has expired.

Reason: To allow sufficient time to prepare for the commencement of archaeological works.

Road Safety:

22 The following requirements of the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) shall be undertaken as part of the development:

(i) All overrun areas identified within the Road Access Report forming part of this planning permission, along the D119 public road, shall be constructed with a minimum depth of 450mm of 100mm broken stone bottoming blinded with ‘type 1’ sub-base, properly compacted;

(ii) The overrun area at the junction with the A6112 identified within the Road Access Report forming part of this planning permission, shall be constructed with a minimum depth of 450mm of 100mm broken stone bottoming blinded with ‘type 1’ sub-base, properly compacted but shall also include a bituminous surface course (to prevent loose material being deposited on the A6112);

(iii) All overrun areas shall be restored to their original state upon completion of the construction phase, although rebuilding of the wall and fences should be outwith the overrun areas at the relevant locations, for any wind mill component replacement, future decommissioning or any potential expansion of the wind farm;

(iv) Prior to the construction period, detailed plans showing the extent of overrun areas must be submitted for approval and agreed in writing by the planning authority.

(v) Prior to the construction period, passing places (Type DC-1, as specified by the Director of Technical Services) of a number and in locations that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority shall be provided;

(vi) Prior to construction, a detailed topographic survey shall be undertaken at each of the pinch points and in conjunction with the swept path analysis; the extent of the overrun areas must be accurately defined. Documents containing the survey and its findings/recommendations shall be approved in writing by the planning authority;

(vii) The D119 public road shall be fully inspected and condition recorded prior to, during and after the construction period. Any defects resulting from the development shall be repaired in accordance with a mitigation strategy that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, within six months of the development becoming operational.

Ecology:

23 Prior to commencement of development, an activity survey for bats shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified person to assess use of the development area and adjacent area to determine any foraging or commuting movements within and across the area affected by development. Activity surveys should be conducted between May and September. Results of the survey shall be submitted to the planning authority and agreed in writing prior to the commencement of construction. Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 Reason: in the interests of the preservation of bats and their habitat, which are protected by law.

24 Prior to commencement of the development, a scheme for the protection of bats shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Any works shall, thereafter, be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: in the interests of the preservation of bats and their habitat, which are protected by law.

25 Prior to commencement of the development, the developer shall clarify the position in relation to usage of the site and surrounding land by badgers. This may be achieved through further surveying and reporting relating to a land buffer of 500m of the application site boundary. The results of the survey shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, and any mitigation specified within it as necessary shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the agreed survey.

Reason: in the interests of the preservation of badgers and their habitat, which are protected by law.

26 No works shall be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the planning authority.

Reason: to afford protection to breeding birds, which are protected by law.

Informative Notes:

1 All work within the public road boundary must be undertaken by a contractor on Scottish Borders Council’s approved list (DC-8 – specification of Director of Technical Services).

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation John Hiscox Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 Planning and Building Standards Committee 17 Item No. 5(h) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12TH APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(h) REFERENCE NUMBER: 09/00752/FUL

OFFICER: Stuart Herkes WARD: Leaderdale and Melrose PROPOSAL: Siting of mobile concrete batching plant SITE: Rodger (Builders) Ltd, Station Road, Earlston APPLICANT: Rodger (Builders) Ltd AGENT:

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is 0.12ha of land within the business premises of Rodger (Builders) Ltd, inside the development boundary at Earlston, and within the boundaries of Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Employment Land Safeguarding zEL56 (‘Station Road, Earlston’). It is currently used as part of the yard area of the builders’ business. More specifically, it occupies land to the north and east of the main building within the business premises, where it constitutes the southeastern extremity of the builders’ yard. While the adjoining land is in most cases, other sections of the same business premises, this is not the case on its eastern boundary, which is commensurate with the perimeter boundary of the yard. Here, the site lies adjacent to tennis courts and other business premises, including that which is accommodated within a Category B Listed Building (‘Fluthers Cottage’).

The site lies roughly 75m to the south of the High Street and its boundary is 20m from the nearest dwellinghouse, No 4. South Croft Park. While the latter is the closest dwelling, several other properties within the same residential area, are located only a little distance beyond this.

Access to the business premises is from Station Road, roughly 125m from the site. Existing traffic to and from the business premises, and within the yard area, generated by the applicant’s current business activities, includes the movement of cranes; tippers; skip wagons; and low loader vehicles.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is the siting of a mobile concrete batching plant for the purpose of producing concrete from its constituents: aggregate (sand and gravel), cement, and water.

The main components of the proposed development are:

x Three aggregate storage bays (approximately 16.5m long; 9m wide; and 2.5m high) x An aggregate hopper (approximately, 14.5m long; 4.6m wide; and, at its highest point, 6m high); x An aggregate weigh conveyor (approximately, 2.25m long; 1.25m wide; and 2.75m high); x A batch conveyor (approximately, 12.75m long; 1.3m wide; and, at its highest point, 7.8m high); x A gantry accommodating the cement weigh hopper and planetary mixer (approximately, 4.8m long; 4.5m wide; and 8.6m high); x A batch cabin (approximately, 3.75m long; 2.6m wide; and 3.3m high); and Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 x Two 50T cement silos (each, approximately, 10.8m long; 2.5m wide; and, including the reverse jet filter, 4.8m high).

Aggregate (sand and gravel) would be stored within three storage bays located within a bunded area to the north of the batching plant. During production, this would be transported from the storage bays to the hopper by a small front load vehicle. From the hopper, it would then be delivered to the mixer via the conveyor. The cement would be stored within two silos from which it would be fed directly into the mixer via a screw conveyor. Within the mixer, the aggregate, cement and water would be mixed to form concrete, which would then be delivered directly from the mixer, to a delivery vehicle positioned directly below the mixer.

HGVs would be required to deliver sand, gravel and cement to the site, and to distribute the ready- for-use concrete directly from the site to its required location.

It is proposed that the plant would operate between 07:00 to 19:00 from Monday to Friday, and 07:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays.

It is proposed that the local road network should be accessible to and from the site, via the existing access road to Rodger’s yard.

It is advised that surface water would be recycled for use in concrete production.

There is already an existing 50T cement silo within the yard area but it is understood that this would be replaced by the proposed two new silos, which, although of a similar capacity to the existing, would nonetheless be significantly lower in height.

PLANNING HISTORY

The site has no planning history but is included within the boundaries of Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Employment Land Safeguarding zEL56 (‘Station Road, Earlston’).

A planning application (09/00834/FUL) for change of use from store, alterations and extension to form a dwellinghouse at Fluthers Cottage, a Category B Listed Building, to the north and east of the site, was refused on 19 August 2009 because the proximity of the site to the adjoining industrial yard was considered to have the potential to give rise to conflicts, between the two uses, thereby potentially prejudicing the operational capability of the adjoining employment use. Further, it was considered that it would adversely affect the setting and character of the existing Listed Building by virtue of the design, scale and materials of the proposed alterations and extension.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

21 representations, including 17 objections, have been received from 23 members of the public, Earlston Tennis Club and Earlston Community Development Trust. These raise the following concerns:

x The operation of the proposed development would have an unacceptable environmental impact and would be a serious health risk to local residents because it would create a great deal of dust and air pollution, both through the operation of the batching plant (cement dust, and dust from sand and aggregate) and through increased numbers of heavy vehicles entering the site (dust and fumes). Accordingly, it should not be located on a site adjacent to a residential area and primary school. As such, the proposed development is contrary to Adopted Local Plan Policy ED5 – Town Centres; Adopted Local Plan Policy EP5 – Air Quality; Adopted Local Plan Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments; Adopted Local Plan Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity. x The operation of the proposed development would be a nuisance to local residents because it would create a great deal of additional noise, both through the operation of the batching plant and through increased numbers of heavy vehicle movements in and out of the site. Accordingly, it should not be located on a site adjacent to a residential area and Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 primary school. As such, the proposed development is contrary to Adopted Local Plan Policy ED5 – Town Centres; and Adopted Local Plan Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments; and Adopted Local Plan Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity. x The impact of the proposed development would be greatly exacerbated if it were to be allowed to operate out with normal business hours, from 7am to 7pm on weekdays, and 7am to 1pm on Saturdays. This would cause an unacceptable level of disturbance and nuisance to nearby residents. As such, it would be contrary to Adopted Local Plan Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity. x The proposed development would exacerbate existing road safety concerns, because it would increase traffic on the local road network and would be served by the existing entrance to Rodger’s premises in Station Road. The existing junction does not at present, safely accommodate existing traffic movements, parking and pedestrian movements. This is a particular concern in an area where there are many children and elderly people, and where pedestrian movements take in routes between home, school, the town centre and the tennis courts. (The proposed development would be within 100ft of the ‘Safe Route to School’ for the Primary School). As such, the proposed development is contrary to Adopted Local Plan Policy ED5 – Town Centres; and Adopted Local Plan Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments; and Adopted Local Plan Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity. x The proposed development would exacerbate existing road safety concerns since the increased number of vehicle movements would result in the deposition of mud and dust onto the local road network, increasing the risk of pedestrians slipping and falling; x The proposed development is a change of use from a builders’ yard with some light industry, to heavy industry/manufacturing plant which would degrade the quality of the built environment in the centre of Earlston, and undermine its future prosperity. It is, in its nature, out of character with a location within the centre of a settlement, near residential properties. While most local businesses are small to medium sized and serve the needs of the local community, the proposed development does not reflect the local area’s needs and would therefore fundamentally alter this balance. There are more appropriate sites out with the town centre, where it could be accommodated away from homes and busy streets, but could still be accessed by the locally based workforce. As such, it is contrary to Adopted Local Plan Policy ED5 – Town Centres and Adopted Local Plan Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments; x The proposed development would be an eyesore within the local streetscape; x Given the potential for nuisance and disturbance to local residents from the siting and operation of the proposed development, there should be an assessment of the impact of the proposed development upon the local area; x Given the potential for nuisance and disturbance to local residents from the siting and operation of the proposed development, there should have been greater consultation with the public than has occurred; x The proposed development would result in a loss of privacy because operators working on it would be able to look over the boundary wall and directly into the property at Fluthers Cottage; x The dust generated by the proposed development would be carried by the prevailing wind towards the tennis courts, and would adversely affect the condition of the tennis courts; x Consideration needs to be taken of the impact of the proposed development on drainage and local waterways from the cleaning of plant and vehicles; x Neighbours were not properly notified about the planning application.

