Item No 4 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 9 August 2010 at 10 a.m. ------

Present: - Councillors J. Houston (Chairman), J. Brown, N. Calvert, J. A. Fullarton, T. Jones, G. Logan, J. Mitchell, D. Moffat, C. Riddell-Carre, R. Smith, N. Watson. Apologies:- Councillors J. Hume, T. Weatherston. In Attendance: - Development Manager (Projects, Review & Performance), Development Manager (Applications), Assistant Road User Manager, Managing Solicitor – Commercial Services, Committee and Elections Team Leader. ------

MINUTE 1. There had been circulated copies of the Minute of the Meeting of 5 July 2010.

DECISION APPROVED for signature by the Chairman.

APPLICATIONS 2. 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 the Appendix to this Minute.

MEMBERS Councillors Fullarton and Mitchell left the meeting following consideration of application 10/00499/FUL. Councillor Brown left during consideration of application 10/00682/FUL.

APPEALS AND REVIEWS 3. There had been circulated copies of a report by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on Appeals to the Scottish Ministers and Local Reviews.

DECISION NOTED:-

(a) that an appeal had been received in respect of the installation of solar thermal panels, 18 High Street, Peebles.

(b) that the Scottish Ministers had sustained appeals, subject to conditions, in respect of:-

(i) replacement windows with uPVC sash and case windows double glazed, Flat 2/2, The Pirns, King Street, Galashiels; and

(ii) installation of solar thermal panels, 18 High Street, Peebles

(i) installation of 3 solar panels, Harden Vale, Ancrum; (ii) erection of conservatory, 3 Scott Crescent, Selkirk; and

(iii) erection of log cabin, land south of Whitchester House, Duns.

URGENT BUSINESS 4. Under Section 50B(4)(b) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, the Chairman was of the opinion that the item dealt with in the following paragraph should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency, in view of the need to keep Members informed.

SITE VISITS 5. It was proposed that members visits the sites of the proposed quarry at Rumbletonlaw, Greenlaw and the re-development of the Netherdale Campus, Galashiels prior to consideration of the applications at the next meeting.

DECISION AGREED that site visits be organised before the next meeting of the Committee.

The meeting concluded at 1.25 p.m. PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE 9 AUGUST 2010 APPENDIX APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

Reference Name and Address Nature of Development Location

03/00627/FUL Vattenfall Wind Power Ltd Wind Farm comprising Land at Minch Moor Bridge End twelve wind turbines, Elibank and Traquair Hexham wind monitoring mast, Forest Northumberland connection building, site Innerleithen access roads and temporary site compounds

Decision: Refused for the following reasons:-

1. The proposed development is contrary to Policies I19, I20, and N9 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018 and Policy D4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2009 in that:

• The proposal will be located on the fringe of, and have a significantly harmful influence on, sensitive landscape types as defined in the Borders Landscape Assessment 1995 which are of an inappropriate scale and character to accommodate the proposals successfully, due to the smaller scale nature of the landscapes, the height of the turbines compared to the height of the hills and the relatively narrow width of the ranges of hills between the valleys providing insufficient landform screening from sensitive receptors. • The proposal will have a significant adverse impact on the landscape character of the area, including the hills between the Tweed and Yarrow Valleys, the valley landscapes themselves, the landscape designations and the surrounding countryside which is of high scenic value and contains nationally listed and locally proposed designed landscapes and gardens. • The turbines will have a significant detrimental visual impact on important landscape features, prominent landmarks, major tourist routes and popular public viewpoints as a result of skyline and blade overtipping impacts on high sensitivity road, recreational and landscape receptors, exacerbated by the impacts of widespread forestry clearance and required aviation lighting. • The proposal will cause significant and unacceptable visual cumulative impacts when considered with schemes approved or proposed, including coincident and sequential impacts from roads and paths in the area, especially the Southern Upland Way. 2. The proposed development is contrary to Policies N14 and N15 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and Policy BE2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2008 in that it would result in significant adverse impacts on the setting of Scheduled Monuments and insufficient information has been supplied to properly determine the impact of the development on the archaeological interests at the site.

09/01395/FUL Vattenfall Wind Power Ltd Construction of access Innerleithen Mountain Bridge End road and watercrossing Bike Centre Hexham Traquair Road Northumberland Innerleithen

Decision: Refused as there is no operational need for the development and the works would be unnecessary, superfluous and be potentially detrimental to the efficient operation of the car park and overall landscape character of the area, contrary to the criteria contained within Policy G1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008. 09/00468/MIN Cemex UK Operations Ltd Extension to quarry for Land South West of Tannochside Park the extraction of hard Cowieslinn Quarry Uddingston rock Peebles Glasgow G71 5PH

Decision: Approved, subject to a legal agreement relating to off site habitat creation and subject to the following planning conditions:-

