Planning Application: 09/00883/Ful

PLANNING APPLICATION: 09/00883/FUL

In the event that a recommendation on this planning application is overturned the Committee is reminded of the advice contained on the front page of the agenda for Reports on Applications

The Proposal

• Application (as amended) to form road layout and access for a Business Park at Barmuckity (amended drawing L (00) 41 C refers) • Road layout/site to be developed in two phases – Phase One and Two comprise land areas to the east and west of Moss of Barmuckity Road/Barmuckity Farm respectively. • Initially, access to business park (Phase One) from a new priority junction off the existing Moss of Barmuckity Road, approx. 80 m south of the existing A96/U123 Moss of Barmuckity Road junction. • Thereafter, new 4-arm roundabout access junction to be constructed on the A96, approx. 340 m to the east of existing junction, which will also incorporate the existing Elginshill Road junction. The road extending off the southern arm of the new roundabout will be used to serve the whole business park area (Phase One and Two). With operation of the new roundabout, the existing junction onto the A96 will be closed to all traffic except emergency vehicles. • The internal roads within Phase One incorporate a 7.3 m wide carriageway and 3 m footway (both sides). The main site access road extending off the roundabout has a 7.3 m wide carriageway (plus 3.5 m ghost island) plus 2 m verges and 3 m footways (both sides). This road ends at another new roundabout to be formed within the site along the southern boundary to the south-east of Barmuckity Farm. A “Link to potential Future By-pass” is then indicated, with a route extending off the southern arm of this internal roundabout over the railway onto land beyond. • Within Phase One, finished levels of roads to be at or just above (300 mm) existing ground level. • No details are included about the location, number and range of uses and/or sizes and design/layout of development plots and buildings. Unlike the original layout plan, the amended details no longer identify areas and possible land-uses (for example, office, industrial, starter business, commercial, hotel and public building uses) and proposed landscaping features (for example, structure planting, parkland and detention ponds, etc). However, within Phase Two, an “approx. location of possible water feature” is indicated. • A Drainage Assessment (DA), Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and an Assessment of Junction Capacities (AJC) document have been submitted, the latter in support of the amended application details (see Objections/Representations).

The Site

• Approx. 54 ha site located to east of Elgin and to south of the A96 trunk road. • Site is split into two parts, located on either side of the existing U123E Moss of Barmuckity Road. This road leads off the existing A96/U123E Moss of Barmuckity junction and leads to/from Barmuckity Cottages, Barmuckity Farm and beyond. • Site bounded to the north by the A96 road and agricultural land beyond (part of which will be used in conjunction with Elgin Flood Alleviation Scheme), to the west by the Linkwood Burn and residential development at Waulkmill/Linkwood East, to the south by the Aberdeen – Inverness railway line and to the east by an existing watercourse, Moss of Barmuckity and agricultural land. • Site currently in agricultural use and is highly visible from the A96, and bounded by fencing or planting and contained by the railway embankment/cutting along the southern boundary. Towards the north west corner (in Phase Two), the land is low lying and prone to flooding. Barmuckity Farm is set on a small knoll of land slightly elevated above the rest of the site. • An overhead electricity line crosses north-south through Phase Two to west of Barmuckity Farm/Cottages, and a line of existing pylons which in part run parallel to the A96 cross west-east through Phase One. Both supply lines are to be retained. • The site is designated in the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008 as Elgin BP1 Barmuckity.

Policy / Objections-Representations / Consultations - See Appendix

History 09/00287/SCN – Screening Opinion issued 20 April 2009 for a proposed Barmuckity Business Park. This confirmed the proposal is a ‘Schedule 2 development’, under the 1999 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations and with no significant environmental effects likely to arise, no formal EIA required. However, environmental issues associated with transport, landscape and flooding to be addressed within the application.

December 2008 – Elgin BP1 Barmuckity Business Park designated within the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008. The conclusions from the Local Plan Inquiry in 2008, confirmed BP1 as the preferred site for a business park development, however detailed flood issues and access arrangements would require to be addressed at the detailed application stage. In addition, the development was not dependent on any by-pass route option but could be adapted, if necessary, to take account of any Elgin by-pass and a landscape scheme was required to screen and mitigate the development on the site.

Advertisement Amended proposals (April/May 2011) advertised for neighbour notification purposes.

Observations This application is to form a road layout and access for a business park at Barmuckity. As amended, the proposals retain the two-phase approach to developing the site but reverse the phasing of the development. Land to the east of Barmuckity Farm will now be developed first. The access arrangements are reduced from four to two stages i.e. initial use of existing A96 junction and later, use new roundabout on A96 to serve the whole business park area (both Phases).

Information indicating possible locations/areas and types of proposed land use and strategic landscaping have been omitted from the amended site layout drawing L (00) 41C. This indicates the proposed phased areas for development and the extent of the proposed road layout and flood plain areas within the site (for 1 in 200 year event level). For Phase One, additional drawings include a design for the new roundabout and cross and long-section details. The latter confirm the extent of land raising where, within flood plain areas, road levels are set no higher than existing road levels and outwith the flood plain, the highest land raising is 300mm above existing ground level with no embankments or ground works encroaching into the flood plain area to the east of the site. No details regarding road levels/land raising are included for Phase Two.

The amended details follow from earlier consideration of the proposal and after a workshop facilitated by Scottish Government and attended by the applicant’s representatives and several consultees to address outstanding issues in particular flooding and transportation. These remain key issues in determining the application.

Development on Elgin BP1 Barmuckity Business Park (Elgin BP1, Policy 1a, ED4, ED3, ED2) ‘In principle’ support for a business park at Barmuckity is given by the local plan designation, Elgin BP1. This designation supports the structure plan strategy (Policy 1a), fulfils a stated objective of the Elgin settlement statement and was informed by an earlier review of the development plan (including the Local Plan Inquiry) and a local economic development strategy. As a strategic priority, the latter identified that a business park be formed in Elgin to assist with economic development and regeneration.

From Policy ED4 and the supporting justification, business parks are intended to attract new/modern enterprise, assist in attracting inward investment and accommodating users requiring a higher amenity/environmental setting than that available on industrial sites e.g. officers, call centres and high technology uses, and provide a location for non-retail commercial enterprises who do not require a town centre location. Developments which adversely impact on the high amenity environment will not be permitted. The Elgin BP1 designation also includes provision for industrial use (location/amount not specified) and Policy ED3 indicates uses that would be suitable or appropriate on industrial land.

In relation to the Elgin BP1 designation, the proposal will provide a road layout and access arrangement to facilitate and stimulate development on the business park. Considerations about the nature and suitability of any proposed use, including the extent to which uses identified in policy ED4 are realised and design/layout issues for the site overall and for each plot (including those identified in ED2) cannot be addressed at this stage. These matters are not included in application and will require to be considered in any future applications for development proposed on the site.

The proposal takes account of certain aspects of the designation where subject to details, the “water feature” (in Phase Two), over part of the site prone to flooding, may contribute to the requirement to keep that area free of development and provide an environmental/high amenity setting for the park. As required, a FRA has been submitted (see below) but whereas the local plan envisages how this business park can be best advanced, including outside agency involvement in promoting/marketing the site, etc no development brief or masterplan has been prepared.