Earlston Tennis Club has asked that in the event that the planning application is approved, a planning condition should be imposed, requiring that a 2.5 to 3m high slatted fence should be erected along the boundary line with the tennis courts and Rodger’s yard, in the interests of minimising the impact of dust levels on the courts.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Following advice from the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health), the applicant was asked to undertake a noise impact assessment and a quantitative assessment of the impact of the proposed development on local air quality. Reports on both assessments have now been supplied to the Planning Authority. Additional emails have also been supplied to provide clarification on several points made within the noise impact assessment report.

Air Quality Assessment

The air quality assessment considers the impact upon local air quality of the proposed development. It advises that potential air quality impacts would be emissions of dust and fine particles produced during the concrete batching process, and additional vehicle emissions associated with increased vehicle movements to and from the site to supply the aggregates and cement, and distribute the concrete. It recognises that the site is located within an area that is particularly sensitive to air emissions due to its proximity to residential areas, a school and school playing fields. However, it concludes that neither the operation of the proposed cement batching plant nor the increase in vehicle movements associated with it, would have a significant impact upon local air quality provided appropriate mitigation measures for minimising emissions are adopted to reduce the impact to an acceptable level.

With regard to the operation of the proposed cement batching plant, it is advised that the following mitigation measures should be adopted:

x regular cleaning of the operational area; x the covering of loose aggregates when in transit to the site; x the dampening down of stockpiles during dry weather; x minimising the surface area of stockpiles; x minimising material handling and drop heights; x using pressure relief valves on silos; x using overfilling alarms on silos; and x maintaining dust filters on cement silos.

It is anticipated that there would be an increase in vehicle movements of 32% compared to the existing level of yard traffic, and that there would be a doubling of HGV movements within that yard traffic, from its present level. However, it is advised that based on the 2007 Highways Agency Design Manual for Roads (DMRB) screening criteria, the anticipated increase in traffic volume would be unlikely to result in a significant worsening of air quality for roadside receptors (i.e. those receptors located within 200m of the affected road network), and accordingly that the additional traffic would be unlikely to have a significant impact on local air quality.

Noise Assessment

The environmental noise assessment report advises that the predicted noise from the operational activities associated with the proposed development, would result in a perceptible increase in noise levels at the nearest residential receptor to the site, which would be liable to disturb residents. However, it considers that proportionate and reasonable measures could be put in place to ensure that the noise level experienced at the nearest residential receptor would be less than the level required to be of ‘marginal significance’. Accordingly, it advises that limiting the noise ‘rating’ level to no more than 44 dB LAeq,T at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor (that is, limited to 5 dB(A) above the lowest background noise level) should be the preferred control strategy. In the event of planning approval, it considers that a planning condition might be attached to the planning consent to require that details of a suitable mitigation scheme should be specified prior to the commencement of operations on-site in order to ensure that resultant noise levels are less than those of marginal significance.

Appropriate mitigative measures are identified as being practical engineering solutions; site layout; and procedural matters. It is advised that possible practical engineering solutions might be the Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 erection of noise barriers; the enclosure of individual noise sources; and/or the erection of a canopy structure over the batching and vehicle loading equipment. Procedural matters refers to restrictions that might be placed on the movements and activities of vehicular traffic associated with the proposed development. It is clarified in emails from the applicant that it would be agreeable to restrictions being placed on the number of vehicle movements within the yard during both peak (07:00 to 16:30 hours, Monday to Friday) and off-peak (16:30 to 19:00 hours, Monday to Friday and 07:00 to 13:00 Saturday). More specifically, it is advised that it would be agreeable to the following restrictions:

07:00 to 16:30, Monday to Friday – a maximum of 4 movements per hour for trucks delivering aggregate and stone; a maximum of 6 movements per week for trucks delivering cement (no restriction on vehicles delivering concrete from the site is indicated).

16:30 to 17:30, Monday to Friday – a maximum of 6 vehicle movements per hour (3 trucks in; 3 trucks out) for Truckmixers and Delivery HGVs.

17:30 to 19:00, Monday to Friday – a maximum of 4 vehicle movements per hour (2 trucks in; 2 trucks out) for Truckmixers and Delivery HGVs.

07:00 to 13:00, Saturday - a maximum of 6 vehicle movements per hour (3 trucks in; 3 trucks out) for Truckmixers and Delivery HGVs.

It is advised that this timetable has been devised in order not to restrict cars and other employee vehicles.

It is further advised that there may be occasions where there are specific contracts that require additional vehicle movements and on occasion, additional hours of operation. It is advised that prior to the undertaking of such works, a formal request would be made to the Planning Authority for the extension of operations to facilitate these activities.

Additionally, it is advised within the noise assessment report that drivers should be restricted from idling at the site entrance at any time, and that consideration should be given to the use of non- audible ‘smart’ reversing alarms to control any potential noise disturbance from vehicle movements within the site.

Other Information

The applicant has supplied an additional drawing of the aggregate stock bays shown on the main Proposals Drawing EAR 001.

The applicant submitted a ‘Dust & Air Quality Statement’ but this has been superseded by the Air Quality Assessment described above for the purposes of addressing the impact on local air quality. However, this document contains a table showing ‘Vehicle Statistics’ for the past twenty years, which advises that at November 2009, there were 29 vehicles operating within the applicant’s yard area, and that this number has decreased from an all time high in 2005, of 50 vehicles.

The applicant has also supplied a letter intended to address the objections expressed to the proposed development. This advises as follows:

x Rodger (Builders) Limited has been based in its Station Road premises for about 70 years. Within that time, the premises have variously been used to accommodate the following uses:

o Storage of cement, sand, aggregates and building materials; o Storage of Holequest site investigation equipment; Holequest materials testing laboratory; cranes; plant; tippers; mixers; artic units; vans and cars; o Tyre changing and repair for HGVs; o Munitions manufacturing during WWII; Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 o Conversion of ex-MoD vehicles into private cars; o Storage and servicing of aeroplanes; and o Timber kit manufacturing.

x During this time, the yard has always been accessed via the existing access, even when the yard at its height, accommodated over 40 HGVs.

x There would be no appreciable increase in yard traffic as a consequence of the proposed development. Since October 2008, four vehicles have been sold and only one (a volumetric batch mixer) acquired. Only two additional vehicles would be required in the event of planning approval for the proposed concrete batching plant, meaning that Rodger would be operating with one truck less than it had in October 2008.

x Congestion at the road junction is a relatively new phenomenon caused by the parking and unloading of delivery lorries servicing the supermarket, and by cars parking on the opposite side of the road from the yard entrance.

x The opening of the new school has meant that schoolchildren no longer need to pass the yard in order to access the rear gates of the old school.

x The proposed plant would be under 9m high from a level already lower than both the tennis courts and the plasterers yard. Operatives would not need to access the exterior high level of the plant for anything other than very occasional maintenance. Accordingly the privacy of Fluthers Cottage would not be prejudiced beyond its current level.

x Currently cranes leave the site as early as 05:30 and in the summer months at least, quite often do not return to the yard until after 20:00. The proposed batching plant would not extend the yard’s current working hours.

x The planning application was made in accordance with the proper guidelines, and following consultation with the Planning Department.

x The tennis courts were until recently screened by a Leylandii hedge, some 9m high, which Rodger believes it may have originally planted for the purposes of screening the courts. However, the hedge was recently removed, apparently because detritus from it, was falling onto the half court. Rodger would be prepared to provide a scaffold screen net on the perimeter ball stop fence to screen the courts from the yard area.

x The proposed development would not have a noise or air quality impact that could not be mitigated; nor would it generate cement dust. The operation of the plant would be controlled by an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Permit administered by SEPA. Further, cement is an expensive commodity and it would not be in Rodger’s interests to allow it to be carried off in the wind. The plant would be completely enclosed by goose grey plastisol sheeting, which would not only prevent dust escaping but would contain such noise as is generated by the operation of the electric motors and compressed air systems required by the plant, which would be powered by a whisper generator.

x The purpose of the proposed development is to extend the range of activities to safeguard the future of the company and the continued employment of its workers.

x The Community Council was invited to attend, and attended, a meeting at Rodger’s yard, at which the operation of the proposed concrete batching plant was explained to them. On the basis of a follow-up email from the Community Council to the appropriate councillors, the Community Council seemed broadly satisfied with the proposal.

x The site is designated for employment use.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 The applicant has subsequently provided email confirmation that there is currently one existing 50T cement silo within the yard. It is advised that in the event of planning approval, this would be removed, and replaced with the two proposed 50T cement silos. It is further advised that the existing silo is roughly twice the height of the proposed new silos, which although of the same capacity as the existing, are designed to be lower.