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 approved shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the plans and specifications submitted as part of the planning application. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site and to safeguard the amenity of the area. 3. Phasing of the development site shall accord strictly with submitted Environmental Impact Assessment. Reason: To ensure that the development proceeds in a manner that is compatible with the local environment and the amenity enjoyed by occupiers of nearby dwellings. 4. All soils shall be retained on the site and none shall be sold off or removed from the site. Reason : To enable sound agricultural restoration; to minimise the movement of soils and to minimise traffic movements outwith the site. 5. No extraction shall take place on the quarry extension (the area outwith the existing quarry boundary) until all soils have been stripped to full available depth from the relevant extraction phase. Work routines for stripping operations shall be designed to minimise vehicle traffic on the unstripped land and at all times the mechanical handling and compaction of soil shall be minimised. Top soil dumps shall not exceed 6m in height and shall be grassed and seeded to the specification of the Planning Authority at the earliest convenience. All dumps shall be evenly graded to tops shaped to prevent water ponding. At least 3 working days notice shall be given to the Planning Authority before the work commences on the stripping or movement of soils and the Planning Authority reserves the right to suspend operations during adverse weather conditions. Reason: To prevent damage to soil structure and to enable sound agricultural restoration. 6. The hours of operations for all working, with the exception of measures required in an emergency situation, servicing, maintenance and testing of plant, shall be limited to the hours of 0700 hours and 2000 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0700 hours to 1200 hours on both Saturdays and Sundays. In addition, no operations shall be permitted on 25th and 26th December and 1st and 2nd January. Reason : In the interests of amenity. 7. Minerals shall only be dispatched from the site between 0700 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays and 0700 hours and 1200 hours on Saturdays, with no movements on Sundays. Reason: In the interests of amenity. 8. No plant or machinery shall be operated unless it is silenced so as to comply with the best practical standard the details of which should be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Reason: To reduce noise levels to the minimum reasonably achievable in the interests of amenity. 9. Prior to the commencement of the development a dust management system to be set up and agreed with the Planning Authority and thereafter implemented within the terms of this agreement. All plant and machinery on the site shall be installed and maintained in such a manner as to minimise the release of dust and shall wherever possible incorporate dust suppression and collection equipment. Reason: In the interests of amenity of neighbouring properties. 10. Prior to the commencement of extraction hereby approved a system of monitoring the existing deep groundwater sources of private water supplies to be agreed with the Planning Authority. In the event of the failure or contamination of these supplies occurring as a result of mineral extraction operations then provision shall be made by the developer for alternative supplies. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers. 11. The public road shall be kept free of debris/mud from the site during the operational period. Surface water from the accesses must be diverted before it meets the public road; A wheel washing facility shall be installed and shall remain fully operational for the duration of the development hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety. 12. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit to, and have approved in writing by the Planning Authority, details of a Noise Monitoring Scheme that shall be adhered to strictly at all times during the development period. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers, in the interests of amenity. 13. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit to, and have approved in writing by the Planning Authority, details of a Dust Management plan that shall be adhered to strictly at all times during the development period. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers, in the interests of amenity and to prevent pollution to nearby natural habitat and the water resource. 14. The vibration from blasting should not exceed 6mms-1 peak particle velocity in any plane for 95% of blasts, at any property in existence at the time of the Consent. No Blast should exceed 10mms-1 at any such property. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers, In the interests of amenity. 15. Noise levels not to exceed 50 dB LAeq 1 hour at the nearest noise sensitive premises in existence at the time of the consent. Mitigation measures as outlined in Section 10.6.2 Page 161 of the EIA Volume 1 shall be implemented in accordance with a scheme which should be agreed with the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers, In the interests of amenity. 16. No development shall commence until a scheme has been submitted to and agreed by the Planning Authority, outlining the timescale and means for the advance warning of the occupants of the houses in identified noise sensitive locations and the Planning Authority of any blasting to be carried out at the site Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers, In the interests of amenity. 17. The quarry shall be worked and the land restored within a period of 24 years from the date of the commencement of the development. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site and to safeguard the amenity of the area. 18. Any oil, fuel, lubricant, paint or solvent within the site shall be stored within a suitable bund or other means of enclosure, constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority to prevent such material from contaminating top soil or sub soil or water course. Reason: To protect land and watercourses from damage by polluting agents. 19. A detailed Restoration Plan (to include detailed plans of the topography, detailed designs and specifications for the proposed ponds, detailed planting and seeding plans and specifications, shall be submitted to, and agreed by the Planning Authority and thereafter implemented in accordance with an agreed scheme of works. Reason: To ensure satisfactory restoration of the site. 20. Prior to the commencement of the development the developer shall either lodge with the Planning Authority a bond of a value to be agreed in respect of the costs of restoration of the site or shall make other financial arrangements to satisfaction of the Planning Authority to ensure the adequate restoration of the site. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site. 21. Prior to development a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) should be drafted by a contracted archaeologist outlining a Watching Brief. During a Watching Brief, an archaeologist will remain on site during any groundbreaking in order to identify surviving archaeological remains. If archaeological remains are identified, the archaeologist should be given at least 2 hours for proper recording of the evidence. If significant archaeology is discovered, the Archaeology Officer shall be contacted to discuss further mitigation such as a full excavation of discovered features. The developer should also ensure that any significant data and finds undergo post-excavation analysis and curation and that these results be published. Reason: The site is of archaeological importance and may contain archaeological features of significance. 22. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a detailed Landscape and Management Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in liaison with its specialist consultees, including SEPA and Scottish Natural Heritage. Thereafter, the approved scheme shall be strictly adhered to at all times prior to, during and after development, as specified within the agreed document(s). The following issues shall be given coverage in any agreed scheme, although this is not an exhaustive list: • provenance of all trees and shrubs to be planted; • tree/shrub species and density • a programme for completion and subsequent maintenance for the first five years after planting, including details of planting shelters, taking/destaking, replacement of failures, weeding and feeding; • decommissioning of buildings/plant and restoration of haulage road area; • precise siting of any vegetation associated with lagoons and reed beds (which will become future wildlife features); Reason: Landscaping of the site is integral to this type of development and is essential to ensure assimilation with the surrounding environment. In the interests of protecting ecological interest 23. Notwithstanding the details shown in any information submitted as part of the approved application, revised details relating to the exact specification and location of the ponds and associated works/vegetation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in liaison with SEPA, and shall thereafter be strictly adhered to. Reason: To ensure that any issues relating to potential flood risk and contamination of the nearby Shipburn Burn have been fully addressed. 24. Water discharge run off rates during operations or post development restoration phase, during storm conditions, shall not exceed greenfield run off rates as calculated in the submitted EIA. Reason: To prevent increased flood risk to downstream properties. 25. In respect of ecological issues, the development shall at all times be undertaken in strict accordance with the recommendations and mitigation measures identified within Section 7 of the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment including mitigation/action required in response to any findings in the additional survey work/reports regarding fish, birds, badgers and otters. Reason: To ensure that protected wildlife and habitat is safeguarded at all times during the development. 26. The Shiplaw Burn shall be protected by a fenced off corridor at a minimum of 20m distance as detailed in Chapter 7 of the EIA. No plant or machinery will be permitted within the corridor. The corridor will be regularly monitored for habitat development. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 27. A checking survey for otters by a suitably qualified person shall be required before works commence. The findings of this survey 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 protecting ecological interest. 28. If otters are identified at the site through the checking surveys carried out in pursuance to condition 27 above, to avoid their disturbance during construction of the bridge and associated access, no personnel or machinery should be operating on the river area of the site at least two hours after sunrise and two hours before sunset, without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 29. A checking survey for badgers by a suitably qualified person will be required before works commence. Before development on the site begins, a scheme for the protection of badgers 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 protecting ecological interest. 30. In order to avoid disturbance to breeding birds, no soil stripping and overburden movement to be carried out at the site during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 31. Measures to protect badgers and otters on construction sites to be implemented: covering of trenches overnight or provision of escape ramps, capping of any temporarily exposed pipe systems to prevent animals gaining access, safe storage of chemicals. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 32. A detailed dimensional drawing of the crossing point/bridge over the Shiplaw Burn shall be submitted for the prior approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to maintain reasonable control of the appearance of the site, and to minimise the impact of the development on its surroundings. 33. A Construction Management Plan detailing waste treatment, to include measures to ensure the protection of the on-site watercourse and groundwater from construction pollution/quarry operations during or after their completion (silt, debris, oil and fuel spillages) shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of works. Reason: To ensure the protection of the water environment during construction and quarry operations. 34. SEPA Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 (general guidance and works affecting watercourses), PPG 3, 4, 7, 13 (site drainage), PPG 2, 8 (oil storage) and PPG 6 (construction and demolition) shall be adopted by the developer as appropriate. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 35. No building, structure or plant shall be erected on the site without the prior Consent of the Planning Authority. Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to maintain reasonable control of the appearance of the site, and to minimise the impact of the development on its surroundings. 36. The perimeter of the site shall be fenced off at all times during development in accordance with a scheme of details that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of public safety. 37. A site notice or sign shall be displayed in a prominent place at or in the vicinity of the site until the completion of the development, which shall be readily visible to the public, and printed on durable material. The Notice shall take the following form: • Development at (Note 1) • Notice is hereby given that planning permission has been granted, subject to conditions (Note 2) to (Note 3) on (Note 4) by Scottish Borders Council. • The development comprises (Note 5) • Further information regarding the planning permission, including the conditions, if any, on which it has been granted can be obtained, at all reasonable hours at Scottish Borders Council Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells, Melrose. Telephone (01835) 825060, or by visiting http://eplanning.scotborders.gov.uk/publicaccess, using the application reference (Note 6). Reason: To ensure compliance with Section 27C of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.

Informative: This planning permission does not purport to grant consent under any other legislation or Regulations operated by bodies other than the Planning Authority, including Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, the Water Authority, and any other Department of Scottish Borders Council (This list is not exhaustive).

Note: Permission was granted with delegated powers to officers to determine that the applicant was in control of the land at Shiphorns quarry to meet the obligation of removing the building and including the restoration of that particular site within their landscaping proposals.

10/00439/FUL Hudson Hirsel LLP Erection of 105 Land West Of West Per Aitken Turnbull dwellinghouses Paddock (Hawick) Duns Road 22 Buccleuch Street Coldstream Hawick Scottish Borders TD9 0HW

Decision: Approved subject to the following conditions and informative and the conclusion of a legal agreement covering affordable housing and education contributions:

Informative: With regards to condition No4 above the notes should be completed as follows: Note 1: Insert address or describe the location of the development Note 2: Delete “subject to conditions” if the planning permission is not subject to any conditions Note 3: Insert the name and address of the developer Note 4: Insert the date on which planning permission was granted (normally the date of this Notice) Note 5: Insert the description of the development. Note 6: Insert the application reference number.

10/00639/FUL Arrowhead Housing Erection of seven flats West Winds And Per Thomson & Partners Adjoining Land 4A Thomson House Upper Burnmouth Forth Street Burnmouth Edinburgh Scottish Borders EH1 3LD

Decision: Approved subject to the following conditions, informative and the conclusion of a legal agreement covering financial contributions towards education provision:

1. Notwithstanding the description of the materials in the application, no development shall be re- 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. 2. Sample panels of the external wall finish to be prepared on site for prior approval by the Planning Authority before this aspect of the development is commenced. Reason: The materials to be used require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting. 3. The finished floor levels of the buildings hereby permitted shall be consistent with those indicated on a scheme of details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is re-commenced. 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. 4. No development shall re-commence except in strict accordance with a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works for the parking area, which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 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. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density iv. location and design, including materials, of walls, fences and gates; 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. 5. The details of the access to the site, including the provision of a footway on the northern side of the access and boundary treatment along the frontage of the flats, and parking to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the re-commencement of works on site. The works must thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the agreed details and must be completed before any residential unit is occupied and shall thereafter be retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 6. Details of a survey and investigation of the soil conditions of the site, sufficient to identify the nature and extent of any soil contamination, together with a schedule of the methods by which it is proposed to neutralise, seal or remove the contamination substances, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be carried out before any works in connection with this permission are begun. Reason: To ensure that the site is made safe before works commence.

Informative: Details of the proposed access, parking area and pedestrian footway shall be formed as per the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) consultation response of 6 July 2010.

Vote Councillor Fullarton, seconded by Councillor Moffat, moved that the application be approved.

Councillor Riddell-Carre, seconded by Councillor Watson moved as an amendment that the application be refused on the grounds that the development was contrary to Policy G1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in terms of incompatibility with the surrounding properties and scale, massing height.

On a show of hands Members voted as follows:- Motion - 5 votes Amendment - 4 votes The Motion was accordingly carried.

