Redirecting to East Ayrshire Council
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EAST AYRSHIRE COUNCIL NORTHERN LOCAL PLANNING COMMITTEE 27 JANUARY 2012 08/0922/FL: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING ROADS, FOOTPATHS AND ANCILLARY WORKS - RESUBMISSION - INCLUDING FLOOD PREVENTION WORKS AT MAXHOLM ROAD, RICCARTON, KILMARNOCK, EAST AYRSHIRE BY MAXHOLM DEVELOPMENTS LTD Report by Head of Planning and Economic Development Click for Application Details: http://eplanning.east- ayrshire.gov.uk/online/caseFile.do?category=application&caseNo=08/0922/PFL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHEET 1. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Proposed Residential Development for 90 houses including roads, footpaths and ancillary works. The scheme includes land raising within the site as well as road improvements on Stoneyhill road and Ayr Road. The housing mix consists of 30 semi-detached and 60 detached houses all with private gardens and private driveways. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Planning Application be refused for the reason on the attached sheet. 3. CONCLUSIONS 3.1 As is indicated in Section 5 of the report, the application is considered to be contrary to the development plan. Therefore, given the terms of Section 25 and Section 37 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, the application should be refused unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 3.2 As is indicated in Section 6 above, there are material considerations relevant to this application however the points of raised by the applicant are not of sufficient weight to justify approval of the application contrary to the Development Plan. CONTRARY DECISION NOTE Should the Committee agree that this application should be approved contrary to the recommendation of the head of planning and economic development then the application will require to be referred to full council as it would be a significant departure from council policy. If the application was subsequently approved by the full Council the matter must be notified to the Scottish Ministers due to the SEPA objection. Alan Neish Head of Planning and Economic Development Note: This document combines key sections of the associated report for quick reference and should not in itself be considered as having been the basis for recommendation preparation or decision making by the Planning Authority. EAST AYRSHIRE COUNCIL NORTHERN LOCAL PLANNING COMMITTEE 27 JANUARY 2012 08/0922/FL: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING ROADS, FOOTPATHS AND ANCILLARY WORKS - RESUBMISSION - INCLUDING FLOOD PREVENTION WORKS AT MAXHOLM ROAD, RICCARTON, KILMARNOCK, EAST AYRSHIRE BY MAXHOLM DEVELOPMENTS LTD Report by Head of Planning and Economic Development 1. PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of this report is to present for determination an application for planning permission which is to be considered by the Local Planning Committee under there scheme of delegation as the proposals represent a major development in terms of the Town and Country Planning( Hierarchy of Developments ) (Scotland ) Regulations 2009. 2. APPLICATION DETAILS 2.1 Site Description: The site is poor quality agricultural land which undulates significantly and extends to approximately 8.5 hectares in area. Low lying farmland adjacent to the River Irvine forms the western boundary of the site. The eastern boundary of the site is the, now vacant, Council housing estate of Maxholm Road , Barnwell Road & Fleming Street. The site has a drainage ditch and electric pylons transversing the site from north to south. 2.2 The northern boundary of the site is formed by the A71 bypass between the Bellfield Interchange and the Moorfield Roundabout. This road sits significantly higher than the application site. 2.3 A portion of the site is located within the SEPA 1;200 year flood event maps. 2.4 Proposed Development: Proposed Residential Development for 90 houses including roads, footpaths and ancillary works. The scheme includes land raising within the site as well as road improvements on Stoneyhill road and Ayr Road. The housing mix consists of 30 semi-detached and 60 detached houses all with private gardens and private driveways 3. CONSULTATIONS AND ISSUES RAISED 3.1 East Ayrshire Council Housing Services has indicated that Access to the Maxholm site is contained within land owned by the Council, and negotiations would require to be finalised prior to any development works commencing. The adjacent site at Riccarton West is a Council-owned vacant site which is currently contained in the approved Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2011/ 2012 – 2015/ 2016 for the provision of an element of affordable housing, and is proposed to be contained in the new SHIP which is due to be submitted to the Scottish Government prior to the end of February 2012, following Cabinet approval. In this regard, an outline planning application, 07/1042/OL for the Riccarton West site has been submitted to the Planning Authority. The developer for the Maxholm site had explored the use of shared SUDS and other infrastructure across both sites in light of the close proximity of both developments. The Private legal agreements of the Council as land owner are not relevant to the determination of this application 3.2 East Ayrshire Council Roads &Transportation Service recommend refusal of the scheme as the road hierarchy for the new development fails to adhere to the Roads Guidelines. The scheme fails to provide the appropriate number of parking spaces for residential developments and also fails to include any traffic calming within the new development. 3.3 East Ayrshire Council Roads And Transportation Division Flooding Section - Section 208 of SPP indicates that land raising requires to be linked to compensatory storage which replaces the storage capacity of the floodplain, it goes on to say this must have as a minimum, a neutral effect on the storage or betterment of the effect on the floodplain storage. The applicant has not provided a suitably amended scheme or appropriate measures to compensate for the anticipated effects on the flood plain and therefore the Roads And Transportation Division Flooding Section must object to the scheme. 3.4 SEPA have indicated that they object in principle to this planning application on the grounds that it may place buildings and persons at flood risk contrary to Scottish Planning Policy and PAN 69. They state: Given the location of the proposed development within the undeveloped/sparsely developed functional floodplain we do not consider that it meets with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy and our position is unlikely to change. We have a shared duty with Scottish Ministers and other responsible authorities under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 to reduce overall flood risk and promote sustainable flood risk management. The cornerstone of sustainable flood risk management is the avoidance of flood risk in the first instance. We recommend that alternative locations be considered. In the event that the Planning Authority proposes to grant planning permission contrary to this advice on flood risk the application must be notified to the Scottish Ministers as per The Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2009. 3.5 West Of Scotland Archaeology Service have indicated that there are several important sites in the landscape surrounding the area proposed for development. Many of these are of interest in their own right; others derive additional significance because of their possible historical associations with William Wallace. These include the possible location of the “Bickering Bush”, an incident involving the young William Wallace in the spring of 1292 or thereabouts, at a site by the confluence of the Kilmarnock Water with the River Irvine, near Riccarton and Caprington, where Wallace is reputed to have killed three members of a five strong patrol who had demanded his catch of fish. The bush where he hid the bodies is reputed to have survived into the 19th Century, and its position was shown on the 1st Edition Ordnance Survey map of C.1860 at a point around 140m east of the proposed development area. In addition, the Riccarton area in general belonged to the Wallace Family from the late 12th Century, and the Castle of Riccarton is supposed to have been at Yardside, to the east of the proposed development area. While neither of these sites fall within the Boundary of the area of the development , their presence, and that of other archaeological material recorded in the surrounding landscape highlights the potential for large scale ground disturbance associated with development to reveal buried traces of earlier landscapes associated with the recorded sites some of which could be contemporary with the historical character himself. Given the potential for archaeology interests in the area it is recommended that if Planning Consent was given for the development that a suspensive condition be attached to any grant of Planning Consent addressing the need for appropriate Archaeology investigation of the site. Any grant of Planning Permission could contain conditions addressing this matter. 3.6 Scottish Power submitted a holding objection to the proposal due to the large amount of overhead transmission lines and potentially underground equipment in the area. It should be noted that they also indicate that the developer may be able to resolve the issues raised and that they should contact Scottish Power to address the issues. 3.7 East Ayrshire Council Outdoor Services - no comments 3.8 East Ayrshire Council Education and Social Services indicate that there is sufficient capacity