In addition to the existing cement silo, the applicant has also confirmed in writing that within the yard area there are currently, bays for the storage of sand and aggregates; and storage bays for compost and scrap plastic; and that a current use within the yard, is the crushing of stone and old concrete for recycling.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads & Fleet Management): has advised that while there is likely to be an increase in heavier traffic accessing the current builders’ yard, this is not considered to be of such a significant volume in order for there to be an objection in principle to this proposal. However, it is noted that the existing junction accessing onto Station Road is in need of repair, and in the event of planning approval, it is requested that this work should be made the subject of a planning condition.

Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health): initially advised that the applicants should be required to submit a noise impact assessment and a quantitative assessment of the impact of the proposed development on local air quality, addressing emissions from the new plant and vehicles using the site. Subsequent to the submission of appropriate assessments on noise and air quality, it is advised that the conclusions of both assessments are accepted. It is considered that the hours of operation on Saturdays would be more appropriately restricted to 08:00 to 13:00, rather than to 07:00 to 13:00 as the applicant proposes. It is further advised that in the event of planning approval, adherence to the noise level restriction identified in the noise impact assessment should be made the subject of an appropriate planning condition.

Statutory Consultees

Earlston Community Council: objects to the siting of the proposed development, highlighting the following concerns:

x The operation of the proposed development would exacerbate existing traffic congestion within the town, particularly during High School hours;

x Excessive deposits of mud would be left on local roads, especially during inclement weather;

x Noise from the proposed development would be liable to disturb the residents of surrounding properties; and

x Dust and air pollution from the proposed development would cause severe environmental and health and safety issues, especially in the adjacent tennis courts, which are used mainly by children and young people.

It is further advised that many local residents were unaware of the proposed development but strongly opposed to it when they found out about it.

It is considered that in light of the potential impact upon the surrounding area, local residents should have been made fully aware of the planning application.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Support is however, expressed for businesses bringing revenue and employment into the community. It is considered that there may be more appropriate alternative sites for the proposed development, out with the town centre.

SEPA: has returned the consultation request with no further comment, advising only that there is standing advice applicable to this type of small scale local development.

Other Consultees

None

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

Policy N20 – Design

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

Policy ED1 – Protection of Employment Land Policy ED5 – Town Centres Policy EP5 – Air Quality Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy H3 – Land Use Allocations

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Finalised Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment

Policy ED1 – Protection of Employment Land Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The main planning issues with this application are:

x Whether or not the proposed development is sympathetic to the character of the site and the surrounding area; x Whether or not the proposed development would have any unacceptable impact upon local air quality, either through the operation of the proposed concrete batching plant or through the increase in HGV traffic required to supply stone, sand and cement to, and distribute concrete from, the site; x Whether or not the proposed development would have any unacceptable impact upon the amenity of residential properties, the tennis courts, playing fields, primary school or town centre, as a consequence of increased noise levels resulting from either the operation of the proposed concrete batching plant or from the increase in HGV traffic required to supply stone, sand and cement to, and distribute concrete from, the site; x Whether or not the proposed development raises any road safety concerns; and

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 x Whether or not the proposed development would have any other unacceptable impact upon the amenity of any neighbouring site.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

The site lies within an existing business premises, which is itself included within Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Employment Land Safeguarding zEL56 (‘Station Road, Earlston’) within the Development Boundary at Earlston. It also lies within the vicinity of residential areas, tennis courts, playing fields, a primary school and the town centre. The proposal must therefore be considered against the Council’s planning policies pertaining to economic development within designated Employment sites, and then against all other policies within the Statutory Development Plan. In particular, consideration needs to be given to the impacts of the operation of the proposed development upon the amenity of neighbouring areas, most notably in terms of air quality, noise and road safety.

Land Use

The proposed use of the site as a concrete batching plant is consistent with both the character of the existing business premises, a builders’ yard, and the designation of the site in the Adopted Local Plan as employment land. It is not a change of use within the yard area, or out of character with the existing or designated use of the site. Indeed, the applicant has advised that the site has been in use for more than 70 years, during which time it has accommodated a range of uses, which currently includes the storage of sand, aggregates and cement; the crushing of stones and old concrete for recycling; and the storage and servicing of HGVs. There are already existing aggregate storage bays in the vicinity of the site, and the applicant has advised that there is currently one 50T cement silo in situ within the yard. In view of current operations accommodated within the yard area, it is not considered that the proposed development represents a significant departure from the existing use of the site. However, an assessment of the site’s suitability to accommodate the proposed development must also take account of the potential impacts of the siting and operation of the proposed development upon the surrounding area.

Air Quality

A number of objections to the proposed development advise that the operation of the proposed concrete batching plant and the vehicle movements that it would generate, would impact upon local air quality, affecting the health of local residents, school children, and anyone using the tennis courts or playing fields.

Following a request from the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health), the applicant has supplied a quantitative assessment of the impact of the proposed development on local air quality, addressing emissions from the proposed plant and vehicles using the site. This concludes that neither the operation of the proposed cement batching plant nor the increase in vehicle movements associated with it, would have a significant impact upon local air quality provided appropriate mitigation measures for minimising emissions are adopted to reduce the impact to an acceptable level. The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has advised that the conclusions of the report are accepted. Accordingly, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to attach a planning condition to require that details of an appropriate scheme of mitigation to address concerns relating to the impact on local air quality should be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.

Noise

There are already a number of existing uses of the yard area, which would be liable to have a noise impact, e.g. movement of HGVs; stone and concrete crushing; transfer of sand and aggregate from vehicles to storage bays.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 The location of the proposed development was discussed at the pre-application stage with planning officers, and it was considered at that stage that the proposed site was liable to be the preferred location within the yard area, because it was further from existing dwellinghouses than any other area within the perimeter of the yard. However, a number of objections to the proposed development advise that the operation of the proposed concrete batching plant and the vehicle movements that it would generate, would cause an unacceptable level of disturbance to local residents through its noise impacts.

Following a request from the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health), the applicant has supplied a noise impact assessment, addressing noise generated by from the proposed plant and vehicles using the site. This concludes that noise from the operational activities associated with the proposed development would result in a perceptible increase in noise levels at the nearest residential receptor to the site, which would be liable to disturb residents. However, it considers that proportionate and reasonable measures could be put in place to ensure that the noise level experienced at the nearest residential receptor would be less than the level required to be of ‘marginal significance’. The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has advised that the conclusions of the report are accepted. Accordingly, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to attach a planning condition to require that details of an appropriate scheme of mitigation to address concerns relating to noise impact should be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.

The report advises that limiting the noise ‘rating’ level to no more than 44 dB LAeq,T at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor (i.e. limited to 5 dB(A) above the lowest background noise level) should be the preferred control strategy. In the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that noise output from the proposed development should not exceed this level.

The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has additionally advised that contrary to the applicant’s proposal, the hours of operation on Saturdays would be more appropriately restricted to 08:00 to 13:00 rather than to 07:00 to 13:00. In the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that the hours of operation of the batching plant should be restricted to 07:00 to 19:00 from Monday to Friday and to 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturday.

The applicant has advised that even with a requirement for two new additional vehicles, the proposed development would not see the number of vehicles operating from the site increase above the number of vehicles that it operated from the yard in October 2008. Moreover, it has advised that at November 2009, there were 29 vehicles moving within the yard area, and that this number is in itself a significant decrease from an all time high in 2005, of 50 vehicles.

The applicant has advised that it would be agreeable to restrictions being placed on vehicle movements during both peak and off-peak hours of operation. It is considered that in the event of planning approval, the imposition of such restrictions would be appropriate but that these would be more appropriately handled within the context of the agreement of schemes of mitigation to address noise impacts rather than made the subject of a planning condition explicitly restricting vehicle movements to particular levels during defined periods of time. Notwithstanding the applicant’s willingness to cooperate on this point, it is considered that these restrictions need further, detailed consideration, mainly because the applicant has identified particular instances where it might occasionally need to exceed these levels, but also because information about the number of vehicle movements relating to the distribution of concrete from the site during peak hours, has not yet been supplied. While in the event of planning approval, it is considered that restrictions on vehicle levels during peak and off-peak hours might be appropriately addressed within the agreement of the scheme of mitigation for noise, it is nonetheless considered that it would be appropriate to attach an informative advising that the scheme of mitigation for noise impact should include the identification of appropriate restrictions on vehicle movements during peak and off-peak hours.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 In the event of planning approval, and in the interests of reducing noise affecting nearby residential properties, it would also be appropriate to require by planning condition that details of the treatment of those boundaries of the site which are commensurate with the boundaries of the yard, are submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Road Safety

A number of objections to the proposed development advise that the vehicle movements that the proposed development would generate, would be liable to cause road safety concerns or greatly exacerbate existing road safety issues.

The Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has advised that while there is likely to be an increase in heavier traffic accessing the current builder’s yard, this is not considered to be of such a significant volume as to make the proposal unacceptable in terms of its impact upon the local roads network. However, it is advised that the existing junction accessing onto Station Road is in need of repair. In the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require that the existing junction is repaired prior to the commencement of development.