10/00499/FUL Mr Michael Pike Erection of Land South Of ESBC00009380 Per AD Architectural dwellinghouse with Lindean Design attached garage Croft Road Hillview West Linton Greenside Scottish Borders Peebles

Decision: 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 the provisions of Section 16 of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 2. 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. 3. The development hereby approved shall be constructed using natural slate on the roof. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting. 4. The details of all boundary walls and/or fences shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Thereafter the walls and/or fences shall only be constructed in strict accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area. 5. Development shall not begin until drainage works have been carried out in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory arrangements are made for the disposal of surface and foul water. 6. Two parking spaces, not including any garage, must be provided within the curtilage of the site. The two parking spaces should be nose-in parking bays and must be formed to the satisfaction of the planning authority before the dwellinghouse is occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 7. The verge crossing should be formed as to the following specification: 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. Reason: In the interest of road safety. 8. The Street Lighting Column shall require to be relocated outwith of the driveway. The applicant should liaise with the Councils Street Lighting Manager to have this work carried out (at the applicant expense). Reason: In the interest of road safety. 9. 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. 10. The existing tree on the site to be replaced prior to the house being occupied. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area. 11. All windows shall be of a sash and case design constructed of timber. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Informative: The applicant is advised that only approved contractors on the Council's List 13, DC-8, may work within the public road boundary.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST Councillor Calvert declared an interest in the above application in terms of Section 5 of the Councillors Code of Conduct and left the Chamber during the discussion.

10/00589/FUL Mr Derek Russell Change of use of Land East Of 70 (Walkerburn Development agricultural land to form Galashiels Road Trust) community allotments Walkerburn Per Mrs Patricia Purves Scottish Borders Glenmead Walkerburn Scottish Borders EH43 6DD

Decision: Approved subject to the following conditions:-

10/00674/FUL William Bannister (NCDT) Alterations and Newlands Primary And Graeme Currie (SBC) extensions to form new School Per Cooper Cromar community centre with West Linton Newton House associated landscaping Scottish Borders 457 Sauchiehall Street and car parking EH46 7BZ Glasgow G2 3LG

Decision: Approved subject to the following conditions and informatives:

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. 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. 3. The installation of any kitchen ventilation system used on the premises shall comply with the DEFRA publication Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties. 4. Noise levels emitted by any plant and machinery used on the premises shall not exceed Noise Rating Curve NR20 when measured within the nearest noise sensitive dwelling. The noise emanating from any plant and machinery used on the premises should not contain any discernible tonal component. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties. 5. Music played on the premises shall be inaudible between 22:00 - 0800 hrs in any domestic premises in existence at the date of this decision. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties. 6. Any floodlighting for the sports pitch shall not be operated between 22:00 - 07:00 hrs. All exterior lighting shall be designed in accordance with the guidance produced by The Institution of Lighting Engineers. Where necessary, suitable shuttering shall be provided for each lamp to prevent unwanted light affecting the occupiers of properties off site. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties. 7. Detailed dimensional engineering drawings of the proposed junction with the public road and required layby alterations, to include the proposed signing and lining for the one way system, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of development. Thereafter, the details so agreed shall be completed and available for use prior to the commencement of the use hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 8. Before the development hereby approved is commenced, the new access to the site shall be laid out and constructed in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the existing users of the public road. 9. The area allocated for parking on the submitted plan shall be properly consolidated, surfaced and drained before the use of the site commences/the buildings are occupied, and shall not be used other than for the parking of vehicles in connection with the development hereby permitted. Reason: To ensure there is adequate space within the site for the parking of vehicles clear of the highway. 10. The mature group of trees on the South West corner of the site and the North East boundary (aside from a small length at the proposed turning head) shall be retained. No excavation works shall be undertaken within the root protection area of these trees. Reason: In the interests of preserving the visual amenity of the area. 11. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, the trees to be retained on the site shall be protected either by the existing fencing or by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high, placed at a minimum radius of one metre beyond the crown spread of each tree, and the fencing 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 on the development site, the loss of which would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area. 12. Where proposed paved surfaces pass beneath tree canopies, the developer shall carry out all excavation by hand digging where necessary and provide porous filling around the base of the tree, taking such further precautions as may be necessary to prevent any damage to any tree or its root system. Reason: To protect the trees to be retained. 13. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with the submitted scheme of hard and soft landscaping works as detailed in plan CEEAUA-NH-010 Rev to include a programme for completion and subsequent maintenance. This programme shall be submitted for the prior approval of the Planning Authority within 3 months of the date of this consent. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development. 14. The natural stone from the demolished stone wall shall be re-used for the proposed walls on site. Reason: In the interests of sustainability. 15. Details of all proposed means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before work on the site is commenced. Thereafter, the proposed means of enclosure shall be in place prior to the commencement of the use hereby approved. Reason: To enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings. 16. A provision of 10 nest cups for house martins and 10 nest cups/ledges for swallows shall be made to be located at suitable locations within the redeveloped site or on other suitable buildings in the immediate vicinity of the site. The work shall be carried out by a suitably qualified person. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 17. All Hirundine nests on the site will be inspected by an IEEM registered ecologist outwith the breeding season, and before the beginning of March 2011, to ensure there are no eggs or young present. All traces of the empty nests shall then be removed to discourage birds from reusing the existing nests. The transport container, which contains some nest sites, will then be removed from site prior to the beginning of the breeding season. The eaves of the buildings that will be affected by the construction process during 2011 shall be secured after removal of the unoccupied nests by affixing appropriate bird netting at a 45 degree angle between the eaves of the building and the building wall to exclude the birds from the areas previously used as nest sites. The bird netting shall be in place, before the beginning of March 2011, to prevent the reestablishment of nests in areas that will be affected by construction. The netting shall be inspected periodically to ensure that it is in good condition, remains undamaged and remains capable of excluding birds during the 2011 breeding bird season. The netting will be removed following completion of the construction works. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 18. A detailed Landscape and Habitat Management Plan to deliver habitat enhancement is required, to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before any works commence. Thereafter, the Plan so approved shall be implemented in accordance with a scheme of phasing that shall first have been agreed by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecological interest. 19. 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 the scheme of details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Reason: To ensure the development minimises any environmental impact. 20. Development shall not begin until drainage works have been carried out in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory arrangements are made for the disposal of surface and foul water. Informatives 1 The applicant is advised that only contractors on the council’s approved list 13, DC-8, may work within the public road boundary. 2 All contractors shall be made aware of the potential presence of bats and breeding birds, of their legal protection. If bats or breeding birds are discovered following the commencement of works, works should stop immediately and the developer must contact SNH for further guidance. Works can only recommence by following any guidance given by SNH. 3 As the proposed premises are to be used for food handling the applicant is advised to discuss appropriate finishes and equipment with an Environmental Health Officer.In addition the following points should be considered:- The kitchens serving the nursery (42), community hall (20) and dining hall (19) must all be of a size to provide adequate working space to allow for the hygienic performance of all operations. The kitchens must be fitted with adequate facilities for the cleaning and disinfection of working utensils and equipment. On the plans only one utensil wash-up sink is shown in the nursery kitchen. In order to provide adequate facilities for cleaning and disinfection, twin wash-up sinks with at least one draining board and adequate work surface to stack dirty utensils must be provided. These sinks must be side by side and in addition to any mechanical dishwasher provided. There is no indication of a readily accessible external waste storage system serving the nursery kitchen. There must be suitable and sufficient means of storing waste both inside and outside all kitchens. Suitable and adequate temperature-controlled storage facilities must be provided. 4 The Food Business operator and staff will be required to be trained in Food Hygiene and have in place at the establishment a food safety management system based on HACCP. The Food Business Operator is required to register with the Environmental Health Department at least 28 days prior to operating as these plans indicate a major change in the food business operation. 5 Further information on nest cups can be found at: http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/helpingbirds/nestboxes/attracthousemartins/ http://www.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/birdguide/name/s/swallow/encouraging.asp http://www.bto.org/notices/nestbox_guide.htm 6 In respect of condition No 15 submission of a Landscape and Habitat Management Plan to deliver habitat enhancements e.g. enhancing the boundaries to link with the local Forest Habitat Network and local wetland habitat network (nearby Local Wildlife Sites at Bog Wood and Longstruther burn). A wetland feature (such as a SUDS pond) could enhance the habitat network for bats (health & safety considerations permitting). There are opportunities for bat boxes, bird boxes and insect hotels, wildflower/grassland plots to enhance biodiversity and provide an educational resource for the hub.

10/00682/FUL Mr R Tolson And Miss G Change of use of Disused Steading Browne steading Buildings 26 Preston Road buildings/outbuildings North And North East Tonbridge and alterations to form Of Galalaw Kent four residential units Farmhouse TN9 1UH Hawick

Decision: Approved subject to the following conditions and informatives:

Informative: The consultation response from the Environmental Health is attached for the information of the applicant.

In respect of condition 17, the access track to the site must be upgraded so that it is capable of carrying emergency vehicles. This includes ensuring the track is wide enough and constructing it in a suitable compactable, free draining material capable of carrying a 14 tonne axle load. (It should be noted that Building Standards may require a bound surface, given the number of dwellings, and the relevant area officer should be contacted at an early stage). The access track must be widened at the corner to allow two vehicles to pass. The initial 6 metres of the access track must be surfaced to the specification of the Planning Authority, shown below, and be widened to 5.5m to allow two vehicles to pass. This work must be carried out by a contractor on the Council’s approved list (attached): 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.