With limited information presented, the amended site layout plan does not fulfil any expectations of a ‘masterplan’ to guide the overall development of the site. The submitted layout establishes a framework or network of roads extending through the site. This network is unsupported by other details indicating, for example, the range and location of possible uses, size of plots available, landscaping, flooding and drainage requirements etc. (see below) which might inform the overall design and layout of the site. Without prejudice, in the absence of any development brief or masterplan, there remains the potential for development to progress in a piecemeal and un-co-ordinated manner. This may require further amendment of the road layout once individual development proposals come forward.

Given the extensive site and with the revised phasing arrangement, development on Phase One to the east of Barmuckity Farm will, at least initially, appear detached and separated from existing development in Elgin by the Phase Two area which will not be developed until various issues are addressed.

Flooding (Elgin BP1, EP7, EP6, IMP1) The FRA indicates that approx 50% of the site is at risk of flooding (1 in 200 year return period) including land along the eastern (Moss of Barmuckity) boundary within Phase One, and a large part of the lower lying, Phase Two area. In addition, the A96 and land on either side of the existing A96/Moss of Barmuckity Road junction are liable to flood, as is the area between that junction and Barmuckity Cottages through which access to the park will be taken.

The FRA asserts that the development, including road construction and raising land to a level outwith the flood plain is likely to have a minimal impact on flood storage capacity and the downstream area. This is not accepted by SEPA, such work being contrary to national (SPP (2010)) and local (EP7) policy, and any changes in ground level from the existing situation could have an adverse impact on flood risk to development elsewhere, by raising flood levels in the vicinity or by altering flood mechanisms in the area. The basis of SEPA’s continued objection to the proposal is that until further investigation work has been undertaken to identify suitable measures to address flooding, no changes should be made to the current situation which could have impacts that have not been understood, nor addressed in the current FRA. Through the workshop and subsequent discussions, it was established that the objection can be addressed through further information and/or by suspensive conditions requiring further investigation before development commences within any area liable to flood especially in Phase Two.

As noted, the amended details have reversed the phasing arrangements. Phase One is now land to the east of Barmuckity Farm. This will allow an earlier start on forming the road access infrastructure and to stimulate development on the park thereafter. This is the area least affected by flooding although parts of the area are at risk of inundation. Subject to all road development activity being located outwith the defined flood area, no further investigations are required to address flood risk.

Within Phase One, land along the Moss of Barmuckity watercourse is at risk of flooding. However, to address SEPA’s concerns, the amended layout details indicate that no “water engineering” works are proposed, for example re-alignment of this watercourse, nor are any other flood investigations required because no part of the road network encroaches into the flood plain, including any embankment or groundworks associated with raising the road 300mm above ground level.

For Phase One, land at the site access is liable to inundation i.e. in the vicinity of the new priority junction off the existing Moss of Barmuckity Road into the site, and also between this new access and the existing A96 junction. In discussions, SEPA have advised that they would not object if the roads are kept at existing level. The section details as submitted confirm that this is the case.

In light of the amended details and subject to conditions as recommended, SEPA’s objection to development within Phase One (as amended) has been satisfied and there are no outstanding objections to the development of Phase One road/access arrangements in terms of flood risk. However, proposals for individual developments within Phase One which encroach into flood plain areas will be required to address the impact of flooding both to the development itself and the surrounding area.

However, land in the vicinity of the A96 junction is already liable to flood. The proposals for Phase One will not alter that situation and all road levels will be at existing ground levels. Access/egress will be difficult during periods of flooding for users of the development and also for emergency vehicles and other existing premises in the vicinity, and sections of the A96 road itself flood on either side of the existing junction. This situation is likely to remain until at least implementation of the Elgin FAS and works within Phase Two to address and reduce flood risk. The Transportation Manager has indicated that future applications will have to demonstrate that the risk of flooding is mitigated whether by a second access being available that is not at risk of flooding or that changes are made in the road design to remove the risk of flooding.

In Phase Two, to the west of Barmuckity Farm, a significant length of road network is within, or immediately abuts, the flood plain area. Based on the workshop and subsequent discussion between SEPA, MFA and the applicant, the agreed approach is not to commence construction of development, including the road layout in Phase Two until the final layout and area available for development within Phase Two has been established.

This will be informed by a (further) FRA to develop the best options to manage flood risk on the site and allow any further work on the Linkwood Burn to be considered, for example diversion of the Linkwood Burn through the site incorporating the proposed water feature and culverts under the A96 Moss of Barmuckity and A96 roads. (According to SEPA, the alternative of land raising and canalisation of the Linkwood Burn is unlikely to receive CAR authorisation and could have a detrimental impact on the Elgin FAS). Any “water engineering” proposals affecting the existing watercourse would require evidence, based on a range of matters in a report required under policy EP6, to demonstrate that the arrangements will work in terms of flood risk, ground water impacts, fish migration, river hydrogeology and that there will be no impact elsewhere, including downstream. As part of the required report, the impact on otters needs to be addressed, as required by SNH.

In order to address SEPA’s objection and other consultee requirements, a suspensive condition is recommended to prevent construction of development, including the proposed road network within Phase Two until options to manage flood risk in that area have been addressed. As in Phase One, road construction related activity, including temporary storage of materials etc. should not be located within the flood plain area of Phase Two.

Drainage (EP5, EP10, IMP1M EP7) Apart from indicating off-site public foul drainage connections, the drainage strategy in the DA includes on-site disposal of surface water run-off using SUDS. SEPA has previously confirmed that the proposed two levels of treatment required for the development are acceptable. No details regarding the actual type, location, design construction specifications or time-scale for provision for each drainage measure is included, including infiltration drains as proposed for roads drainage. No new or further drainage information is presented within the amended proposals. A condition requiring such details is recommended, to include both construction and final SUDS arrangements as required by MFA and SEPA.

Whilst satisfied that there is enough land outwith the 1 in 200 year flood plain areas adjacent to the road network to accommodate SUDS, SEPA previously required SUDS to be located outwith the flood plain, as they would not be adequately operational within it. SEPA now advise that SUDS can be accommodated on the functional flood plain if they do not alter flood plain storage or functionality, if no alternative arrangements are possible and if they are not within at least the 30 year return period level. A condition and an informative about SUDs are recommended to allow SEPA to remove its objection based on the current lack of information regarding SUDS.

Transportation, including access (Elgin BP1, T1, T2, T4, IMP1, MP3 and Elgin TSP2) Policy T2 requires new development to be served by appropriate infrastructure with safe and suitable access arrangements and it presumes against new accesses onto a trunk road. As proposed, the initial access to the park/Phase One will be off the existing A96/Moss of Barmuckity Road junction and once a defined threshold (or trigger) based on the cumulative level of trips using that junction are exceeded, a new roundabout will be formed on the A96. The roundabout access will then become the site access for the business park (Phases One and Two) with closure of the existing junction except for emergency access. From the workshop discussions, further information was required to assess the capacity of the existing and proposed access junctions plus design details for the new roundabout and the main access road through the site.