Amenity of Neighbouring Land

The proposed development would be located in a corner of the existing builders’ yard that would be immediately adjacent to both tennis courts and existing business premises, including one business premises at Fluthers Cottage, that has recently been the subject of a planning application for change of use to a dwellinghouse. Beyond its more immediate environs, there are residential areas, the primary school and the town centre. A number of objectors have advised of their concerns with regard to the impact of the proposed development upon surrounding properties or more generally upon the surrounding area. Some of these objections are expressed in general terms, and it is not clear whether or not these allude to concerns relating to air quality, noise and road safety, but other concerns that have been overtly stated are the deposition of dust from the site, particularly with regard to the effect of this on the playing surface of the tennis courts; the visual impact of the proposed development; and the loss of privacy to Fluthers Cottage as a consequence of overlooking from the proposed plant.

With regard to the deposition of dust, mitigative measures to protect local air quality by restricting the amount of dust that can become airborne, should directly address this concern. It is also considered that the positioning of the batching plant to the north of the main building, should provide some screening from the prevailing wind to further reduce this impact. However, it is recognised that other than a change in ground level, there is currently no existing screening of any significance between the tennis court and the site, although aerial photographs suggest that there had previously been a substantial hedge or tree belt between the two sites that has since been removed (The applicant has advised that although they may have originally planted the hedge, it was not responsible for its maintenance or removal). In the event of planning approval, and in line with the mitigative measures that might be employed to reduce the noise impact, it would be appropriate to consider the treatment of those boundaries of the site that are commensurate with the boundary of the builders yard. The erection of an appropriate screen would further help protect the playing surfaces of the tennis courts. It should be noted in this regard that Earlston Tennis Club has requested that in the event of the planning application being approved, a planning condition should be imposed, requiring that a 2.5 to 3m high slatted fence should be erected along the boundary line with the tennis courts and Rodger’s yard, in the interests of minimising the impact of dust levels on the courts. The applicant, for his part, has offered to erect a scaffold screen net on the perimeter ball stop fence for the purpose of protecting the courts.

Given that screening of the boundary has also been identified as an effective way to reduce noise impacts as well as to reduce the extent to which airborne material can leave the site, and in the event of planning approval, it would not be appropriate to be so specific within a planning condition about the type of screening that would need to be put in place along the eastern boundary. In short, the need for more significant screening in these areas cannot be ruled out at this stage, and Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 this issue would need further consideration, which would be more appropriately addressed within the planning condition requiring the agreement of the details of the schemes of mitigation for air quality and noise impact. It is however, acknowledged that the erection of screening to protect the playing surfaces of the tennis courts is a reasonable request and that this is certainly one function that any screening erected along the eastern boundary should fulfil. Accordingly, and in the event of planning consent, it would be appropriate to attach an informative advising that screening along this boundary to protect the environment and surface of the tennis courts from dust deposition, should be included within the scheme of mitigation to address the protection of air quality.

Since the highest component of the batching plant, the gantry supporting the planetary mixer, would be approximately 8.6m high, the proposed development would not be capable of being screened from view by a boundary fence. However, in most directions the gantry would be viewed against the existing building on the business premises, which is of a similar size and would provide some mitigation in terms of its visual impact. Ultimately however, the existing use of the site is as a builders' yard, and within the adopted local plan, it is safeguarded employment land. The proposed development is consistent with both the existing and designated use of the site. Accordingly, it is considered that while the upper sections would be liable to be seen from outwith the builder’s yard, there can be no objection to the principle of locating the proposed development on the site on the basis of its visual impact. One objector has expressed concern at the extent to which Fluthers Cottage, a neighbouring property to the north and east of the site which accommodates a business premises, would be overlooked from the proposed concrete batching plant. While the potential for overlooking from the various components of the batching plant clearly exists, it has been advised that workers would not have any call to ascend the various structures on a regular basis. Even on those occasions that workers would require to ascend the component elements, this would logically only be to undertake maintenance work, something which would necessarily occur during working hours. Moreover, there is already an existing level of overlooking between Fluthers Cottage and Rodger’s yard, while HGVs are in regular circulation within the yard area. It is therefore not accepted that the proposed development would raise any concerns about creating an unacceptable level of overlooking of the premises at Fluthers Cottage. It is also the case that Fluthers Cottage is not a residential property but a business premises. However, it should be noted that this building was the subject of a planning application last year for change of use from store, alterations and extension to form a dwellinghouse. This application was refused on the grounds that the establishment of a residential use in such close proximity to the employment site would potentially prejudice the operational capacity of the existing business premises, while there were concerns about the proposed design, scale and materials. In the event that Fluthers Cottage was ever to become a dwellinghouse at some future date, the occupier or buyer would be able to take cognisance of the current situation, which is that the property adjoins an operational builders yard, which is designated employment land.

While concerns about airborne dust, visual impact and loss of privacy require that in the event of planning approval, consideration should appropriately be given to the boundary treatments of the site, it is not considered that these issues are sufficient in themselves to make the proposed development unacceptable.

Neighbour Notification

Objections have been raised about the extent to which local residents were properly and adequately notified about the proposed development.

Since the planning application was submitted before 3 August last year, neighbour notification was undertaken by the applicant. Given that the site boundary is not the entire area of the applicant’s yard but only the area of the yard that would accommodate the proposed concrete batching plant, it is advised that neighbour notification would appear to have been undertaken properly, since the applicant has advised in its neighbour notification certificate that notification has been given to all land owners within 4m of the site.

Other Considerations Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 Consideration of the planning application is restricted to an assessment of the principle of locating and operating the proposed development on the site, and does not – and cannot – extend to the regulation of the management of the proposed development. In the event that concerns were ever to arise relating to the improper management of the site, these would need to be addressed at that time through the appropriate regulatory mechanism(s). It should be noted, as per the applicant’s advice, that the operation of the plant would be controlled by an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Permit administered by SEPA.

The applicant’s supporting drawing does not include any representation of the bunds which it is advised would be created around the aggregate storage bays. However, in the event of planning approval, this detail would appropriately be handled within the agreement of the schemes of mitigation to address air quality and noise impacts.

The applicant has advised that the plant would be completely enclosed by plastisol sheeting for the purposes of noise reduction and dust containment. However, the details of any required enclosure of the site would, in the event of planning consent, be appropriately addressed through the requirement to present details of appropriate schemes of mitigation for both noise and air quality.

Given the description of the proposed development as a mobile concrete batching plant, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to attach an informative to advise that planning consent is only given for the location of the batching plant in the approved location, and consent does not confer any wider permission for the batching plant to be located anywhere else within the builders yard.

The proposed development is not an ‘hazardous development’ and accordingly, it is advised that it should not be assessed against Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Policy G3 – Hazardous Developments.

The proposed development would be located on a safeguarded employment site and is not included within a defined area of prime retail frontage. Accordingly, it is advised that it should not be assessed against Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Policy ED5 – Town Centres.

CONCLUSION

The principle of locating and operating the proposed development on the site is considered to be acceptable, provided appropriate planning conditions and informatives are attached to any planning consent issued, to address the concerns highlighted above.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved, subject to the planning conditions listed below:

2. Details of the treatment of those boundaries of the site which define the perimeter of the business premises at Rodger (Builders) Ltd, Station Road, Earlston, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. The approved details shall thereafter be implemented and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details unless written approval to vary these is given by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To reduce noise impacts and dust migration resulting from the operation of the consented concrete batching plant in the interests of protecting the amenity of neighbouring land.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 3. Before any part of the development is commenced, details of an appropriate scheme of mitigation to address the impact on local air quality of the consented development (that is, the impact on local air quality resulting both from the operation of the consented concrete batching plant and from the movement of vehicles supplying materials to, and distributing products from, the consented concrete batching plant) shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority The approved details shall thereafter be implemented, and thereafter maintained, in accordance with the approved details unless written approval to vary these is given by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The operation of the development would not be acceptable unless appropriate mitigation is in place to reduce its impact on local air quality to an acceptable level.

4. Before any part of the development is commenced details of an appropriate scheme of mitigation to address the noise impacts of the consented development (that is, the noise impacts resulting both from the operation of the consented concrete batching plant and from the movement of vehicles supplying materials to, and distributing products from, the consented concrete batching plant) shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall thereafter be implemented, and thereafter maintained, in accordance with the approved details unless written approval to vary these is given by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The operation of the development would not be acceptable unless appropriate mitigation is in place to reduce its noise impact to an acceptable level.

5. Noise levels emitted by the plant machinery shall not exceed 5 dB(A) above the lowest background noise level at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor. Reason: To ensure that the operation of the proposed development does not have any unacceptable impact upon the residential amenity of any dwellinghouses in the vicinity.

6. The operation of the consented development shall be restricted to between the hours of 07:00 to 19:00 from Monday to Friday; to between the hours of 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturday; and shall not operate on Sunday. Reason: To ensure that the operation of the proposed development does not have any unacceptable impact upon the residential amenity of any dwellinghouses in the vicinity.

7. Prior to the commencement of development, the existing junction providing access between the business premises and Station Road, shall first be repaired to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, and the development only commenced once written approval of the works has been given by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

Applicant Informatives

This planning consent only gives planning permission for the location of the concrete batching plant hereby consented, in the location shown on the approved drawings. For clarity, it does not confer any wider permission for the concrete batching plant hereby consented, to be located anywhere else within the business premises at Station Road, Earlston.

The scheme of mitigation to address the protection of air quality required by planning condition number 3 above, and details of the boundary treatment required by planning condition number 2 above, must include the identification of screening to protect the environment and surface of the tennis courts to the east of the site.