10/00727/PPP Mr W Douglas Residential development Land To North East Of Per John R Harris & Cairnlea Partners Appletreehall Palma Place Hawick Melrose Scottish Borders Scottish Borders TD6 9PR

Decision: Refused for the following reason

1. The proposal is contrary to Policies G1, H2 and D2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan and the guidance contained within the “New Housing in the Borders Countryside” SPG, in that the proposal would result in a form and location of development out of character with the existing linear pattern of development at Appletreehall and would constitute ribbon development along the B6359 away from the building group.

Note Councillor Moffat, seconded by Councillor Riddell-Carre moved that the application be refused as the development was contrary to Local Plan Policies G1, D2 and H2 and the guidance contained in the “New Housing in the Borders Countryside” SPG. This Motion was unanimously approved. 10/00901/FUL Mr John Michael Change of use of Land South East Of Hutchison industrial land to form Farne Salmon & Trout Per Yeoman (Berwick) Ltd lorry park, erection of Ltd Unit 10B office accommodation, Station Road Windmill Way West storage buildings, Duns Ramparts Business Park boundary fence and Scottish Borders Berwick Upon Tweed entrance gates TD15 1TB

Decision: Approved subject to the receipt of satisfactory amended plans and subject to the following conditions and informative note:

Informative: Attention is drawn to the enclosed consultation replies from the Director of Technical Services (Roads) and the Economic Development Section of the Council. PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS ITEM NO 5

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

REPORT BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES

DRAFT PLANNING BRIEF – WILDCAT GATE SOUTH, JEDBURGH

1 PURPOSE

1.1 To seek committee approval for the draft planning brief for Wildcat Gate South in Jedburgh (Appendix 1) to go out for 12 week public consultation.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 Wildcat Gate South is located on the eastern edge of Jedburgh and is allocated in the Finalised Local Plan Amendment (AJEDB005) for housing under Policy H3. There were no objections to the site during the Local Plan Amendment process and the site will be part of the consolidated Local Plan.

2.2 The site is a greenfield site with new residential development to the west, the B-listed Head Keepers Cottage to the north and ancient woodland and open countryside/farm land to the south and east. The site is 2.0ha although the developable area is approximately 1.0ha. The ancient woodland included within the site boundary is excluded from the developable area and a strong management scheme is required for the ancient woodland.

2.3 A planning brief has been prepared to set out the development vision for the site, to address potential constraints on the site and to encourage good quality new development in accordance with sustainability principles achieving integration with its landscape surroundings. The planning brief will provide guidance to any developer of the site and will be a material consideration when determining planning applications.

3 CONSULTATION

3.1 Consultation on this report has been undertaken with the Clerk to the Council and Head of Legal and Democratic Services, Chief Financial Officer, Head of Audit and Risk and the Acting Director of Technical Services and Director of Social Work and their comments have been incorporated in this report.

3.2 The draft planning brief is proposed to be subject to a 12-week public consultation. The consultation documents will be sent out to the local Community Council and national stakeholders including Historic Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. The draft planning brief will also be published on the Council’s website. 4 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

4.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from agreeing the planning brief.

4.2 There are ongoing costs related to staff resources needed to carry out research and management relating to the production of the brief. These costs can be met by Planning and Economic Development.

5 RISK COMMENTARY

5.1 The key risks are considered to be:

Risk of not providing guidance

(i) The lack of guidance would cause uncertainty to developers and the public and be a barrier to effective decision making by the Council. This could result in ad hoc and inconsistent decision making with the policies in the Local Plan not being taken fully into account.

(ii) Failure to produce a planning brief would reflect badly on the Council’s commitment to improve the design of new development.

(iii) It is considered that the failure to approve the draft planning brief for public consultation would have resource impacts in the Development Management Section, potentially resulting in delays processing planning applications. In addition, it may have a negative impact on proposed development within the site and on the thorough assessment of the environmental impact of such proposed development.

Risk of providing guidance

(i) There are no perceived risks related to the adoption of the guidance by the Council.

5.2 In accordance with the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005, a pre- screening assessment of the draft planning brief for Wildcat Gate South site has been undertaken to identify whether there will be potential environmental effects. The pre- screening exercise was undertaken using the criteria specified in Schedule 2 of the Act. The pre-screening identified there will be no or minimal environmental effects therefore a full SEA is not required.

6 EQUALITIES

6.1 There are no equality issues in approving this report.

6.2 With respect to Rural Proofing, there is no expected impact on the rural area.

7 SUMMARY

7.1 The report seeks committee approval for the draft planning brief for Wildcat Gate South, Jedburgh to go out for 12 weeks public consultation.

8 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 It is recommended that the Planning and Building Standards Committee agree:

(a) the draft planning brief for Wildcat Gate South, Jedburgh as a basis for a 12 week public consultation, and that if there are any substantive comments then they should be reported back to Committee. (b) that if there are no substantive comments arising from consultation that the planning brief should be delegated for approval to the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Author(s) Name Designation Kristina Bell Assistant Planning Officer

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 Business Services, Planning and Economic Development, Scottish Borders Council, Council HQ, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA. Phone: 01835 825060. Fax: 01835 825158. Email: [email protected] Appendix 1

Scottish Borders Finalised Local Plan Amendment Supplementary Planning Guidance

Wildcat Gate South, Jedburgh Planning Brief September 2010

DRAFT Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Contents

Introduction 2 Local context 3 Policy context 4 Site analysis 5 Constraints and opportunities 7 Development vision 8 Submission requirement 13 Contacts 15 Alternative format/language paragraph 16

Figure 1Local context 3 Figure 2 Site analysis 5 Figure 3 Development vision 8

1 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Introduction

This planning brief is one of a series of Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on development sites and sets out the main opportunities and constraints for the development of the Wildcat Gate South site. The site is included in the finalised Local Plan Amendment as housing allocation AJEDB005 and is 2.0 ha in size although the developable area of the site is approximately 1.0 ha. The site is expected to provide 20 housing units, although the final number of units will be determined at planning application stage when layout and design is agreed.

The brief includes the development vision for the site and aims to lead to a high quality development. As the site is View from west of the site located at the edge of Jedburgh it is important that the development fits into to the surrounding countryside and reflects the scale of development in the existing settlement.

The brief also highlights where development contributions will be sought.

The planning brief should be read in conjunction with the developer guidance in Annex A.

View from east of the site

2 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Local context

Jedburgh is located north east of Hawick and south west of Kelso and has good links to the rest of the Borders and Northumberland especially by road with the A68 trunk road going through the town. It is a well connected settlement with regular bus services to Edinburgh, Galashiels and with a service to Newcastle six days a week.

The town is built in the valley of Jed Water and is surrounded by hills, with Lanton Hill and Black Law to the west and south west respectively. The town centre is made up by a mix of commercial and residential uses and includes historic buildings such as Jedburgh Abbey and Mary Queen of Scots House.

The residential areas of the town stretches up the valley sides and gives attractive views over the hills and the surrounding countryside.

Jedburgh Abbey 3 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Policy context

The brief should be read alongside relevant national and local planning guidance, a selection of which is presented in this section.

National The Scottish Government has a number of policy and guidance documents that could be useful to the consideration of this development: x Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) x Designing Places: A Policy Statement for Scotland x Designing Streets: A Policy Statement for Scotland x PAN 61: Planning & SUDS x PAN 65: Planning & Open Space x PAN 67: Housing Quality x PAN 77: Designing Safer Places x PAN 78: Inclusive Design

Structure Plan Local Plan The Scottish Borders Council Structure Plan provides the The site subject to this brief is allocated as housing site strategic planning context. In terms of this Plan, Jedburgh AJEDB005 in the finalised Local Plan Amendment. lies within the ‘Primary Hub’ that is to be promoted as part A number of policies included in the adopted Local Plan of the strategic development strategy to accommodate and the finalised Local Plan Amendment will be additional housing, retail and employment generating applicable to this site including ‘Principle 1— development. The Consolidated Structure Plan Sustainability’, ‘G1—Quality Standards for New incorporates the original approval in 2002 and the Development’, ‘G5—Development Contributions’, ‘H1— Alteration approved by Scottish Ministers in June 2009. Affordable Housing’, ‘H2—Protection of Residential Amenity’ and BE1—Listed Buildings. Furthermore, key Supplementary Planning Guidance include ‘Placemaking and Design’, ‘Trees and Development’ and ‘Green Space’.

4 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh

5 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Site analysis – context and consideration The site is located on the edge of the settlement and The site is allocated for housing in the finalised Local Plan there are no pavements going beyond the development Amendment (AJEDB005) with an indicative capacity of 20 to the west. The character of the area is rural and units, and is located on the eastern edge of Jedburgh, sheltered. opposite the B-listed building Head Keepers Cottage. The area is sensitive in terms of the landscape setting and the The Local Plan Amendment identified access to the site built heritage of the listed building. The site is sheltered by from the eastern parts of the site. After further assessment it mature trees and hedges separating the site and is considered potentially safer to take access to the site at Oakieknowe Road going east. the western corner. This would have less impact on existing trees and hedges, although cutting back of the hedge to The site is located in a wooded area with ancient wood- the north of the site would be necessary as it is currently land on the slopes down to the burn to the south of the growing over the verge of the road. site. The wooded area is excluded from the developable area of the site. The site is currently grassland and is The site sits relatively high in comparison to the woodland undulating with a ‘ridge’ running from south west to north and agricultural fields to the south. east of the site with lower areas to the east and the west. The ‘ridge’ sits higher and currently acts as a divide within the site.