In terms of trunk road interests, Transport Scotland has not objected to the proposals subject to conditions and informatives as recommended. Rather than presume against it, the principle of the proposed new 4-arm roundabout junction on the A96 has been accepted, the BP1 site being designated in the local plan and intended to encourage regeneration, although further details of the roundabout are required to ensure compliance with current design requirements. Having assessed junction capacities, and as recommended by Transport Scotland, the roundabout must be formed when the cumulative level of vehicle trips from development on the business park exceed 300 two-way movements. This threshold/trigger will act to constrain the progress of development on the business park until the roundabout has been built and made available for use.

With operation of the new roundabout the existing junction onto the A96 will require to be closed except for emergency vehicles at the trunk road boundary, as required by Transport Scotland. This will require formal statutory procedures to be undertaken to promote closure. The location of the closure required by Transport Scotland is different to that identified by the applicant i.e. south of the A96 junction but just north of the new priority access junction into the business park on the U123E Moss of Barmuckity Road. With closure, access to Barmuckity Farm and Cottages, and other premises will still be possible but it will involve a less direct and more circuitous route through the business park.

In terms of local road interests, the Transportation Manager has not objected to the proposals subject to conditions and informatives as recommended. The latter acknowledge that as an application for roads only, future applications for development within the site must include a Transport Assessment and details of pedestrian and cycle network connections internally and to the existing surrounding network and public transport infrastructure. The latter requirement would also address requirements identified by the Access Manager. Requirements for statutory procedures to be undertaken are identified, in particular the promotion and implementation of an Order to prohibit HGV movements on the Moss of Barmuckity Road. Given that the end uses/users of the site are unknown at present, the informatives are indicative and others may be identified when future applications are assessed.

The design of the road layout will be given detailed consideration as part of the separate Roads Construction Consent process although any amendments arising will require to be re-assessed in planning terms. A condition is recommended requiring a method statement to describe how the internal road network will be progressed across the site. In addition, and reflecting advice for example in Designing Streets about the need to safeguard future connections between the site and adjoining land, there are requirements to reserve a corridor of land to facilitate access to land to the east, and also along the main access road off the new roundabout, to allow for any road extending south over the railway line and beyond (see drawing TMC1 appended to consent and condition 10). The latter route has been considered against design criteria for a distributor road and considered capable of crossing the railway line with the necessary clearance.

Indeed, the amended drawings refer to the projected line of the main access road as a “Link to potential Future Bypass”. This is not part of the application nor is there any commitment to the route as described. The function of the main access route off the new roundabout is solely to serve the business park: any future purpose remains to be determined.

The amended drawings make no mention of, nor identify the reserved line of the Elgin TSP2 By-pass Corridor (south option), extending south-west from the existing A96/Moss of Barmuckity Road junction through the Phase Two area of the site. If implemented, this route will bisect the Phase Two area, requiring alternative arrangements to/from the land between the TSP2 line and the Linkwood Burn.

Although studies indicate high costs but significant economic and social benefits from implementing an Elgin bypass, there is no commitment to a bypass from Scottish Government after a strategic review rejected such a proposal in 2008. However, the route remains identified in the adopted local plan, albeit as a reserved line with the corridor being indicative of the route and not an engineered line. To safeguard rather than prejudice the TSP2 route, and before any development is commenced on Phase Two including the road layout, the required investigations within Phase Two should also take account of the requirements to accommodate the TSP2 alignment, as recommended by the Transportation Manager.

Other than to safeguard the TSP2 route, and reserve a corridor along the main access road to enable access, if required, beyond the site at some future date, it is not – nor should it be - the function of this application to determine whether, as an alternative to the TSP2 alignment, a route such as the “Link” should act as a by-pass or some other peripheral route around Elgin: this is a matter which should form part of any review of the development plan. As noted at the local plan inquiry, the business park is not dependent on any by-pass option but it can be adapted to take account of any Elgin by-pass and the safeguarding of “corridors” help to achieve this.

Other Considerations Following consultation, other conditions and/or informatives are recommended to address various interests. The application, as submitted, pre-dates the introduction of assessment for developer contributions by the Planning Gain Unit. An application for a road layout per se is not a development type that would be subject to assessment. In the absence of any masterplan to provide an overall assessment, any contributions will require to be determined during assessment of any individual proposals for development on the site.

Conclusion and recommendation The application pre-dates changes in legislation and although classed as a major application it pre-dates the requirements for pre-application consultation. No pre-determination hearing is required because the proposal is not significantly contrary to the development plan. The proposal is considered to comply with policy for the reasons noted above and subject to conditions as recommended.

The proposal provides access and road layout arrangements to serve a designated business park and to stimulate its development with further applications to follow. The business park is split into two Phases of development. The proposed road network will also be progressed in two phases, from use of an existing junction to a new roundabout. Planning conditions are recommended in particular to address flooding and transportation issues associated with the development, and to enable the development to progress in a phased manner, although no development including the road layout should commence on Phase Two pending further investigation of flood risk and other issues.

Approval is recommended.

Gordon Sutherland Planning and Economic Development Manager

Author/Contact Officer: Angus Burnie Ext: 01343 563242 Principal Planning Officer

APPENDIX

POLICY

Moray Structure Plan 2007 and/or Moray Local Plan 2008

Policy 1: Development and Community

The policy set out below identifies the strategic community development requirements for the delivery of the structure plan strategy-

The Moray Structure Plan Strategy will be supported by:

a) the identification within the local plan of the business and industrial land allowances set out in Schedule 1 and the provision of strategic business locations at Elgin and Forres Enterprise Park and business park opportunities at Buckie, Keith and Lossiemouth;

b) the encouragement of tourism development opportunities;

c) the identification within the Local Plan of the housing allowances set out within Schedule 2;

d) the provision of affordable housing in association with new housing development where a demand is identified in the Local Housing Strategy;

e) the encouragement of low impact, well-designed development in the countryside to support local communities and rural businesses;

f) sustaining the vitality and viability of town centres through the support of opportunities and proposals for retail and commercial development in accordance with the sequential approach;

g) promotion of the strategic transport links as set out in Proposal 2;

h) the protection and enhancement and new provision of facilities for community use, healthcare, sport and recreation;

i) the inclusion within Local Plans of a policy requiring appropriate developer contributions towards healthcare and other community facilities.

Policy 2: Environment and Resources

The Moray Structure Plan Strategy will be supported by: -

a) protecting international, national and local nature conservation and scenic designations from inappropriate development;

b) protecting the wider natural environment and local biodiversity from inappropriate development and promote opportunities for environmental enhancement and restoration where possible; c) working in partnership with the Cairngorms National Park Authority and other interested parties to implement the objectives of the National Park; d) restricting development within coastal areas outwith settlements to only that in which social and economic benefits outweigh environmental impact; e) providing protection from development to the countryside around the towns of Elgin, Buckie, Keith, Forres and Lossiemouth; f) conserving and enhancing the areas built heritage resources and their settings; g) supporting proposals aimed at regenerating the area’s natural and built environment including good design; h) providing waste management facilities to deliver Area Waste Plan and National Waste Plan objectives and ensuring that new development is designed to facilitate waste management practices and promotes the minimisation of waste; i) promoting sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) in all new developments; j) promoting schemes to alleviate flooding in a sustainable and sensitive way using natural ecosystems and features where possible and also restricting development within flood risk areas following the guidance set out in the Risk Framework in SPP7: ‘Planning and Flooding’ and promoting flood risk management schemes to tackle flooding that threatens existing development and considering development proposals against the Flood Risk Framework set out in Table 5; k) safeguarding the area from pollution and contamination; l) promoting opportunities for the sensitive development of renewable energy and promoting renewable energy in new development; m) safeguarding resources for the production of minerals, preferred forestry areas, and prime agricultural land.