The scheme of mitigation to address noise impacts required by planning condition number 4 above, must include the identification of appropriate restrictions on the movements of all vehicles required to supply stone, sand or cement to the consented concrete batching plant during both peak and off-peak hours, and the identification of appropriate restrictions on the movements of all vehicles required to transport concrete from the batching plant to off-site locations, during both peak and off-peak hours. Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Stuart Herkes Assistant Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 Item No. 5(i) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING COMMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(i) REFERENCE NUMBER: 09/01384/FUL

OFFICER: Lucy Hoad WARD: Tweeddale West PROPOSAL: Changes to approved house design (previously approved on consent 06/01526/FUL) SITE: Former Mill Buildings Adjacent Dean Cottage, Old Manse Road, Eddleston APPLICANT: Mr D Cessford AGENT: Kanak Bose Ltd

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site lies to the South of Dean Cottage, Eddleston and is bounded by a small burn to the North, an access track to the West and South, and Barony Castle to the East.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The principle of a house and studio in this location is established and the current application is for alterations to the approved scheme for the dwellinghouse to include the formation of a basement level under the centre of the building and a 600mm projection out on the South West elevation of the building. Changes to fenestration have already been deemed as minor amendments.

PLANNING HISTORY

Planning permission was granted in December 2002 for the conversion and extension of former Mill Buildings into a dwellinghouse and for the erection of a garage/store/workshop. Two further consents to vary the original design of the house were granted in January 2005 and August 2006 (06/01526/FUL).

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Objections have been submitted from 4 neighbouring properties. They can be viewed in full on the Public Access website.

x Road safety for rides and pedestrians to include children x Commercial aspect of development x Increase footprint of dwelling x Additional parking x Impairment of view x Overlooking x Rearrangement of internal space x Visual impact x Potential increase in traffic on fragile road and old stone bridge x Access for large vehicles to other properties difficult

Planning and Building Standards Committee APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicants have provided a supporting statement, which can also be viewed on the Public Access website and the main points raised are summarised as follows:

x Revisions shown in this application relate only to dwellinghouse and not the studio x Business is small craft based as opposed to commercial bakery x Use would be limited to use of the studio as ancillary to the main house x The house will be used solely as a dwellinghouse x The studio will be used to make a limited number of cakes per year x No intention to expand business x No noise pollution, no hazardous materials and limited smell x The applicants own/use 2 small diesel vans as opposed to cars x The household has four cars in total x Additional traffic will not exceed that of a normal household x Additional parking for family or visitor parking x Business is generated via website but clients do not visit the premises to collect product as we deliver x Upgrading of the track through curtilage of applicant will benefit all users x There will be no material changes to the curvature of the track allowing large vehicles to pass x The slabbed path to the front door of the house will not be formed x Additional parking will enable safe passing place of meeting traffic to the benefit of all road users and keep public road clear x The age and weight limit of the bridge is unknown x No heavy plant or transport will cross the bridge during or after construction phase x The development has not restricted the original sightlines with regard to the bend by the bridge x The increase in footprint is insignificant x The base is to be used as games/recreation space x The basement is screened by trees

A supporting statement has been submitted by the applicant’s former landlord and employer.

The applicants business is a fine example of a home base rural enterprise that has a minimal impact on the environment and would sit well within any rural community. No issues regarding traffic, noise or disruption or neighbour complaints have been encountered during their tenancy.

In addition to the drawings the agent has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Local Plan (2008) G1 Quality Standards for New Development H2 Protection of Residential Amenity

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

The Archaeology Officer was consulted and had no further comments to add to the previous application. He has confirmed that the photographic evidence provided in relation to the original application is suffice to ensure a historical record of the building is retained by the Authority.

The Flood Officer was consulted and does not object to the development. Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Environmental Health was consulted and stated that in terms of private water supply a report by a suitably qualified person would be required confirming the suitability of the supply. The report should consider the issues of quantity (adequacy of supply and impact on neighbouring properties) and quality filtration/treatment measures and a chemical and bacteriological analysis of supply) in line with the Private Water Supplies (Scotland) Regulations 2006). Statutory Consultees

The Community Council were consulted and object on the following grounds:

Intended use appears to be for a business Additional parking Incremental development Increased footprint over initial application Increase traffic movement inappropriate for narrow single road with blind corners Internal space – no and size of bedrooms decreased Water source and disposal concerns

Other Consultees

None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES: The key consideration is the impact upon the character and appearance of the existing building within its setting and neighbouring amenity.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Planning History

Policy/Material Considerations

Policy G1 sets out the standards of quality of design against which new development shall be judged and states it must be compatible with and respect the character of the surrounding area, neighbouring uses and built form. Policy H2 states that development judged to have an adverse impact on the amenity of existing or proposed residential areas will not be permitted. In general terms, there is no objection in principle to the current proposal.

Design Considerations

The development is a conversion of a former mill building and detailed plans have been submitted with the application to illustrate a 2 storey property in line with the consented drawings but with additional basement level and adjunct to the south-west. The external materials are natural stone with wet dash finish to new walls and natural slate roof finish. Timber glazing is proposed. The principle of a house and studio in this location is established and the current application is for alterations to the dwellinghouse only to include the formation of a basement level under the centre of the building and a 600mm projection out on the South West elevation of the building. Changes to fenestration have been deemed as minor amendments.

Concerns have been raised with regard to the increase in footprint of the house and visual impact from an additional basement level. In terms of design, the new section on the South West elevation sits below the ridge line of the roof and although visible from the public track is deemed to be modest in size. The basement level as detailed on the North West elevation is mainly Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 screened from view by mature trees and shrubbery and is only partially visible during the winter months from across the river.

Set against the permitted scheme, therefore, the alterations are not considered significant.

Landscape

Due to the existing screening and isolated nature of the site the proposed amendments are considered visually acceptable at this particular location and therefore the proposals are not considered to have a negative impact on the landscape setting.

Flooding

The Flood Officer was consulted on the application and having assessed the submitted flood risk assessment does not object to the development on flooding grounds.

Archaeology

The Archaeology Officer was consulted and had no further comments to add to the previous application. He has confirmed that the photographic evidence provided in relation to the previous application (06/01526/FUL) is suffice to ensure a historical record of the building is retained by the Authority.

Access and Parking

As stated the principle of a house and studio at this location has been established through the previous consents, with the studio conditioned to be ancillary to the use of the main dwellinghouse. The current application relates to the changes in the design of the dwellinghouse only. Therefore, in assessing the proposal, only the points raised that are considered pertinent to this application should be taken into account. The changes in design that have been put forward do not warrant a re-examination of some of the issues raised by objectors. For example, access, traffic movement and road safety would have been taken into account in the initial assessment of the development. A site layout submitted in respect of 06/01526/FUL has been assessed by the Roads Officer and no objection has been raised to the additional parking.

Commercial use

The issue of the use of the property for commercial purposes has been raised as a concern of both the Community Council and neighbouring properties. However, this application is only for alterations to a previously permitted dwellinghouse which is unoccupied at present. Consideration can only be given to the changes proposed that form the basis of the submitted scheme.

The agent and applicant have been made aware that it is considered permissible to run a business from the studio without the need for a formal change of use. At present there is no current business use operating from these premises.

Neighbouring Amenity

In terms of residential amenity, there are no properties in the immediate vicinity of the site that would be affected by the proposal in terms of loss of privacy or light. One objector has raised the issue of loss of privacy and this is not considered to be a concern given the distances involved. The issue of impaired view from their property was also raised but this is not considered to be a material consideration in the assessment of the proposal.

Waste/water

In terms of water supply the agent has confirmed in the previous application that the supply will be Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 by way of connection to the existing private water main currently serving Dean Cottage and Darnhall Mains Farm. The Environmental Health Officer was consulted and further details are required on adequacy of supply and this can be dealt with through a condition attached to consent. Waste is proposed through a biodisc as opposed to septic tank and this is considered an issue to be addressed by the building standards team. The system would be underground so will have little or no impact visually. CONCLUSION

The material considerations in this case are the impact on the landscape setting and residential amenity stemming from the alterations in permitted house design. The relative concerns have been addressed and it is considered that the application can be recommended for approval subject to certain conditions and informatives.

REASON FOR DECISION :

The proposal is in accordance with policy G1 and H2 of the Scottish Borders Council Local Plan (2008) in that the design, scale and materials are considered acceptable for the existing building and location without having a detrimental impact upon the character and amenity of the surrounding semi-rural area or neighbouring property.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and informative:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 58 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.

2 The means of water supply and both surface water and foul drainage shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to development. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced

3 A report on the proposed water supply, by a suitably qualified person, shall require to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority within 2 months from the date of this consent in order to confirm the suitability of the water supply. The report should consider the issues of quantity in terms of adequacy of supply and impact on neighbouring properties. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced and the proposed solution does not impact upon the existing properties. 4 The applicant is advised to keep the existing Right of Way free from obstruction during and after the construction process. Reason: To ensure the existing public amenity is preserved. 5 The colour of the external wall finishes to be agreed by the Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

6 The details of all boundary walls and/or fences to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area

7 The existing trees on the site to be retained and protected during the construction period to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

8 A site plan showing the position of two car parking spaces within the site in addition to the garaging to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the development Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 commences. The car parking spaces to be completed to the specification of the Planning Authority before the dwellinghouse is occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

9 The studio to be ancillary to the use of the dwellinghouse and not to be occupied as a separate studio/workshop or residential unit. Reason: Permission is for one dwellinghouse only and to safeguard the residential amenity of occupiers of the dwellinghouse.