There are wooded areas to the east and south of the site, to the west of the site are some trees and a newly developed housing site with large detached houses.

Preferred access point to the site Views across the site 6 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Constraints and opportunities Opportunities The location of the site creates a wide range of To achieve a successful development the following opportunities. The main opportunities are in connection constraints and opportunities should be addressed. with the attractive landscape and the landform.

Constraints Views and orientation Access and links x The site benefits from attractive long views to the x Impact of access, and safe right hand turning into south. the site, on hedging to the north of the site. x Although some mature trees have been taken down, x Lack of pedestrian link to the town centre. the site benefits from screening by existing

landscaping. Landscape x Gentle slope to the south on developable part of the x The site is undulating and residential development on site can create light and sunny gardens. the ridge in the centre of the site would be x Orientation of houses on the site can benefit from the prominent. The ridge is not essential for the site and southern aspects in terms of solar gain. can be removed to create a less prominent x Opportunity to take advantage of the screened development. setting and orientation of the site for energy efficient x The need to retain the sense of place of the site and design and layout. reducing any visual impact from the surrounding

area. Recent removal of trees has reduced natural Landscaping and built environment screening. x Development of the site offers an opportunity to x Risk of damaging the landscape setting by create strong management scheme for existing inappropriate design and scale of the development. ancient woodland.

x Creation of an attractive edge to the settlement

and links to existing settlement. x Opportunity to create an attractive design and lay out to reflect the sensitive landscape setting and the reflect the built environment in the B-listed building located opposite the site.

7 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh

8 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Development vision Sustainable place The aspiration is to develop a suitable and high quality This section presents the key requirements of this housing development that pay respect to the sensitive development and should be read in conjunction with enclosed setting and surrounding countryside. developer guidance in Annex A.

To achieve the vision attention needs to be paid to The orientation of the site, use of existing trees for shelter, placemaking, to create spaces such as vistas to take choice of house types and choice of building material advantage of the views into the open countryside. and internal design of the buildings should be considered in detail to achieve a sustainable place without The main component in achieving the vision is to create a compromising good quality house design. Respect for the site including excellent energy efficient design. Buildings, existing built environment and the rural location on the landscape enhancements and streets and spaces need to edge of the settlement also needs to be considered. work well together and create a sustainable place. Energy efficient design Eco Homes The Council is committed to improving the sustainability of the built environment in the Borders. The development will be expected to achieve the Building Research Establishment Eco-homes rating of “Excellent”. See ‘submission requirement’ on page 13 for further details.

Existing trees on the western edge of the site View across the site to the south 9 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Scale and layout Buildings x The development needs to harmonise with the land- Materials form of the site. x Materials used should harmonise with surrounding x The new development to the west needs to be nature and reflect materials used in the existing acknowledged and linked to, by extending the town such as stone, slate and render. existing footway, but should not be replicated in terms of scale or layout as Wildcat Gate South has a House type and tenures different character than the more open land to the x Create a development with a mix of house types west. and tenure within the site. x New development needs to reflect the listed building to the north, without replicate it in terms of scale. Affordable housing x The proposed houses and landscaping should x On-site affordable housing units should be consider overshadowing issues and make the most of developed and integrated in the same style and the slope to the south. Gardens should be to the quality as main stream housing and it should not be south and high boundary fences should be avoided. possible to distinguish which properties are x Street layout should encourage lower vehicular affordable housing from their external appearance. speeds. x The requirement for affordable housing should be x Figure 3 ‘Development Vision’ suggests a linked met in line with Local Plan policy H1. The SPG on development with a key frontage running along the affordable housing advises that a contribution of 25% roadside. There may be an opportunity for further is required from this site. The Council’s policy requires development to the rear, provided there are no residential development exceeding 4 units to provide overdevelopment issues, the design and scale are affordable housing on-site. appropriate and there is no adverse impact on the sensitive wooded area to the south.

Design x Sustainability and minimisation of energy demand should be considered at all stages of the planning, design and build of the site and this is required to be demonstrated in any planning application.

Waste x Waste and recycling facilities and collections needs to be considered in the layout and design of the site. Proposed development (09/01043/FUL, EMA Architects) 10 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Density Streets and spaces x The site has an indicative capacity of 20 housing Access and links units. The final number of units on the site is x Vehicular access to the site needs to be taken from determined by the design, layout and the size of the the western parts of the site onto Oxnam Road. units. x It is necessary to achieve safe access to the site with x High density development such as row housing is minimal impact on the existing trees and hedgerows, encouraged. although it will be necessary to cut back, and potentially lower, the existing hedge to the north as it Landscape currently overhangs the road verge. Improved landscaping x There is potential to shift the existing road to the x Development of the site creates an opportunity to south, towards the site, at the point of access to establish a strong management scheme for the create more space to achieve safer access (to be existing ancient woodland (excluded from confirmed at the detailed stage of planning the developable area). development). x Creation of a tiered SUDS as part of landscape x Pedestrian and cycle connections are required to be features. incorporated with the access at the western part of x Existing trees and hedges along the roadside must be the site and connect to the existing footway to the retained, except at the western edge where access west. The link should encourage sustainable travel to will be formed. work and school. x The developer will be expected to meet the cost of, Boundary treatment or contribute towards the cost of, identified off-site x Boundaries and edges of development should transport work required as a result of the develop- consider, and where possible, retain existing trees ment and/or the cumulative effect of development and hedgerows. on a wider scale. x Boundary treatment should respect and integrate the x Development contributions will also be required for surrounding countryside and minimise the visual upgrading of pedestrian and cycle links to/from the impact of development from the surrounding site. countryside.

11 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Parking x Communal parking, potentially within courtyards, should be considered to minimise the visual impact

of parked cars in the development. x Where possible parking/driveway surfaces should be made of a permeable material to aid water run-off.

View points and vistas x Creation of viewpoints overlooking the open countryside to the south from the top of the site x Creation of vistas through the development to exploit the viewpoints Existing play area in Allerley Well Park

Street furniture x Street furniture should be used to create high quality spaces within the development without conflict with street cleansing.

Play areas and open space x Any on-site play areas and open spaces required

should be over-looked by buildings and passers-by. x Contributions towards play areas and green space should be in line with the SPGs on Green Space. It is also required that inspection, maintenance and depreciation for any play areas, proposed paths and open space are addressed as part of the Park furniture in Allerley Well Park considerations.

Education and Lifelong Learning x Currently there is no requirement for development contributions towards education for this site. However, this might change in the future subject to any future review of catchment areas or re- assessment of occupancy projections. Park furniture by Jed Water 12 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Submission requirement Extended Phase 1 habitat survey—This survey should be This section sets out the requirement for development included in any submission and identify semi-natural proposals. Any proposals should reflect this planning brief vegetation and other wildlife habitats including suitable and also the developer guidance in Annex A. The habitat for European protected species and badger setts. following assessment should be submitted to the Council at an early stage to achieve an effective development Drainage impact assessment—A drainage impact assess- management process. ment needs to be included in any submission and address issues such as the development’s impact on the Design statement—Developers must illustrate the catchment area and waste and surface water drainage development vision principles in their design statement solutions. and demonstrate that due consideration has been given Energy efficiency—Developers must submit a statement of the following issues for the local area: for the Council's approval detailing how energy efficiency x Spaces between buildings measures and low and zero carbon technologies will be x Sustainable environment incorporated into the development proposals, and the x Density and use level of CO2 reduction that will be achieved. x Localised topography x Views Eco-homes— An Eco-home statement should x Vegetation pattern demonstrate how advice has been sought from a x Boundary treatment licensed assessor at an early stage in the project to ensure x Streets that the estimated rating will be obtained. A full list of and the following key issues for proposed buildings: licensed assessors can be found at the EcoHomes website x Scale/proportion/materials/colour/articulation (www.ecohomes.org) x Relationship to site plot x Relationship to adjacent buildings/structures Landscaping statement—The statement should include x Contribution to wider townscape how maintenance of proposed and existing planting will x Distinctiveness be managed in the future.

Transport assessment (TA)—Depending on the scale of Refuse vehicle access strategy— The strategy should development, a TA may be required to demonstrate how include details of suitable turning areas for refuse vehicles, the development will function in transport terms with swept path analysis and details of bin locations. emphasis on sustainable travel patterns.

13 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh

Checklist for key submission requirements

Key parts of submission Included in submission?