BP1 Barmuckity The Report ‘Moray Towns Promotion and Development’ has identified the Barmuckity Farm site to the east of Elgin as a preferred location for the provision of a significant area with potential as a Business Park location. In addition, provision will be made for industrial use within part of BP1.

This is a high profile site in close proximity to the established business, commercial, and industrial areas, which has the potential to provide a strong focus with good access, all of which are vital to a successful development.

The western area, whilst closer to existing development, is prone to flooding whilst the eastern part is largely free of flooding. Such areas will be kept free from development and used to provide an environmental/high amenity setting for the park.

Proposals must satisfy the requirements of this Development Plan, in relation to flood mitigation measures. A detailed flood risk assessment will be required for any planning application that is submitted for this site.

TSP2 Bypass Corridor (South option) Line reserved - See (CAT map)

South Side Road Improvements The current Plan continues to link the designation of development land in the south of the town, with road improvements designed to ease traffic circulation in and around New Elgin. The release of significant land holdings in the Barmuckity/Linkwood area is conditional upon specified road works being carried out, which will both improve traffic flows across the periphery of the town (from the A941 Rothes road to the A96 Fochabers road and from the periphery of the town centre). The linkages into the town centre are designed to relieve the present congested route of New Elgin Main Street, and ultimately to provide additional railway crossings to remove the pressure from the single adequate bridge between the Laich Moray and Edgar Road roundabouts.

ED1: Supply of Employment Land

New employment land allocations are identified in the settlement statements to ensure an adequate supply of land over the 5 year period of the Local Plan and beyond, designations within the main towns should provide:

Elgin: an additional 10-15 hectares over and above existing provision.

Forres: an additional 5-10 hectares over and above existing provision for general industrial use.

Buckie: an additional 5 hectares over and above existing provision.

Keith: an additional 5 hectares over and above existing provision.

Other locations: provision of up to 2 hectares according to local demand and availability of appropriate sites.

ED2: Development of New Employment Land

The development of new employment land will require to satisfy the following requirements: i. Road Access: Roads should be constructed to Moray Council standards for adoption, and provision made for on site and off site parking. Layout proposals should provide for pedestrian and cycle links, and provide options for linking with public transport services (e.g. by the provision of bus stops/shelters) where appropriate. ii. Drainage: Foul water will require to be taken to the public sewer. Surface water drainage should incorporate appropriate sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) which should be operational for the lifetime of the development. Due to the potential for pollution to run off water from spillage e.g. oil, drains may require to be trapped as advised by SEPA/Scottish Water.

iii. Landscaping: Requirements for individual sites will be specified in more detail in the relevant settlement designation. Proposals should address issues such as screening, sound barriers, treatment at boundaries, and the general visual appearance of the site. Details of maintenance arrangements will be required in respect of landscaped areas. iv. Design: Where site frontages are highly visible a high standard of design of buildings and layout of yard, storage areas and parking must be incorporated. v. Designing Out Crime: New estates should be designed so that they provide deterrents to crime by ensuring sufficient lighting, planting and boundary treatments. Consultation with the Local Authority Liaison Officer will be carried out for all new proposals.

vi. Natural Environment: Provision will have to be made to ensure appropriate protection for the natural environment and the use of enhanced opportunities for the natural heritage and integration to adjacent lands.

vii. Waste Management: Provision should be made for the collection, segregation and management of waste. Where this is not being provided on a communal basis such provision will be sought on individual sites when applications for planning permission are submitted.

Policy ED3: Business Uses on Industrial Estates

Recognised industrial estates will be primarily reserved for uses defined by Classes 4 (Business); 5 (General Industrial) and 6 (Storage or Distribution) of the Use Classes Order 1997. Some activities within Class 5 may be considered inappropriate for environmental reasons (e.g. noise, dust, vibration or fumes) and will not be permitted.

Shops and outright retail activities will not be allowed; the only retailing permissible will be that which is considered to be ancillary to some other activity (e.g. manufacture; wholesale). For the purposes of this policy, ancillary is taken as being linked directly to the existing use of the unit and comprising no more than 10% of total floor area up to a total of 1,000 square metres gross.

Class 2 (Financial, Professional Services), Class 11 (Assembly and Leisure), and activities which do not fall within a specific use class will be considered in relation to their suitability to the industrial estate concerned, and the available supply of employment land.

ED4: Business Parks

Business parks accommodate uses which require a higher amenity/environmental setting than is available on an industrial estate, and may include commercial activities e.g. offices, call centres and high technology uses. Development that adversely impacts on the high amenity environment of a business park will not be permitted.

Business Parks are identified within the Plan at Forres Enterprise Park, and Barmuckity and Riverview at Elgin. Smaller scale business parks are identified at Buckie, Keith and Lossiemouth.

T1: Transport Infrastructure Improvements

The Council will promote the improvement of road, rail, air and sea routes in Moray and priority will be given to:

a. dualling the A96 Aberdeen to Inverness route, including bypasses at Elgin, Fochabers/Mosstodloch and Keith.

b. improving the A95 (Keith to Aberlour), A941 (Lossiemouth to Elgin to Craigellachie) and A98 (Fochabers to Cullen) routes.

c. improving the Aberdeen to Inverness railway for passengers and freight by providing additional passing opportunities.

d. improving harbour facilities for freight and leisure.

e. improving access to air facilities, in particular through public transport

Proposals that compromise the implementation of these priorities will not be acceptable.

SPP17 details that there will be a presumption against new accesses onto a trunk road, and that the Scottish Executive will consider the case for such junctions where nationally significant economic growth or where regeneration benefits can be demonstrated.

Policy T2: Provision of Road Access The Council will require that a suitable and safe road access from the public highway is provided to serve new development and where appropriate any necessary modifications to the existing road network to mitigate the impact of development traffic, and the provision of appropriate facilities for public transport, cycling, and pedestrians. Access proposals that have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding landscape and environment that cannot be mitigated will be refused.

T4: Bus, Rail and Harbour Facilities

The Council will promote the improvement of the bus, rail and harbour facilities within Moray. Development proposals that may compromise the viability of these facilities will not be acceptable.

T7: Cycling, Walking and Equestrian Networks

The Council will promote the improvement of the cycling, walking, equestrian and motorised sport path networks within Moray. It will give priority to the path networks and to long distance routes including the Aberdeen to Inverness National Cycle Route and the Speyside Way. Development proposals that adversely impact on the routes and cannot be adequately mitigated will not be acceptable.