Informative

1 The Flood Risk Officer advises that the applicant adopts water resilient materials and construction methods as appropriate in the facility as advised in PAN 69

2 The applicant is advised that a suitable `whole house` disinfection system should be fitted to the new house to ensure that the bacteriological quality of the water complies with the Private Water Supply (Scotland) Regulations 2006.

Approved by

Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s)

Name Designation Lucy Hoad Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Item No. 5(j) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

12 APRIL 2009

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: 5(j) REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00036/FUL

OFFICER: Mr B Fotheringham WARD: Mid/East Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Erection of Poultry Unit for Free Range Hens and Associated Infrastructure SITE: Land North East of Hutton Hall Barns, Hutton APPLICANT: Border Eggs Limited AGENT: Edwin Thomson & Co (Berwick)

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is an area of level arable land located on a terrace elevated above the valley of the Whiteadder Water. It is enclosed by post and wire fencing and mature policy woodland to the south, west and north. There is a mature hedgerow along the eastern site boundary beyond which is a farm access track from the minor public road to the south.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This application seeks consent for the erection of a free range poultry unit towards the eastern boundary of the agricultural field shown on the application drawings. The proposed shed would measure 88m long by 16m wide by 5m high. It would be of a steel portal frame construction with low brick dado wall and box profile sheeting to the walls and the roof. Two free standing steel feed silos would be located towards the east end of the north facing elevation. It is proposed to locate the poultry unit 35m in from the existing field gate and 35m north in order to allow for a new access track.

PLANNING HISTORY

There is no specific planning history associated with this site although the following applications are relevant:

06/00326/FUL - Siting of Mobile Poultry Unit, Land East Of Hutton Hall Barns, Hutton – Approved 24 March 2006.

07/01741/FUL - Modification of Planning Condition on Previous Application 06/00623/FUL in Respect of Extension of Period of Consent. Approved 12 December 2007.

07/01752/FUL - Erection of Mobile Poultry Unit, Extension of Access Road and Erection of Shed for Roadside Sales. Land North East of Hutton Hall Barns, Hutton. Approved 8 October 2007.

08/01746/FUL - Erection of Mobile Poultry Unit and Extension of Access Road. Land North East of Hutton Hall Barns, Hutton. Withdrawn 28 November 2008.

Planning and Building Control Committee 1 08/02047/FUL - Erection of Mobile Poultry Unit and Extension of Access Road. Land North East of Hutton Hall Barns, Hutton. Approved 25 March 2009.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

There are 6 letters of objections, 2 letters of support and 2 general representations. Of the 6 letters of objection 2 are from the same address resulting in 5 objections for the purposes of committee referral under the current scheme of delegation.

The principal grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

x Increase in traffic x Inappropriate scale of development x Inadequate access and drainage arrangements x Industrialisation of the rural area x Additional planting/landscaping required x Proximity to listed buildings x Unacceptable levels of smell, noise, dust and flies x Proximity of the site to the Whiteadder Water SSSI x Adverse effect on residential Amenity – proximity to dwellings x Water and drainage arrangements

The letters of support identify Border Eggs as a top performing farm that has been awarded the “Happy Egg” suppliers award for high standards. Borders eggs have invested in the latest most innovative technologies available within the poultry industry to ensure that the business adheres to the latest legislation.

Business Gateway supports this application as the applicant currently operates within the food and drink sector of the Borders – one of the key sectors identified as important to Scottish Economy. The business has been involved in the Scottish Border Food Network and the additional unit will help to increase the employment level of the company. A particular advantage of this application is that it is owned and operated locally with the benefits and outputs remaining in the Scottish Borders.

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Along with the application and supporting application drawings, the applicant has submitted a supporting statement, a summary of maintenance and operation schedules, a consultation response from SEAP and details of the Edinburgh, East Lothian and Borders Nitrate Vulnerable Zone. These supporting documents are available for Members to view on-line through Public Access.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

Planning and Building Control Committee 2 Policy E2 – Farm Diversification Policy E16 – Rural Economic Development Policy I15 – Flood Risk Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy G4 – Flooding Policy NE2 – National Nature Conservation Sites Policy NE3 – Local Biodiversity Policy NE4 – Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy EP5 – Air Quality Policy Inf6 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Policy Inf11 – Developments that Generate Travel Demand Policy D1 – Business, Tourism and Leisure Development in the Countryside

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

SBC SPG – Biodiversity SBC SPG – Landscape and Development

PAN 39 – Farm and Forestry Buildings PAN 51 – Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation PAN 60 – Planning for Natural Heritage PAN 73 – Rural Diversification

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): The Supporting Statement states that the only increase in traffic will be additional feed for the new unit, which will equate to 1 extra lorry every fortnight. As a result, The Director has no objections in principle to this application.

The junction with the public road will need to be widened to accommodate the turning manoeuvres of the larger vehicles. The private access road from the public road will need to be up-graded to provide a compact and even properly drained running surface. Adequate turning radii at the site entrance and within the site are required to ensure that all HGV manoeuvres can be undertaken safely within the confines of the road surface.

Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health): In order to minimise nuisance to properties in the area it is recommended that the poultry unit is re-located as far north as possible. If the application is approved, it is recommended the following conditions be applied in order to reduce the potential for nuisance being caused to occupants of properties in the area:

1 A written operation schedule should be submitted covering management of the unit to mitigate nuisance arising from odour, flies, feathers or dust. 2 A waste management plan should be submitted. This to include details of where manure to be spread and frequency of spread. 3 No incineration of dead birds to be permitted on site. 4 Manure to be stored in covered containers in order to minimise odour produced on site. Containers to be kept as clean as possible to reduce possible nuisance from odour and flies. 5. No broiler production to be permitted at site at any time.

Planning and Building Control Committee 3 Statutory Consultees

Hutton & Paxton Community Council: The Community Council objects on the following grounds:

x Increased ammonia levels together with dust particles x Existing dwellings will be located within the recommended 400m distance as indicated in the Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity Guidelines x The strip of trees identified in the supporting statement to the west of the site is not within the control of the applicant. x Increase in traffic – road safety, noise, disturbance x Needs and rights of residents must be acknowledged

SEPA: No objections. It is proposed that surface water from the roof of the building will be discharged to an existing field drain. The ventilation will be carried out by gable fans which expel the air from the shed and roof vents which draw air into the shed. This means that there will be little or no dust from the shed on the roof and therefore the surface water drainage should be adequately treated by the field drainage system.

SEPA are satisfied with the proposals for manure which will be removed from the proposed shed on a weekly basis and then spread on land.

No flood risk is immediately apparent. The site lies at close proximity to the Whiteadder Water; however, there is a significant height difference between the site and the watercourse which will prevent it from being at risk of flooding from this source.

Other Consultees

None.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

The key planning issues with this proposal are:

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

PRINCIPLE/POLICY

Policy E16 of the Structure Plan and Policy D1 of the Local Plan also supports proposals for business related development in the countryside and gives encouragement for rural diversification initiatives provided a number of criteria are met. The proposed poultry unit is development appropriate to the

Planning and Building Control Committee 4 rural character of the area and it would complement the existing egg production business at Hutton Hall Barns on the south side of the minor public road.

The proposed shed is part of an expansion plan by Border Eggs Limited which currently operates three mobile poultry units on land to the east of Hutton Hall Barns. Members will note from the supporting papers that the applicant is keen to remain in agriculture but in order to do so, it is necessary to diversify. With this proposed expansion Border Eggs would house a total of 37,000 16 week old birds on site and current legislation allows a maximum of 2500 birds per hectare external stocking density. Based on the current application site with a projected number of birds totalling 16,000, there would be 2,000 birds per hectare which is well below the industry recommended limit.

LANDSCAPE

The application is for a large industrial sized building within a relatively unspoilt rural area. However, the proposed building is not atypical of modern agricultural developments and the site area has very low external inter-visibility due to the surrounding tree cover. On the basis that the building is colour treated as proposed and all the existing tree and hedgerow vegetation is retained, the proposal should not cause significant visual intrusion on sensitive receptors, such as residential properties.

There would however, be some visual impact on the driveway between the East Lodge and Hutton Castle and it would be sensible to mitigate this by providing new tree planting between the proposed shed and the driveway. Rather than plant a dense strip along the site boundary, which would also obscure the view from the driveway, it would be more sensitive to plant a dispersed and irregular scattering of trees within the proposed grazing area for the hens. This would mitigate the visual impact of the shed and also provide the hens with some areas of shade when grazing. Should members be minded to support this application, this can be covered by a suitably worded condition. Typical larger broadleaf tree species (e.g. oak, ash, maple) should be used and this can be covered by applicant informative.

The erection of a this industrial sized poultry shed will inevitably have an effect on the surrounding rural landscape, but the low lying nature of the site coupled with the existing mature policy woodland and large agricultural buildings to the south of the site, it is considered that the poultry unit will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the landscape quality or character of the area. Subject to appropriate levels of additional landscaping, the proposed poultry unit would maintain landscape character and would comply with Policy N9 of the Structure Plan and Policy G1 (landscape).

ROADS/ACCESS

It is proposed to access the site via an existing field gate served off the farm track leading from the minor public road from Hutton. The junction of the farm track with the public road is narrow and will need to be widened to accommodate the turning manoeuvres of the larger vehicles. The private access road from the public road will need to be up-graded to provide a compact and even properly drained running surface. In addition, adequate turning radii at the site entrance and within the site are required to ensure that all HGV manoeuvres can be undertaken safely within the confines of the road surface. It should be noted from the applicant’s supporting statement that the only increase in vehicular traffic will be additional feed for the proposed unit. This will equate to 1 extra HGV every fortnight and as such the Director of Technical Services will not object to this application.