Design statement Transport assessment Extended Phase 1 habitat survey

Drainage impact

Energy efficiency statement

Eco-home statement Landscaping statement

Refuse vehicle access strategy

14 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Contacts SBC Development Management SBC Technical Services (Road User Group) John Hayward (Development Manager), Council Head- Ron Elliot (Road User Manager), Council Headquarters, quarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 825060 E-mail: [email protected] Tel: 01835 824000 E-mail: [email protected]

Julie Hayward (Principal Planning Officer), Council Head- SBC Technical Services (Environmental Services) quarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Julie Rankine (Waste Strategy Manager), Tel: 01835 825060 E-mail: [email protected] Council Headquarters - Scott House (A), Sprouston Road, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0QD SBC Plans & Research Tel: 01835 825111 Email: [email protected] Martin Wanless (Plans & Research Manager), Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA SBC Technical Services (Environmental Services) Tel: 01835 825063 E-mail: [email protected] Jason Hedley (Parks Manager), Galashiels Area Office, Paton Street, Galashiels, TD1 3AS. Charles Johnston (Principal Planning Officer), Council Tel: 01896 661770 E-mail: [email protected] Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 825060 Email: [email protected]

SBC Countryside & Heritage Andy Millar (Countryside & Heritage Manager), Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 825062 E-mail: [email protected]

Andy Tharme (Ecology Officer), Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 826514 E-mail: [email protected]

Jon Bowie (Developer Negotiator) Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 825060 E-mail: [email protected]

15 Wildcat Gate South Jedburgh Alternative Format/Language Paragraph

You can get this document on tape, in large print, and Parágrafo de formato/língua alternativos various other formats by contacting us at the address Pode obter este documento em cassete audio, impressão below. In addition, contact the address below for infor- aumentada e vários outros formatos contactando a morada mation on language translations, additional copies, or indicada em baixo. Pode ainda contactar a morada indicada em baixo para obter informações sobre traduções noutras to arrange for an officer to meet with you to explain any línguas, cópias adicionais ou para solicitar uma reunião com areas of the publication that you would like clarified. um funcionário para lhe explicar quaisquer áreas desta pub-

licação que deseje ver esclarecidas. 其他格式／外文譯本這份資料冊另備有錄音帶、大字體版本以及多種其他格式。你 Параграф об альтернативном формате/языковой версии Чтобы получить данный документ в записи на пленке, в 可以透過以下地 крупношрифтовой распечатке и в других различных 址與我們聯絡，索取不同版本。此外，你也可以聯絡以下地址 форматах, вы можете обратиться к нам по приведенному ниже адресу. Кроме того, по данному 索取本資料的中 адресу можно обращаться за информацией о переводе на различные языки, получении дополнительных копий а 文和其他外文譯本或索取更多拷貝。亦可要求我們做出安排， также с тем, чтобы организовать встречу с сотрудником, 由我們的工作人 который сможет редставить объяснения по тем разделам публикации, которые вам хотелось бы 員當面為你解釋你對這份出版物中的不明確之處。 прояснить.

[Alternatywny format/język] Alison Clifton, Planning and Economic Development, Aby uzyskać kopię niniejszego dokumentu w formacie audio, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, dużą czcionką, oraz innych formatach prosimy o kontakt na Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA. Telephone: poniższy adres. Uzykać tam można również informacje o tłu- maczeniach na języki obce, otrzymaniu dodatkowych kopii 01835 825060. oraz zaaranżowaniu spotkania z urzędnikiem, który wyjaśni E-mail: [email protected] wątpliwości i zapytania związane z treścią niniejszej pub- likacji.

16 Annex A – Developer Guidance

Introduction

The main aim and principle of the Scottish Borders Local Plan is to support and encourage sustainable and high quality development. The Council produce planning briefs that set out the development vision and the main strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints on sites allocated in the Local Plan to achieve this.

The Council has also produced detailed guidance in the form of Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on a number of topics. The Council is continually adding to the list of SPGs that needs to be considered when developing development proposals. The full list of SPGs and draft SPGs is available on the Council’s website.

The aim of this supporting document to planning briefs is to set out guidance to developers that apply to all or most allocated housing sites. As all sites are different in character and landform they also have different strengths and potential constraints to address to be able to achieve a sustainable place through the use of energy efficient design, creation of sustainable buildings, landscape enhancements and creation of streets and spaces. Consideration should be given to ‘Designing out Crime’ and ‘Trees and Development’ and ‘Landscape and Development’.

This document will direct developers to existing SPGs and the main Structure Plan and Local Plan policies and other policy documents which need to be considered when working up development proposals. The list of policies is not exhaustive and the document will evolve over time and be amended to include up to date policies and recommendations. Council departments and sections referred to in this document can be contacted on 0300 100 1800 or see detailed contact list in planning briefs.

Energy efficient design Sustainable design The Council is committed to improving the sustainability of the built environment of the Borders. The Building Research Establishment’s “EcoHomes” has a recognised standard of sustainable design. This covers the following topic areas: x Energy x Transport x Pollution x Materials x Water x Land use and ecology x Health and wellbeing x Site / building management.

Developments will be expected to achieve the “Eco-Homes” rating of “Excellent”. This standard is assessed using the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) and can be applied across the spectrum of housing types. The Eco-Homes excellent standard can be achieved through creative design such as making best use of natural daylight and choosing construction materials that are appropriate to the climate conditions of the development site. This means that even starter homes which are very price sensitive can be built to these standards (where the incorporation of technologies such as solar panels and wind turbines may not be financially viable).

The Eco-Homes standard includes making full use of energy conservation techniques, including:

x Reduction of primary energy use and reduction of CO² emissions through, for example, the siting, form, orientation and layout of buildings which maximise the benefits of heat recycling, solar energy, passive solar gain and the efficient use of natural light; and the use of planting to optimise the balance between summer shading and winter heat daylight gain. x Reduction of water consumption through for example use of water butts for garden use, low-water consumption white goods, showers and WC’s, grey water recycling for internal use. x Green specification of materials including those for basic building elements and finishing elements. x Reduction of construction waste through for example sorting and recycling construction waste on-site. x Designing for life-cycle adaptability.

Advice should be sought from a licensed assessor at an early stage in the project to ensure that the estimated rating will be obtained. A full list of licensed assessors can be found at the Eco-Homes website (www.ecohomes.org) or by contacting the BREEAM office (see contacts in Appendix 2).

Construction methods should allow for building deconstruction which enables fittings and materials to be re-used and / or recycled at the end of the building’s life.

Renewable energy & energy efficiency Development proposals should comply with all relevant national policy to reduce carbon emissions from development, to achieve high standards of energy conservation and to provide on-site renewable energy production where appropriate. These provisions are highlighted in Policy G1 (5) – ‘Quality Standards for New Development’ of the Local Plan in the ‘Renewable Energy’ SPG. Developers must comply with these policies and provide evidence of how they have addressed them. Onsite energy generation should be incorporated into the development wherever possible as well as sustainable building construction and design.

The Consolidated Scottish Borders Structure Plan (2001 – 2018) Policy I21 “Small Scale Renewable Energy Technologies” states:

“Proposals for community and small scale renewable energy generation (or related techniques) will be encouraged where they have no significant adverse impact on the natural and built environment or amenity of the area.”

“All developers, whatever the nature of their proposals, will be encouraged to consider the potential to use materials, designs and technologies which either reduce the impact of energy consumption or reduce the environmental impact of energy generation when formulating proposals.”

The Adopted Local Plan (ALP) 2008 Principle 1 (Sustainability) states:

“In determining planning applications and preparing development briefs, the Council will have regard to the following sustainability principles which underpin all the Plan’s policies and which developers will be expected to incorporate into their developments…”

“… (5) the efficient use of energy and resources, particularly non-renewable resources.”

The ALP policy G1 (5) identifies the standards which will apply to all development, including that:

“ … in terms of layout, orientation, construction and energy supply, the developer has demonstrated that appropriate measures have been taken to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, including the use of renewable energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable construction techniques in accordance with supplementary planning guidance referred to in Appendix D,”

The planning system supports low and zero carbon development through the use of energy efficiency, micro-generation and renewable energy systems. The Council’s approved SPG18: Renewable Energy requires all future developments with a total cumulative floorspace of 500m² or more to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 15% beyond the 2007 Building Regulation CO2 emissions levels. This 15% reduction should be considered a minimum requirement.

The SPG on Renewable Energy states:

(1) The Council now requires all future developments with a total cumulative floorspace of 500m² or more to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) by 15% beyond the 2007 Building Regulations carbon dioxide emission levels.

(2) To achieve this reduction, consideration should first be given to energy efficiency and building design measures.

(3) Where the 15% reduction cannot be met through energy efficiency and design measures then on-site low or zero carbon technologies (LZCT) including renewable energy systems should be used.

(4) Developments under 500m² are also strongly encouraged to achieve an additional 15% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions through these measures.

(5) All applications for planning permission will also now require a statement on how energy efficiency measures and low and zero carbon technologies have been incorporated into the development proposal.

Scottish Planning Policy states that the renewable energy target is for 50% of Scotland’s electricity to be generated from renewable sources by 2020 and 11% of heat demand to be met from renewable sources. These targets are not a cap.

To achieve the required reduction in CO2 emissions the development should first give consideration to energy conservation measures and sustainable design and construction techniques to reduce the energy demand of the development. Once energy demand has been minimised consideration should then be given to the use of low and zero carbon technologies (LZCT) for on-site heat and / or power generation. LZCT includes community heating schemes and combined heat and power schemes which would serve the development as whole.