Dependant on funding the Council will examine the possibility of an extension of the Elgin to Lhanbryde footpath network.

E1: Natura 2000 Sites and National Nature Conservation Sites

Natura 2000 Designations

Development likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site will be subject to an appropriate assessment. Where an assessment is unable to conclude that a development will not adversely affect the integrity of the site, development will only be permitted where:- a. there are no alternative solutions; and b. there are imperative reasons of over-riding public interest. These can be of a social or economic nature, except where the site has been designated for a European priority habitat or species. Consent can only be issued in such cases where the reasons for over- riding public interest relate to human health, public safety, beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment or other reasons subject to the opinion of the European Commission (via Scottish Ministers).

National Designations

Development proposals which will adversely affect Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI’s) or National Nature Reserves will be refused unless the developer proves that: a. the objectives of designation and overall integrity of the site will not be compromised, or b. any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the site has been designated are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance

E2: Local Nature Conservation Sites and Biodiversity

Development proposals which will adversely affect Local Nature Reserves, Sites of Interest to Natural Science, Ancient Long Established or Semi Natural Woodland, raised peat bog, wetlands, protected habitats or species or other valuable local habitats or conflict with the objectives of Local Biodiversity Action Plans will be refused unless it is demonstrated that; a. local public benefits clearly outweigh the nature conservation value of the site, and b. there is no suitable alternative site for the development.

Where there is evidence to suggest that a habitat or species of importance exists on the site, the developer will be required at his own expense to undertake a survey of the site’s natural environment.

Where development is permitted which could adversely affect any of the above designated sites the developer must put in place acceptable mitigation measures to conserve and enhance the site’s residual conservation interest.

Development proposals should protect and where appropriate, create natural and semi natural habitats for their ecological, recreational, landscape and natural habitat values.

E3: Tree Preservation Orders and Controls on Trees

The Council will serve Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) on potentially vulnerable trees which are of significant amenity value to the community as a whole, or trees of significant biodiversity value.

Within Conservation Areas the Council will only agree to the felling of dead, dying, or dangerous trees. Trees felled within Conservation areas or subject to TPO protection should be replaced, unless otherwise agreed with the Council.

The Council may attach conditions on planning consents ensuring that existing trees and hedges are retained or replaced. An applicant will be required to survey and identify those trees to be protected within the development site. A safeguarding distance should be retained between mature trees and proposed developments.

When imposing planting or landscaping conditions on certain developments especially in rural areas, the Council will specify the use of native species of trees and will prioritise the re- establishment and extension of hedgerows and/or shelterbelts.

BE1: Scheduled Ancient Monuments and National Designations

National Designations

Development proposals will be refused where they will adversely affect Scheduled Ancient Monuments and nationally important archaeological sites or their settings unless the developer proves that any significant adverse effect on the qualities for which the site has been designated are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance.

Local Designations

Development proposals which will adversely affect sites of local archaeological importance, or their settings, will be refused unless it can be demonstrated that; a. local public benefits clearly outweigh the archaeological value of the site, and b. there is no suitable alternative site for the development, and c. any adverse effects can be satisfactorily mitigated at the developers expense.

Where, in exceptional circumstances, the primary aim of preservation of archaeological features in situ does not prove feasible, the Council shall require the excavation and researching of a site at the developers expense.

The Council will consult Historic Scotland and the Regional Archaeologist on development proposals which may affect Scheduled Ancient Monuments and archaeological sites.

EP5: Surface Water Drainage: Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS)

Surface water from development should be dealt with in a sustainable manner that avoids flooding and pollution and promotes habitat enhancement and amenity. All sites should be drained by a SUDS system or equivalent. A Drainage Assessment will be required for developments of 10 houses, or greater than 100 sq metres for non residential proposals. Applicants must agree provisions for long term maintenance to the satisfaction of the Council, SEPA and Scottish Water.

EP6: Waterbodies

The Council will approve proposals affecting waterbodies where the applicant provides a satisfactory report that demonstrates that any impact (including cumulative) on river hydrology, sediment transport and erosion, nature conservation, ecological status or ecological potential, fisheries, water quality, quantity and flow rate, recreational, landscape, amenity, and economic and social impact can be adequately mitigated. The report should consider potential impacts up and downstream of the works particularly in respect of potential flooding. Opportunities for the enhancement of biodiversity and nature conservation should be considered. SNH and SEPA will be consulted on proposals.

EP7: Control of Development in Flood Risk Areas

Proposals for development in areas considered to be at risk from flooding will only be permitted where a flood risk assessment to comply with the recommendations of National Guidance and be satisfactory to both SEPA and the Council is provided by the applicant. The assessment must demonstrate that any risk from flooding can be satisfactorily mitigated without increasing flood risk elsewhere. New development should not take place if it would be at significant risk of flooding from any source or would materially increase the possibility of flooding elsewhere. Due to continuing changes in climatic patterns, the precautionary principle will apply when reviewing any application for an area at risk from inundation by floodwater. The following limitations on development will also be applied to take into account the degree of flooding as detailed in National Guidance; a. in areas of little of no risk (less than 0.1%) there will be no general constraint to development. b. areas of low to medium risk (0.1% to 0.5%) will be considered suitable for most development. However, these areas will generally not be suitable for essential civil infrastructure such as hospitals, fire stations, emergency depots etc. Where such infrastructure has to be located in these areas or is being substantially extended, they must be capable of remaining operational and accessible during extreme flooding events. c. in areas of medium to high risk (0.5% or above)

i. in built up areas most development may be acceptable if flood prevention measures exist, are under construction, or are planned.

ii. essential civil infrastructure will generally not be permitted.

iii. undeveloped and sparsely developed areas are generally not suitable for additional development. Exceptions may arise if a location is essential for operational reasons.

Policy EP8: Pollution Planning applications that are subject to significant pollution such as noise, including RAF aircraft noise, air, water and light will only be approved where a detailed assessment report on the levels, character and transmission of the potential pollution is provided by the applicant to show how the pollution can be appropriately mitigated. Where the Council applies conditions to the consent to deal with pollution matters these may include subsequent independent monitoring of pollution levels.

EP9: Contaminated Land

Development proposals on potentially contaminated land will be approved if: a. site specific risk assessments are undertaken by the applicant to identify any actual or possible significant risk to human health or safety, or to the environment and that any previous historic uses are not continuing to cause significant pollution to the water environment, and b. effective remediation measures are agreed to ensure the site is made suitable for any new use granted consent, and c. appropriate measures for the disposal of any contaminated material is agreed with the Council.

The Council will consult SEPA in respect of pollution of controlled waters and licensing issues arising from remediation works.