As the development would be associated with the existing free range poultry business at Hutton Hall Barns there are already a number of vehicular movements on this minor public road and it is considered that with the additional unit, the extra traffic will not result in an unacceptable adverse effect on road safety and will be acceptable in principle.

Planning and Building Control Committee 5 The required junction improvements and access upgrades have been discussed with the applicant’s agent and Members will note that amended plans have been submitted for the consideration of the planning authority. The Director of Technical Services has confirmed verbally that the revised drawings are not acceptable and will require further amendments. However, it is felt that the required level of improvement can be met and should members support this application, the access issues can be covered by suitably worded conditions and applicant informatives.

WATER & DRAINAGE

Members will note that SEPA has no objections to this planning application. It is proposed that surface water from the roof of the building will be discharged to an existing field drain. The ventilation will be carried out by gable fans which expel the air from the shed and roof vents will be used to draw air into the shed. This system ensures that there will be little or no dust from the shed on the roof and therefore the surface water drainage should be adequately treated by the existing field drainage system.

In terms of waste management, it is proposed to remove manure from the shed on a weekly basis and to spread it on land. Members may be aware that the site is located within the Edinburgh, East Lothian and Borders Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) and the Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (PEPFAA) code should be followed regarding the spreading of manure. The NVZ plan and supporting risk assessment plan submitted with the application indicates that the manure removed from the proposed shed, along with manure from sheds 2 and 3 will be taken to one of two sites and stored under waterproof cover. These sites have been specifically selected so as not to cause nuisance to neighbouring properties.

Any waste water and water supply proposals may require authorisation under The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (as amended) (CAR) and this can be covered by applicant informative.

IMPACT ON DESIGNATED AREAS

The application site is not located within any designated area although it is situated on land above the Whiteadder Water, a tributary of the River Tweed SAC and SSSI. Development proposals which will have an adverse effect, either directly or indirectly, on international or national sites (SSSIs) will not be permitted unless the integrity of the site is protected and the development offers substantial benefits that outweigh the national nature conservation value of the site.

The proposed shed would be located approximately 150m from the Whiteadder Water, albeit approximately 30m above the level of the river. It is proposed to empty manure from the sheds on a weekly basis and spread this on suitable fields away from the water course therefore reducing the chance of manure finding its way to the SSSI. As free range hens tend to range on land close to the shed and will not range anywhere near the field boundary to the north, leaching of nitrogen from manure will be negligible and will have minimal, if any, effect on the watercourse.

The proposed shed and proposed management arrangements, together with other regulatory constraints including SEPA and environmental health is unlikely to have a significant effect on the designated area, either directly or indirectly and as such the development will be in accordance with Polices N2 and N3 of the Structure Plan and NE1 and NE2 of the Local Plan.

RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

Members will note from the letters of objection that considerable concern has been raised about the effect the proposed shed will have on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties. It is

Planning and Building Control Committee 6 considered that the poultry unit will lead to increased levels of air pollution, noise, dust and flies which would then result in an unacceptable adverse effect on the amenity of nearby residential properties.

The proposed shed would incorporate latest technology, including gable fans and extraction systems, manure drying and conveyor belt systems, all of which help to reduce the amount of noise, smells and dust emanating from the shed. Members will be aware that the free range poultry business is heavily regulated and these modern sheds are set up to minimise disruption to neighbouring dwellings.

The shed will be well screened from existing properties but additional planting, as discussed earlier, will minimise visual and environmental effects. Eggs are collected from the existing facilities on a Monday, Wednesday and Friday morning and this will continue with eggs removed from the new shed at the same time and on the same vehicle. The new shed will also require up to 2 feed deliveries per month and this will also be delivered at the same time as the existing units. This will limit vehicular movements and minimise disruption to neighbouring properties.

Manure will be removed on a weekly basis by tractor and trailer and moved to one of two sites mentioned earlier in this report. These sites have been specifically identified as causing the least nuisance to neighbours taking into account the prevailing winds. Spreading is always carried out when ground conditions allow and this is normally done within 24 hours in order to minimise smell.

Policy H2 of the Local Plan is particularly relevant in established residential areas and is used to ensure that development does not have an adverse effect on the amenity of these areas. However, the basic principles can be applied to rural situations, particularly where residential units may be affected. The application site is located approximately 220m north east of the closest residential property (East Lodge) not associated with the proposed poultry unit. Although the shed will not be visible from East Lodge because of an intervening tree belt, it is accepted that there is the potential for an effect on the amenity of this property as a result of dust and smells. East Lodge is located immediately opposite the existing agricultural buildings and poultry units at Hutton Hall Barns and the existing close association with the existing operational farm will have evidently an effect on the residential amenity of this property. It is considered, however, that this will not be exacerbated by the proposed poultry unit on land to the north east.

FLOODING

The application site is not identified as a site at risk of flooding and this is confirmed in SEPA’s consultation response. The Whiteadder Water is located approximately 150m north of the proposed shed but due to the significant difference in ground levels, the site will not be at risk from a flood event on this river. The proposal therefore complies with Policy I15 of the Structure Plan and Policy G4 of the Local Plan.

LISTED BUIDINGS

Policy BE1 of the Local Plan and Policy N17 of the structure Plan seek to preserve the character of Listed Buildings, their setting and related fixtures and any development that would have a detrimental effect on their listed character, integrity or setting will not be supported.

Hutton Castle, a Category B Listed Building is located approximately 600m north west of the application site. Associated with Hutton Castle are The Quadrant, Walled Garden , Mill, East Lodge and West Lodge and these are all category C(s) listed. These properties are located to the east of the application site with East Lodge located only 220m south east. This is the only property likely to be affected by the proposed poultry unit. East Lodge is located to the south of an existing tree belt and will not be visible from the shed. There will be glimpses of the proposed shed from the driveway leading to Hutton Castle but additional planting, covered by condition, would help minimise any visual impact. It is considered that the distances between the listed buildings and the proposed shed, along Planning and Building Control Committee 7 with the existing and proposed planting, would not result in an adverse effect on the character, integrity or setting of the listed buildings.

CONCLUSIONS

Members will note from the third party representations available on-line through Public Access that the principal grounds of objection relate to traffic movements and impacts on residential properties. The anticipated vehicular movements, particularly those of HGVs associated with the poultry unit are low and infrequent and are unlikely to have a significant adverse effect on road safety on the surrounding roads. The supporting information and comments received from the Director of Technical Services suggest that the minor public road is suitable for the anticipated vehicular movements subject to modifications/improvements to the existing junction of the farm track with the minor road.

It is considered that the low lying nature of the site, existing shelter belt planting coupled with appropriate additional landscaping would ensure that the shed can sit comfortably within the landscape. The shed would be located a reasonable distance away from ‘protected’ buildings not associated with the poultry unit and would not result in a significant adverse effect on the residential amenity of these dwellings. Furthermore, the location of the proposed poultry unit supplemented by additional landscaping would not compromise the character, integrity and setting of nearby listed buildings.

The regulatory bodies, particularly SEPA, are comfortable with the proposals and provided appropriately worded conditions to address the issues discussed above are added to any grant of consent, the proposed development would be acceptable and in accordance with development plan policy, in particular Policies E2 and E16 of the Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILIDNG STANDARDS

I recommend that the application is approved subject to the following conditions and informatives:

4. The colour of the external box profile sheeting shown on the plan hereby approved shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and no other colour materials shall be used without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

5. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft landscaping works (which shall specifically include planting on the west boundary of the site adjacent to the Planning and Building Control Committee 8 existing access drive serving Hutton Castle) which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall include (as appropriate): i. indication of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration ii. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas iii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density iv. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

6. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with details of a new private junction from the existing access track which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details to include swept path analysis showing how the larger vehicles can access the site without damaging the road verge. Swept path analysis should also demonstrate how the larger vehicles can turn within the site, thus ensuring they rejoin the access track in a forward gear. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure that the site can be accessed by larger vehicles.

7. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with details of improvements to the existing junction of the access track with the minor public road serving Hutton which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details to include swept path analysis showing how the larger vehicles can access the track without damaging the public road verge. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure that the site can be accessed by larger vehicles.

8. No incineration of dead birds shall be permitted on site. Reason: In the interests of public health.

12. No broiler production to be permitted on site at any time. Reason: In order to avoid nuisance to nearby residential properties.

Planning and Building Control Committee 9 Informatives

1. The improved junction to be 6 metres wide over the first 15 metres, formed with 10m radii and constructed to the following specification - a 40mm layer of 14mm size close graded bituminous surface course to BS 4987 laid on a 100mm layer of 28mm size dense base to the same BS laid on a 310mm layer of 100mm broken stone bottoming blinded with sub-base, type 1.

2. The private access road from the public road will need to be upgraded in a manner which provides a free draining smooth running surface, which should be maintained as such during the life span of the development.

3. The junction and private access road must be designed in a manner which prevents associated surface water from reaching the public road.

4. Adequate turning radii at the site entrance and within the site are required to ensure that all HGV manoeuvres can be undertaken safely within the confines of the road surface.

5. The Prevention of Environmental Pollution from Agricultural Activity (PEPFAA) code should be followed regarding the spreading of manure.

6. The applicant should note that soil porosity tests will be required for the proposed septic tank and soakaway and they should contact the SEPA Borders EPI Team to discuss (tel: 01896 754797).

7. Any waste water and water supply proposals may require authorisation under The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (as amended) (CAR).