Developers must submit a statement for the Council’s approval detailing how energy efficiency measures and low and zero carbon technologies will be incorporated into the development proposal, and the level of CO2 reduction that will be achieved.

In this respect, developers should bear in mind the timescale for development in relation to Government proposals for progressive increases in CO2 reductions to meet the 2016 target of net zero carbon emissions for new dwellings. Council aspirations are in line with Government thinking on carbon neutral developments. Meeting these targets is increasingly likely to involve site-wide approaches and communal energy technologies rather than installations on individual dwellings.

Broad guidance on the CO2 emissions reductions achievable from a range of sustainable energy technologies is provided in the table below:

Scale of technology Name of technology Potential

CO2

emissions

reduction

Site-wide / communal Biomass district heating Up to 70%

Gas combined heat and power (CHP) Up to 50%

Biomass combined heat and power (CHP) Up to 50% Wind turbine(s) Up to 50% Individual dwelling Biomass boiler Up to 65% Solar photovoltaic cells / panels Up to 35% Ground source heat pump Up to 35% Advanced improvements to the building fabric Up to 30% Solar thermal hot water Up to 25% Air source heat pump Up to 20% Intermediate improvements to the building fabric Up to 20%

Micro wind turbine Up to 5% Micro combined heat and power Up to 5%

(Source: Entec report for Scottish Borders Council (April 2008))

This table is for indicative purposes only. The Energy Saving Trust and specialist suppliers and contractors will be able to provide up-to-date information and advice which may be of use to developers in formulating proposals.

Water and wastewater capacity Local Plan policy Inf5 ‘Waste Water Treatment Standards’ outlines the Council’s view of the preferred way of dealing with wastewater. In terms of water and wastewater capacity and network issues early contact with Scottish Water is recommended.

Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) Provision for SUDS that effectively manage the flow of rain water runoff by treating it within the site and accords with current design principles are required in all developments. Guidance is outlined in Local Plan policy Inf6 ‘Sustainable Urban Drainage’ and in PAN61 ‘Planning and Sustainable Urban Drainage System’. Scottish Water and SEPA can provide more detailed advice.

Sustainable Buildings

Design and Placemaking The Council has produced a SPG on ‘Placemaking and Design’ (launched January 2010). The document sets out the key sustainable placemaking objectives that any new development in the Scottish Borders should strive to achieve.

Key considerations that need to be considered to achieve high quality buildings and places are summarised in the figure below:

National guidance is available in a number of documents including ‘Designing Places: A Policy Statement for Scotland’, PAN67 ‘Housing Quality’ and PAN 77 ‘Designing Safer Places’.

Designing out crime The Council has an approved SPG on ‘Designing out Crime in the Scottish Borders’ (www.scotborders.gov.uk/life/planningandbuilding/plansandresearch/20618.html) that aims to improve awareness amongst the development industry and householders, and includes practical guidance to ensure the following topics are considered to create an attractive and safer environment: x Planning of sites (including phasing) x Layout of sites (roads and footpaths) x Layout of development (casual surveillance) x Landscaping (location and type of planting and maintenance) x Lighting x Design (site and house design)

National guidance is available in PAN 77 ‘Designing Safer Places’.

Affordable housing The requirement for affordable housing should be met in line with Local Plan Policy H1 ‘Affordable Housing’ and the SPG on Affordable Housing. The proportion of affordable housing to be provided will be in accordance with the present policy and depends on what housing market area a specific site in included in. Affordable housing units are likely to be required on site and should be designed to integrate with other houses on the site.

The current levels of contributions are included in the table below. Housing Market Area Affordable Housing Requirement (%) Berwickshire 20 Central Borders 25 North Ettrick and Lauderdale 15 North Roxburgh 20 North Tweeddale 25 South Roxburgh 25 South Tweeddale 25

The Council has moved to four housing market areas, and revised levels have been produced in a Draft Updated Affordable Housing SPG, which is now subject to public consultation.

Some sites in the Local Plan will be located close to or in conservation areas or close to listed buildings. For new development not to have a negative impact on the built heritage, the Council has outlined its policies in BE1 ‘Listed Buildings’ and BE4 ‘Conservation Areas’. Other relevant policy documents are Historic Scotland’s Scottish Historic Environment Policy.

Structure Plan policy N14, N15 and N16 and Local Plan policy BE2 ‘Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments’ requires detailed investigation where a development proposal impact on Scheduled Ancient Monuments, nationally important sites not yest scheduled, or any other archaeological or historical site. National guidance is available in SPP23 ‘Planning and the Historical Environment’. The Council’s Archaeology Officer can provide more detailed advice.

Landscape enhancements

Open space, green space and play areas Policy G1 ‘Quality Standards for New Developments’ in the Local Plan and Structure Plan policy C6 ‘Open Space’ covers the provision of open space in new developments. Structure Plan policy C7 ‘Play Areas’ needs to be considered as well as the SPG ‘Green Space’ when preparing development proposals.

The SPG on Green Space states that the Council may require developers: x “To provide or fund additional provision where there are identified quantitative deficiencies in provision within the appropriate distance thresholds of a proposed development, or where the development will result in quantitative deficiencies. x To contribute to the enhancement of existing provision when there is a identified qualitative deficiency in provision when there is an identified qualitative deficiency in provision within the appropriate distance thresholds of a proposed development and one effect of the development will be to increase the demand pressure on these spaces and facilities.” The requirement for developments can be very different and the Council will use quantity standards set out in the SPG to determine the scale of contributions required towards new off-site provision or the enhancement of existing off-site provision. Details of the standards are included in the SPG and it also encourages pre-application discussions with the Planning Officers.

Advice on a national level is available within the Scottish Planning Policy, paragraphs 149 and 150 relating to ‘Open Space and Physical Activity’ and PAN65 ‘Planning and Open Space’.

Ecology, habitats and trees Local Plan policies NE3 ‘Biodiversity’, NE4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’ and the SPGs on ‘Trees and Development’, ‘Landscape and Development’ and ‘Biodiversity’ provide guidance on these issues and list what is required for developments.

The main principle for protection of biodiversity is to promote development that is sustainable and protect biodiversity so there is no net loss of biodiversity. The degree of protection of a site depends on its position within the hierarchy of designations to protect species and habitats. The key considerations in terms of landscape are: x Landscape implications of planning applications in terms of site context, proposed layout, future use and maintenance x Minimise impact by retaining existing trees, shrubs, boundary eatures etc. wherever possible.

In terms of trees and development, developer should : x Ensure development schemes include measures to safeguard trees and where appropriate to supplement an area’s tree cover x Provide detailed tree and land survey for application sites in close proximity to trees, or on site which trees are growing.

Detailed arrangements for future maintenance of landscaping on a site will be requested as part of any planning application. Early contact with the Council to discuss biodiversity, trees and landscaping issues is recommended.

Landscape designations A number of allocated sites are located in the proximity of landscape designations, for example Gardens and Designed Landscapes, National Scenic Areas, Areas of Great Landscape Value, Special Area of Conservation and Site of Special Scientific Interest. These designations are protected against adverse impact from development through Local Plan policies BE3 ‘Gardens and Designed Landscapes’, NE1 ‘International Nature Conservation Sites’, NE2 ‘National Nature Conservation Sites’, EP1 ‘National Scenic Areas’ and EP2 ‘Areas of Great Landscape Value’ as well as Structure Plan policies and national policies. Planning proposals for sites in close proximity should detail the impact on these areas and how to mitigate the adverse impact.

Creation of streets and spaces Roads and access Road design should not be conceived in isolation, but as an element in the overall design of the development. The Council's 'Standards for Development Roads' should serve as a guide for the form of development on the site, but flexibility must be exercised so as not to inhibit the design of an innovative less car dominant layout which respects the landform and character of the area. In this regard the Council's SPG on 'Placemaking & Design' serves as a good guide as does the Scottish Government publications on 'Designing Places' and 'Designing Streets' These documents promote an informal system of well connected streets with natural traffic calming (building lines, squares, shared road surfaces etc) built in and equal priority given to all transport modes such as passenger transport, walking and cycling. More details are available in Local Plan policies Inf2 'Protection of Access Routes', Inf3 ''Road Adoption Standards' and the Council's Transportation Standards Scottish Borders Local Plan Appendix D). Developers are advised to contact the Council's Technical Services Department for further advice.

Parking In a development where car parking spaces are allocated to individual properties the provisional requirement will be two parking spaces per dwelling unit (discounting garages). There will be a 25% requirement for visitor parking to be provided in groups of two spaces or more. For communal car parking the provisional requirements, which include visitor parking, is 1.5-1.75 spaces per dwelling unit. More details are available in Local Plan policy Inf4 ‘Parking Provision and Standards’ and the Council’s Transportation Standards (Scottish Borders Local Plan Appendix D). Developers are advised to contact the Council’s Technical Services Department for further advice.

The developer should consider a range of solutions to reduce the impact of car parking on the residential environment. These might include a combination of:

x Avoiding front garden space being entirely given over to parking x Using traditional front garden walls and hedges to structure the street appearance x Designing in shared small scale semi-private courtyard parking x Placing larger parking courtyards behind perimeter blocks x Building shared surfaces in traditional materials rather than using coloured concrete block surfaces – for example in parking zones, subject to adoption requirements, and domestic driveways.