IMP1: Development Requirements

New development will require to be sensitively sited, designed and serviced appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area. It must meet the following criteria: a. the scale, density and character must be appropriate to the surrounding area, b. the development must be integrated into the surrounding landscape, c. adequate roads, public transport, and cycling and footpath provision must be available, at a level appropriate to the development, d. adequate water, drainage and power provision must be made, e. sustainable urban drainage systems should be used where appropriate, in all new developments f. there must be adequate availability of social, educational, healthcare and community facilities, g. the development should, where appropriate, demonstrate how it will incorporate renewable energy systems and sustainable design and construction. Supplementary Guidance will be produced to expand upon some of these criteria,

h. provision for the long term maintenance of public landscape and amenity areas must be made,

i. conservation of natural and built environment resources must be demonstrated,

j. appropriate provision to deal with flood related issues must be made, including the possibility of coastal flooding from rising sea levels and coastal erosion,

k. pollution, including ground water must be avoided,

l. appropriate provision to deal with contamination issues must be made, and m. the development must not sterilise significant workable reserves of minerals, prime quality agricultural land, or preferred areas for forestry planting.

n. where appropriate, arrangements for waste management should be provided.

Policy IMP2: Development Impact Assessments The Council will require applicants to provide impact assessments in association with planning applications in the following circumstances: a. an Environmental Assessment (EA) will be required for all developments that are likely to have significant environmental affects under the terms of the EA regulations. b. a Transport Assessment (TA) is required for developments that raise significant transport implications such as additional peak hour traffic, traffic late at night in a residential area or road safety concerns. The indicative thresholds contained in the related guidance to SPP17 will be used. However it should be noted that Transport Assessments could be required no matter the size of the site. Moray Council will develop its own thresholds and promote these through Supplementary Guidance which will be subject to stakeholder consultation before adoption. Moray Council's Roads Service can assist in providing a screening opinion on whether a Transport Assessment will be sought. c. a full Retail Impact Assessment (RIA) will be required for all retail proposals of 1000 square metres gross or more outwith designated Town Centres. For smaller developments the Council may require a retail statement to be prepared by the applicant. d. where appropriate, applicants will be asked to carry out other assessments e.g. noise; air quality; flood risk; badger or bat surveys to confirm the compatibility of the development proposal.

Policy IMP3: Developer Contributions Contributions will be sought from developers in cases where, in the Council’s view, a development would have a measurable adverse or negative impact on existing infrastructure, community facilities or amenity, and those contributions would have to be appropriate to reduce, eliminate or compensate for that impact.

Where the necessary contributions can be secured satisfactorily by means of planning conditions attached to a planning permission, this should be done, and only where this cannot be achieved, for whatever reason, the required contributions should be secured through a planning agreement.

OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS

a) Letters received from the following: • Mrs Johanna Chadfield-Fousert, Tower View, Moss of Barmuckity, Elgin IV30 8QW • Mrs E Daniel, Roslyn Cottage, Moss of Barmuckity, Elgin IV309 8QW • A A MacWatt, Whinny Brae, Moss of Barmuckity, Elgin IV309 8QW • Network Rail, Buchanan House, 58 Port Dundas Road, Glasgow G4 0LQ* • Mr W Miles, (by email) • Mr S Pound (by email) • Miss R Ramsbotham (by email)

* Letter does not object to proposal but encloses details of planning and basic engineering comments which have been forwarded to the applicant for attention and consideration.

The main points of the letters are

Location • Proposals would not serve Moray and in detracting from the town, is it in the best interests of Elgin to have more business taken away from the town centre to the outskirts of the town? • In danger of losing an already dying town centre altogether if more business is taken away, including that from unfilled units on The Wards, and Forres Business Park which has proved less successful than first anticipated. We must learn from mistakes not ruin this ‘green belt’. • Area should not be built upon and we should protect our natural environment, wildlife and the historic city and business, not take business out of town. • Cannot see benefits of proposal to Elgin. Given current economic climate and the decline of the town centre and businesses, this development would cause more of the heart of the community to be lost.

Comment: The site is designated as a business park, Elgin BP1 in the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008 having been informed by a review of the development plan and a local economic development strategy where establishing a new business park for Elgin was a strategic priority to address issues relating to economic development and regeneration. The development plan indicates business parks can provide a location for non-retail commercial enterprises who do not require a town centre location.

Local Plan designation • Not aware of the local plan announced in 2008 and (Pound) would have liked to consult the Council on the decision to develop the land around the Cottages. The Council must now inform owners of affected property in writing, but this was not the case in 2008.

Comment: The Elgin BP1 designation formed part of the review of the development plan and was considered at the Local Plan Inquiry. The Council publicised its review and preparation of the development plan at various stages, offering opportunities for comment on the proposals. As the objector indicates, there was no requirement to notify parties of land identified for development whilst preparing the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008.

Flooding • Put application on hold until the Elgin Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) has been completed. The area is prone to major and minor flooding and it would be unsuitable for any business to locate to an area where this is a risk of flooding. • Land at Barmuckity is part of a natural flood plain. Building on it will mean even less places for increased surface water (and higher river levels) to disperse to the River Lossie, which is only a short distance away. The proposal could seriously increase the danger and risk of future flooding in Elgin before the start of any Elgin FAS.

Comment: Approx. 50% of the site is at risk of flooding. The Elgin FAS will reduce the risk of flooding to the site from the River Lossie but any development within the area remains at the risk of flooding from Linkwood Burn and the Moss of Barmuckity. Conditions are recommended to allow development on areas least affected by flooding within Phase One and to preclude development including the road layout from commencing within Phase Two (and similarly within the flood plain of the Moss of Barmuckity) until detailed measures to mitigate and manage the impact of flooding have been agreed.

Traffic and Access • Measures should be put in place to ensure that no additional traffic during and after construction would impact on the existing road through Barmuckity where vehicles possibly consider it as a short cut to the proposed site. • As a winding and narrow road, it is not suitable for further traffic. Several domestic dwellings at the site of the road could suffer structurally. • Need clear and unhindered access to existing homes off the A96, yet this is not clear on the plans, including safety on foot and cycle. • Proposed layout will bring traffic closer to property and have a number of impacts with the road close to cottage and clarification on future access to A96 is requested. • The road will not be as safe with more traffic around and with construction, this will be disruptive through noise, dust smell and even unpassable at times as the new road goes in.

Comment: The existing A96/Moss of Barmuckity Road junction with a new priority junction formed off the latter will be used initially to access the business park. Once traffic levels generated by the development on the park exceed a defined level (or trigger) a new roundabout access junction on the A96 will be constructed to access the business park and the existing junction will be closed off. An Order will be promoted to prohibit HGV movements on the Moss of Barmuckity Road and prior to any road closure the relevant statutory procedures will require to be undertaken.

Initially, there will be increased use over the road section between the A96 and the new junction into the business park. Temporary disruption and disturbance impacts to existing road users will occur during construction and continue with use of the new access road located to the north of Barmuckity Cottages until the new roundabout is constructed and used as the main access to the park, with the existing junction closed off. The recommended method statement should identify measures to minimise these impacts. The location of a proposed road closure on the Moss of Barmuckity Road was identified in the application details available online during the advertisement for the proposal. Whilst subject to statutory procedures to effect closure, Transport Scotland require closure at the boundary of the trunk road. With closure, access to existing premises including Barmuckity Farm and Cottages will involve a less direct, more circuitous route through the business park.

Impact on wildlife • Barmuckity is inhabited by a diverse selection of wildlife, including migrant and native species that regularly nest across the area, hence the area needs to be protected. • Changes in land-use will have a dramatic and devastating impact on local wildlife and natural environment, and risk of pollution (noise, air, surface water, etc.).