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

The original version of this report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy has been retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Barry Fotheringham Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Control Committee 10 Planning and Building Control Committee 11 PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE ITEM 6

12 APRIL 2010

REPORT BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS

PLANNING APPEALS AND REVIEWS

1 PURPOSE

1.1 The purpose of this report is to give details of Appeals and Local Reviews which have been received and determined during the last month.

2 APPEALS RECEIVED

2.1 Planning Applications

2.1.1 Reference: 09/01098/PPP Proposal: Residential Development Site: Land South West of Carnethy, Medwyn Rd, West Linton Appellant: I R Anderson

Reasons for Refusal: Appeal against non determination of application within prescribed timescale.

Reasons for Refusal: No determination made.

Grounds of Appeal: The site was specifically included within the settlement boundary after careful consideration by the Reporter during the Local Plan process. The site is suitable for development which should not be precluded by the designation of a TPO.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations

2.2 Enforcements:

Nil

3 APPEAL DECISIONS RECEIVED

3.1 Planning Applications

3.1.1 Reference: 09/01503/CLEU (Certificate of Lawful Existing Use) Proposal: That the occupation of caravans for holiday purposes, and not for permanent residential use, for up to 11 months in any 12 month period (1 March to 31 January) is lawful by virtue of planning permission 02/00813/COU. Site: Riverview Holiday Park, Mangerton, Newcastleton Appellant: Mr Phil Kelly Reasons for Refusal: It would not be competent to issue a Certificate of Lawful use for the development. Section 150 of Town and Country Planning Scotland Act 1997 provides that the operation would only be certifiable as lawful if no enforcement action can then be taken. That is not the case regarding this submission, as the development has been constructed within the last 10 years.

Grounds of Appeal: It is contended that by virtue of the provisions of planning legislation, the use described in the application is lawful as that is what has previously been granted planning permission. Scottish Borders Council has failed to understand the basis on which the application has been made, and has therefore failed to come to a correct decision, based on the evidence that was submitted in support of the application, and the legislation applicable to the application and the associated decision.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations

Reporter’s Decision: Sustained and costs awarded against the Council.

Summary of Decision: The Reporter, Richard E Bowden, concluded that there is an existing valid planning permission for the site with conditions that clearly state the type and period of use for caravans on the site. The Council has acted unreasonably in trying to retrospectively introduce a new definition of “holiday purposes” that it has sought to apply to one of the conditions. He concluded that the limitations which the Council sought to impose go well beyond any reasonable interpretation of the term “for holiday purposes”.

3.1.2 Reference: 09/00104/FUL Proposal: Erection of Two Dwellinghouses Site: Site West of Smiddy’s Cottage, Paxton Appellant: John Home Robertson

Reasons for Refusal: Appeal against imposition of condition (point iv) which states:

“prior to the commencement of development, the new hedge and tree planting outwith and adjacent to the western and southern boundaries of the application site shall be undertaken and completed in accordance with soft landscaping works which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall include: i. indication of existing trees and hedges to be removed, those to be retained and, in the case of damage, proposals for their restoration ii. location of new trees and hedges iii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density iv. new planting in the area highlighted in red on 'Sketch 5' attached to the planning approval to be undertaken in accordance with the Landscape Planting Schedule attached v. programme for subsequent maintenance. Reason: To enable the proper form and layout of the development and the effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.”

Grounds of Appeal: Ground 1: The area of woodland planting sought outwith the application site is not fairly and reasonably linked to the nature and scale of the development and is in excess of that required to satisfy planning policy requirements. Ground 2: The planting schedule proposed by Scottish Borders Council contains some non native and inappropriate species which are not suited to the site or wider landscape and is therefore unreasonable.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations

Reporter’s Decision: Sustained in part. Summary of Decision: The Reporter, Ronald W Jackson, concluded that the position of the Council in terms of the need for a substantial area of planting was sound. The extent and nature of planting required by the Council was not unreasonable. The appeal was sustained in part only in so far as the Reporter introduced minor changes to the wording of the condition imposed by the Council.

3.1.3 Reference: 09/00225/OUT Proposal: Erection of managers dwellinghouse, stable blocks, horse exerciser and pool Site: Land west of Newmill House, Slitrig, Hawick Appellant: Mr A Whillans

Reasons for Refusal: The proposed development is contrary to Policy H8 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan Alteration (2008), Policy D2 of the Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan (2008) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance on New Housing in the Borders Countryside (2008), in that the site is outwith any recognised settlement or building group and the need for the house has not been adequately substantiated, and that, accordingly, the proposed development would represent a sporadic form of development in the open countryside.

Grounds of Appeal: The need for the development was adequately demonstrated and the appeal site is sufficiently well related to the existing building group as to enable the provision of the managers dwelling as an addition to that group.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations

Reporter’s Decision: Sustained.

Summary of Decision: The Reporter, Ronald W Jackson, concluded that the proposed site would relate as well to the existing building group as other buildings in the vicinity. He also concluded that the existing house and alternative sites within the area would not meet the essential criteria required to meet the requirements of the British Horseracing Authority which require to be met if the applicant is to retain his training licence.

3.2 Enforcements

Nil

Note: An appeal previously reported and relating to a site at Knowepark Gardens, Galashiels has subsequently been deemed by the DPEA to be out of time.

4 APPEALS OUTSTANDING

4.1 In addition to that listed in section 2 of this report, there remained 2 appeals previously reported on which decisions were still awaited when this report was prepared on 2 April. These relate to sites at:

x Bowden Stand Dam x Huddersfield Street, Galashiels

5 REVIEW REQUESTS RECEIVED

5.1 Reference: 09/01408/FUL Proposal: Erection of Dwellinghouse Site: Plot 3, Land south and south east of Smithy Cottage, Westruther. Appellant: Mr & Mrs T Walker Reasons for Refusal: The proposed development is contrary to Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Policy G8 - Development Outwith Development Boundaries, in that the site lies outwith the development boundary and the need for a dwellinghouse at this location has not been adequately substantiated.

5.2 Reference: 09/01123/PPP Proposal: Erection of Dwellinghouse and two agricultural buildings and formation of associated access. Site: Land north east of Applecross, Pyatshaw, Lauder. Appellant: David Magahy

Reasons for Refusal: The proposed development would be contrary to Approved Scottish Borders Structure Plan Policy H8 and Adopted Scottish Borders Local Plan Policy D2, and contrary to the advice of the New Housing in the Borders Countryside Supplementary Planning Guidance note (December 2008) in that the site lies out with any recognised settlement or building group, and the need for the new farmhouse has not been adequately substantiated.

5.3 Reference: 09/00960/FUL Proposal: Siting of caravan (retrospective) Site: Field no 0328, Kirkburn, Cardrona. Appellant: A Cleghorn

Reasons for Refusal: The development is contrary to Scottish Borders Adopted Local Plan Policies G1 – Quality Standards for New Development and D1 – Business, Tourism and Leisure Development in the Countryside as a caravan at this location is not compatible with nor respects the character of the surrounding area and there is no justifiable economic or operational need for accommodation at this site

6 REVIEWS DETERMINED

6.1 Reference: 08/01844/OUT Proposal: Erection of Dwellinghoues Site: Land at Eshiels Recreation Hall, Peebles Appellant: Glentress Recreation Club

Reasons for Refusal: The proposed erection of a dwellinghouse on this site would be contrary to Policy Inf12 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2008 and Policy C4 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2011 in that it would result in the loss of public infrastructure and a public facility. The existing recreation hall provides opportunities for social well being and inclusion in a rural area and the loss of this public facility would have a significant adverse effect on the sustainability and viability of the Eshiels Community.

Method of Review: Review of papers.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer upheld.

6.2 Reference: 09/01157/FUL Proposal: External Redecoration (retrospective) Site: Old Bakehouse, Main St, West Linton Appellant: Fiona Ingram

Reasons for Refusal: The development is contrary to policies N18 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan (2001-2011) and policies G1 and BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan (2008), in that the painting of the external sandstone frontage is harmful to the character and appearance of the historic building and the surrounding Conservation Area. Method of Review: Review of papers.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer overturned and permission granted subject to a condition requiring minor changes to the external painting scheme.

6.3 Reference: 09/01156/FUL Proposal: Replacement Windows Site: 2A Crossland Crescent, Peebles Appellant: Nicola Page

Reasons for Refusal: The proposal would be contrary to Policy N18 of Scottish Borders Structure Plan, Policies G1 and BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan, and Supplementary Planning Guidance on Replacement Window, in that the installation of uPVC replacement windows would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Method of Review: Review of papers.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer varied and permission granted subject to a condition allowing replacement windows to the less prominent elevations of the property.

7 REVIEWS OUTSTANDING

7.1 In addition to those listed in section 5 of this report, there remained 1 review previously reported on which decisions were still awaited when this report was prepared on 2 April. These relate to sites at:

x Land north of Hownam School

NB. A previous request for a review relating to Land South West of Carnethy, Medwyn Rd, West Linton is no longer before the Local Review Body as a result of the applicant’s decision to appeal to the DPEA against the Review Body’s failure to determine the review within 2 months.

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

This report has been signed by the Head of Planning and Building Standards and the signed copy is retained by the Council.

Author(s) Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Building Standards

Background Papers: None. . Previous Minute Reference: None. Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Alison Clifton can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.

Contact us at Planning and Economic Development, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells TD6 0SA Tel. No. 01835 825407 Fax No. 01835 825158 Email : [email protected]