Comment: Following consultation, Scottish Natural Heritage has not objected to the proposals. No significant adverse impacts on nature conservation and pollution interests have been identified. Checks for badgers and an otter survey are recommended by SNH.

Future by-pass • ‘Link to any future bypass’ crosses agricultural land which supports a huge diversity of flora and fauna and is very low lying. This would impact dramatically on residents, surface water and drainage. • Not aware that a route had been chosen for a future bypass.

Comment: In the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008, an indicative by-pass corridor (South Option) route is indicated (Elgin TSP2). The corridor is not an engineered road line but is indicative of a route extending south-west through the Phase Two area from the A96/Moss of Barmuckity Road junction. In 2008, following a strategic transport review, the Scottish Government rejected an Elgin by-pass although the route remains designated in the development plan. Although this route is not shown in the amended plans, a “Link to Future bypass” extending south from the site across the railway line is included. In development plan terms, there is no commitment given to this “Link” whether in terms of its location or status.

Impact on Privacy, Loss of light, etc • Clarification required on plans regarding development of land adjacent to the Cottages. Establishing a line of trees to screen the park from the Cottages, will block out natural light, and make the houses seem enclosed and all the things loved about living at Barmuckity will be disrupted then gone, including noise at all hours, dust (affecting ability to hang out washing or enjoy use of garden) andconstruction impacts which will drive small creatures in and around homes, drive birds away, and bring smells from fuel, dust, mud, machinery and litter, also attracting rodents. • If built, natural light will be affected, shortened periods of afternoon sun will make houses cooler, require more heating and no longer able to sit in the garden and enjoy the sunshine. • Loss of privacy and nice views out of window will be diminished by buildings.

Comment: The application is for roads infrastructure only. There are no details about the design/layout of buildings in this proposal, including tree planting. Once the latter are available, it would be appropriate to consider the impact of such proposals on neighbouring property. Loss of view is not a material planning consideration.

Precedent • If granted, difficult to refuse future development as proposal would set a precedent.

Comment: The BP1 designation gives in principle support to the formation and development of a business park at Barmuckity. This current application seeks to provide appropriate and suitable road infrastructure. It will act to stimulate and attract development on the business park. Future applications will be required to progress further development on this park.

Alternative site • Why build here when down the road there is another field that could be used with no people on its land and no one affected? This is a joke with people getting paid to mess up the landscape and ruin people’s lives.

Comment: Regardless of any suggested ‘alternative’ site, the Council is required to determine the current application. A business park at Barmuckity is designated in the local plan.

Proposed Petition • Please stop this build as you will be met with a petition from Barmuckity Farm Cottages and other surrounding properties. Comment: No petition has been submitted.

Location of Septic Tanks • Application does not consider location of septic tank shared by the five Barmuckity Cottages which may conflict with the road layout. An agent acting for the business park has confirmed that the cottages may be able to hook up to the mains sewage supply being put into the business park.

Comment: The application is for a road layout only. Septic tank locations for existing property are not shown nor understood to be located on the alignment of the roads as indicated in the application. It would be more appropriate to consider this issue further once detailed applications for development are proposed in the vicinity of the Cottages.

Other options discussed with Barmuckity Business Park Ltd • Various options discussed with the agent for Barmuckity Business Park Ltd, including a ‘buffer’ between the park and the Cottages to preserve privacy and reduce noise impact, plus giving additional land to the Cottages and an offer to buy out owners of property. The agent indicated that these were not an option at the present time and further investigation would be required to create an embankment to screen off noise and alleviate flooding. A potential additional benefit to the Cottages that may counteract loss of value and rental income would be the capability to hook up to mains gas if supplied to the Business Park.

Comment: These comments refer to discussions held between an objector and the applicant’s representative and include matters to be resolved separately from the planning process. Conditions are recommended to prevent development commencing within Phase Two pending further investigation of flood management options: if an embankment is proposed/ required this should form part of the required investigations.

Reasons for Comment • Other reasons for comment identified include activity at unsociable hours/behaviour, affecting natural environment, drainage, dust, height of proposed development, loss of privacy (being overlooked), noise, over-development of site, reduction of natural light, road access, road safety, smell, traffic and view affected, loss of value of property and litter .

Comment: All representations received in 2011 were submitted online using the Public Access facility where a number of predefined ‘reasons for comment’ can be selected. Not all of the reasons highlighted are substantiated nor are they necessarily applicable to this application which is for a road layout only: some are more relevant in considering any future applications for actual development proposals on the business park in the vicinity of the Cottages. Loss of view and property value are not material planning considerations.

b) Supporting Documents as received from the applicant.

1 ASSESSMENT OF JUNCTION CAPACITIES (AJC) (April 2011) The AJC notes that the proposal is to deliver an access junction and roundabout, and an internal layout to stimulate development on the BP1 site and generate interest from relevant land-uses. The objective is to demonstrate that the proposed access strategy and capacity of the proposed junction layouts are sufficient to cater for the potential development on BP1, and identify the level of trips that could use the existing priority junction onto the A96 before the new roundabout is constructed/operational.

The application excludes land-uses and the road layout itself does not generate traffic. To inform the analysis, base traffic flows in terms of passenger car units for different vehicle types were derived from automatic traffic count information available for the A96. Census 2001 travel to work statistics were used to identify trip distribution, with 58% of all assumed trips from Elgin, and the majority of trips taking access/egress from/to the west.

Barmuckity Farm Access: Based on a junction analysis, development on BP1 in the region of 300–400 two-way trips could utilise the existing priority junction before the new roundabout is required. At that time, the existing junction would be closed off and all access to BP1 would be taken from the roundabout. Additional trips through the existing junction would result in capacity and operational issues. Supporting traffic assessment details including traffic generation and distribution information will require to be included in future applications for developments on BP1, to determine when the new roundabout junction is required.

New A96 Roundabout: The AJC considers that the preliminary roundabout design as submitted reflects the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Vol 6). Given uncertainties over any future routeing of strategic traffic to the south of Elgin, the design aims to maximise capacity within the confines of the existing design criteria and surrounding road infrastructure. The new roundabout uses an existing minor access junction, to provide an improved access to the B9103 and BP1 (and beyond), without the need for a further additional junction, hence the proposal is an efficient solution to deliver the access and minimise the impact of trunk road movements. The roundabout has three circulatory lanes on the west and east approaches, to maximise entry capacity and on the egress from the BP1 site, mainly to facilitate any south Elgin link road traffic. Following analysis, no capacity problems were identified, including the potential for 1000 two-way development trips to be accommodated. The AJC analysis considers this provides sufficient comfort that the roundabout will have sufficient capacity to serve the BP1 site in the long term. (Note: The AJC document replaces an earlier Access Strategy document which was based on the original not the amended proposal and is not been summarised here).

2 FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT (FRA) (August 2009) – The FRA identifies that the site is at risk of flooding in 1 in 200 year return period from the River Lossie, Linkwood Burn and Moss of Barmuckity. If implemented, the Elgin Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) would reduce the risk of flooding to BP1 from River Lossie but it remains at risk from Linkwood Burn and Moss of Barmuckity. With a minimum ‘freeboard’ of 500mm, proposed levels would have to be 10.2m AOD to the west of Barmuckity Farm and 10.9m AOD in the south east corner near the railway line and 10.7m AOD closer to the road to the east of the Farm.

In terms of risk, for areas not within the 1 in 200 year event area but in close proximity to it, water resilient materials and construction methods are advisable. For the remainder of the site, the FRA considers that the site is already a built up area, owing to the development plan designation and the planned Elgin FAS will remove the risk from River Lossie. At the 1 in 200 year return period, the volume of water stored on the floodplain is affected by the development and will also affect overland flows paths across the site, but this impact is considered minimal as the proposal is for construction of access roads within the site.

The FRA notes the development, including road construction may have a detrimental impact on risk of flooding to downstream areas but this is thought likely to be minimal. Raising land to road level to provide the ‘freeboard’ may increase the risk to property downstream but is not considered significant, given the rarity of the event required for such an impact to occur. The risk of flooding to Barmuckity Farm is unlikely to increase and Barmuckity Cottages are already at risk from such an event level. With no pluvial or groundwater flooding at the site it is unlikely the development will have a detrimental impact on neighbouring property. During the 1 in 200 year event the site cannot be accessed from the access point nearest to Elgin but it can be accessed from a second access to the east of the Farm.

The FRA recommends limiting development to areas not at flood risk at the 1 in 200 year return period, however access and egress remains an issue, and for areas at the 1 in 200 year event level, a minimum freeboard allowance of 500mm would be required. In addition, impacts of surface water runoff should be minimised through the adoption of SUDS, and consideration given to flood relief culverts at low points on southern side of A96 (with flap valves to prevent flood water entering the BP1 site from the River Lossie) and a flood wall or embankment constructed along a 100 m length of the Linkwood Burn.

3 DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT (DA) (August 2009) The DA is provided to meet the requirements of policy EP5. There are no existing gravity foul sewers within the site and those adjacent are of insufficient capacity. There are no adopted storm drains within the site. Surface water flows towards the north-west corner of the site, Linkwood Burn and the Moss of Barmuckity.

The drainage strategy includes separate foul and surface water systems the latter incorporating on-site SUDS. For foul water drainage, a pumping station, rising main, on-site foul sewers and off-site connections are proposed. For surface water drainage, SUDS will form an integral part of the development with a minimum of two levels of treatment (or three for all warehouses and workshops). The first will be local soakaways and porous pavements, with linked swales for the second, and detention basins for the third.

In the west of the site, a large water feature with reed beds and detention basins will be formed as a final treatment stage. To the east, detention basins will be formed in north- and south-east corners of the site. Roof water will be disposed of via soak pits and infiltration trenches will be used for disposal of roof water and shallow infiltration drains will be used for roads drainage. The proposed arrangements are considered suitable for the ground conditions, assessed as being relatively high permeability. The detailed design of the drainage network will ensure that the 1 in 200 year storm event and associated overland flows are managed within the development site without causing flooding to buildings or infrastructure.

CONSULTATIONS Environmental Health – informative recommended regarding construction hours and noise/vibration.

Environmental Health, Contaminated Land – informative recommended regarding previous sources of contamination and recommendation to investigate whether ground has been contaminated before work is carried out.

Scottish Water – does not object but approval does not guarantee a connection to Scottish Water infrastructure.

SEPA – OBJECTION maintained on the grounds of lack of information but objection may be removed subject to conditions being attached and for further investigation undertaken (on the Linkwood Burn and Moss of Barmuckity) to identify suitable measures to address flooding, including evidence that proposed flood mitigation measures will work in terms of flood risk, ground water impacts, fish migration, river hydrogeology and with no impact elsewhere. Information required to confirm that no land raising will take place in the flood plain or that roads with associated embankments do not encroach into flood plain. Conditions are recommended to prevent construction of Phase Two for development until road layout agreed, no other development (i.e. storage of materials, etc) within the flood plain, details of SUDs to be provided for each phase and whilst no water course engineering required to implement Phase One, a report (see policy EP6) is required for any water engineering proposals to mange flood risk in Phase Two.

Moray Flood Alleviation – approval recommended subject to conditions. Applicant to demonstrate compliance with SPP, flooding and drainage for whole project. All proposals for SUDs and Flood Risk Management to be submitted and Phase Two not to commence until written acceptance of proposals is given. It is acceptable to commence and complete Phase One provided the applicant can show that Phase One works have no impact on flood risk and SUDs. A construction phase Surface Water Management Plan is required to show that flood risk to neighbouring land is not increased during the construction period.

Scottish Natural Heritage – in relation to the amended plan, and in view of distance involved, no requirement to carry out an otter survey for Phase One. This would also be the case if Phase Two area is not used for storage of materials for processing work, etc during the development of Phase One. If machinery, vehicles, compounds, equipment and materials, etc are to be stored in Phase Two, applicant to carry out an otter survey to establish otter use and identify appropriate mitigation and licensing requirements, or establish and maintain an adequate 50 m buffer zone between any development and Linkwood Burn. An otter survey is a likely requirement for development within Phase Two. As badgers can use field margins, the applicant should ensure that they are not present prior to developing the site.

Archaeology – condition recommended regarding required programme of archaeological investigation.

Transportation Manager - approve subject to conditions including details of method statement on delivery of road layout, plus reservation of corridors to safeguard TSP2 designation and for future connections to/from land to east and south respectively, if required and for proposed SUDs arrangements. Informatives are recommended (and others may be identified in future applications) regarding requirements for a Transport Assessment and details of pedestrian and cycle network connections internally and to existing network and public transport infrastructure to be included in any future applications within BP1. In addition, prior to commencement of any development resulting in cumulative vehicle trips two-way movements at existing A96 junction exceeding 300 two-way movements in peak hour period, new roundabout access to be constructed and existing access from A96 to be closed except for emergency vehicles, plus statutory procedures for road closure to be undertaken and an environmental traffic regulation Order to be implemented to prohibit HGV movement on Moss of Barmuckity Road.

Transport Scotland – conditions required where until 4-arm roundabout has been implemented, the level of any future development using the existing access A96 junction to be restricted to 300 two-way peak hours vehicle trips and on reaching threshold, detailed plans for roundabout to be submitted and approved. Informatives also recommended regarding details of works necessary within the trunk road boundary. The existing junction requires to be closed off except to emergency vehicles at the trunk road boundary so that the local road cannot be used for parking or a layby as this would still allow turning movements to and from the trunk road.

Scottish & Southern Electricity – the site has 33kV wooden pole line and 132kV transmission line crossing it. All site works to be carried out in accordance with relevant Health and Safety note GS6 and an agreed detailed method statement for works in proximity to transmission lines. Assuming all works are carried out in accordance with relevant legislation, no issues with development. Further contact with SSE recommended if looking for quotation for deviating or undergrounding the wooden pole line

Access Manager –approval recommended subject to condition regarding detailed plan of public access within site and off-site connections including core paths, safe cycle links, etc.