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS ITEM NO 6

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

REPORT BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS

DRAFT MINI PLANNING BRIEF – MAIN STREET, ECCLES

1 PURPOSE

1.1 To seek approval for the draft mini planning brief for the Main Street, Eccles, housing site (see Appendix A) to be used as a basis for public consultation for a 12 week period.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 The site is allocated in the Finalised Local Plan Amendment for housing (AECCL001). The site is 0.2ha and is allocated under Policy H3.

2.2 The site is currently an area overgrown and unkempt ground and is bounded by residential properties to the south, land which currently has planning permission for a residential development of five dwellinghouses to the east, by garden grounds to the east and arable land to the north.

2.3 The Council has prepared this draft mini planning brief for the site to create a development vision, address potential constraints on the site and encourage good quality new development in accordance with sustainability principles which fit with the townscape of the settlement and integrates with its landscape surroundings. The mini planning brief will provide guidance to any developer of the site or any other interested party and will be a material consideration when determining planning applications.

3 CONSULTATION

3.1 The draft mini planning brief will be subject to a 12 week consultation period. The public consultation will include the local Community Council and national stakeholders including Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. The draft mini planning brief will also be published on the Council’s website.

3.2 Consultation on this report has been undertaken with the Clerk to the Council and Head of Legal and Democratic Services, the Head of Audit and Risk, the Chief Financial Officer and the Directors of Technical Services and Social Work and their comments have been incorporated into this report where appropriate.

4 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

4.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from approval of the draft mini planning brief for public consultation. The approved brief will provide guidance to developers for development on the site. 4.2 There are ongoing costs related to staff resources needed to carry out research and management relating to the production of the framework and any printing costs. These costs can be met by Planning and Economic Development.

5 RISK COMMENTARY

5.1 The key risks are considered to be:

Risk of not providing guidance

(i) The lack of guidance would cause uncertainty to the developers and the public and be a barrier to effective decision making by the Council. This could result in an ad hoc and inconsistent decision making with the policies in the Local Plan not being taken fully into account.

(ii) Failure to produce a mini planning brief would reflect badly on the Council’s commitment to improve the design of new development.

(iii) It is considered that the failure to approve the draft planning brief for public consultation would have resource impacts in the Development Management Section, potentially resulting in delays processing planning applications. In addition, it may ultimately have both a negative impact on the development and on the thorough assessment of the environmental impact of development.

Risk of providing guidance

(i) There are no perceived risks related to the adoption of the guidance by the Council.

5.2 In accordance with the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 a pre- screening assessment of the draft mini planning brief for the site has been undertaken to identify whether there will be potentially significant environmental effects. The pre- screening exercise was undertaken using the criteria specified in Schedule 2 of the Act. The pre-screening did not identify any significant environmental effects therefore a full SEA is not required.

6 EQUALITIES

6.1 An equality impact assessment identified that there are no negative equality issues arising from this Brief.

6.2 In terms of rural proofing the Brief for this redevelopment site will not have a negative impact on the rural area.

7 SUMMARY

7.1 The draft planning brief seeks approval for public consultation to provide guidelines for development of the site.

8 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 It is recommended that the Planning and Building Standards Committee:

(a) Approves the draft mini planning brief for the Main Street, Eccles housing site as detailed in Appendix A as a basis for public consultation for a 12 week period, and that if there are any substantive comments then they should be reported back to this Committee.

(b) Agrees that if there are no substantive comments arising from consultation that the mini brief should be delegated for approval to the Head of Planning and Building Standards. Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Author(s) Name Designation Martin Wanless Plans & Research Manager Karen Hope Planning Officer (Plans & Research)

Background Papers: None Previous Minute Reference: None

Contact us at Planning and Economic Development, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA. Telephone: 01835 825060. E-mail: [email protected] Scottish Borders Finalised Local Plan Amendment Supplementary Planning Guidance

Main Street, Eccles Draft Mini Planning Brief September 2010 Main Street, Eccles Mini Planning Brief Introduction Policy context This mini planning brief sets out the main opportunities and Structure & Local Plan constraints relating to this overgrown area of ground in Eccles. Eccles lies within the Berwickshire Housing Market Area, as It provides a framework vision for the future development of the defined in the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan site which is allocated in the Finalised Local Plan Amendment 2001-2018. The Local Plan identifies this site, with an area of 0.2 for housing. ha, for housing (site code AECCL001) with an indicative capacity of 5 units. A number of policies included in the Local context Finalised Local Plan Amendment will be applicable to this site Eccles is located 13 miles to the south of Duns. The site is including ’Principle 1-Sustainability’, ‘G1-Quality Standards for located on the northern side of the village and is reasonably New Development’, ‘G7-Infill Development’, ‘H1-Affordable inconspicuous from the Main Street, to the rear of an existing Housing’, G4-Flooding’ and ‘H3-Land Use Allocations’. row of terraced properties. Furthermore, key Supplementary Planning Guidance include ‘Placemaking and Design’, ‘Renewable Energy’, Landscape and Development’ and ‘Trees and Development’.

Figure 1-Local Context Figure 2-Aerial Image of Local Context 1 Main Street, Eccles Mini Planning Brief Site Analysis The site is located to the rear of a distinctive row of properties The northern boundary of the site, which follows the settlement which have their frontages onto the Main Street of Eccles (nos boundary of Eccles in the Local Plan, bounds an arable field. 10-18). These are a mixture of single, one-and-a-half storey and The southern boundaries of the site bound the gardens of the one-and-three-quarter storey properties finished in natural stone existing properties to the south where a variety of and slate for the most part. boundary treatments exist, including walls, fences and hedges.

The site, which is accessed via vacant ground to the south east, is currently an area of overgrown and unkempt ground. The western boundary of the site is defined by an existing hedgerow for the most part, with trees beyond, to the south by the aforesaid residential properties, to the north by agricultural land and to the east by a vacant area of land Figure 4—Views from which has planning consent for the erection of five detached within site. dwellinghouses, in a courtyard form.

Existing open boundary to north

Nos 13-18 Main Street, Eccles Existing properties to south

Nos 4 –6 Main Street, Eccles 2 Nos 5-6 Main Street, Eccles Existing trees to east Figure 3—Main Street, Eccles. Main Street, Eccles Mini Planning Brief Opportunities and constraints

Opportunities x There are no special features on this flat site, making it relatively easy to develop. x Structure planting along the northern boundary of the site Figure 5-Site layout and would be required to define the edge of the settlement elevations of approved and appropriate boundary treatment along the southern development to the east. boundary would be required to safeguard the amenity of existing dwellinghouses. A management scheme for planting would be required. x There is an existing consented housing development immediately to the east of this site with access from Eccles Main Street, there will be a requirement for a slight modification to the consented layout in order to gain a satisfactory access. x The site is large enough to accommodate a scheme which would be in character with other houses in the vicinity, with potential for row housing and/or courtyard Arcade Developments Ltd (06/02140/FUL) form.

Constraints x Existing hedgerow along the western boundary would need to be safeguarded and retained and existing trees adjacent to this boundary should be protected. Supplementary Planning Guidance on ‘Trees and Development’ must be duly considered, including the avoidance of shading onto rear gardens. Farm buildings at Eccles Mains Farm to east of x The residential amenity of existing residential properties approved development within the vicinity would need to be protected. x Flood risk from overland water flow would require to be addressed and mitigated.

Eccles Mains Farmhouse to east of approved development. Main Street, Eccles Mini Planning Brief Development Vision Figure 6—Development Vision—for illustrative purposes only The aspiration is to develop a high quality housing development that is responsive to the local context. Careful consideration is required of the relationship between the new development and the existing properties within the vicinity.

It is envisaged that a courtyard layout and/or row housing would best suit this site, the following must be considered: x In terms of layout, orientation, construction and energy supply, appropriate measures must be taken to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, including the use of renewable energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable construction techniques. x The design (scale, massing, form and materials) and density of the development should take reference from the neighbouring terraced properties and the consented site to the east. An overly engineered access should be avoided and shared surfaces should be considered. x The dwellinghouses must create a positive, attractive frontage, with overlooking to public spaces where Development Contributions possible. The building frontage should define the key x Affordable Housing—The requirement for affordable entrance and arrival into the site, creating a definitive housing should be met in line with Local Plan Policy H1. A sense of place. contribution of 20-25% would be required from this site. x Use of appropriate styles of high quality boundary x Education—A financial contribution towards Berwickshire treatment in order to help frame spaces, define public High School would be required. and private spaces and contain car parking. x Design the parking layout integral to the spaces e.g. Submission Requirements grouped in attractive courtyards. x Design statement. x Appropriate structure planting along the northern x Energy statement. boundary in order to provide an attractive settlement x Context study: demonstrate an understanding of context edge, incorporating tree and hedge planting, and x Site photos: highlight key views and how the design will high quality boundary treatment along the southern respond to these. boundary to safeguard amenity of existing properties. x 3D visualisation material: sketches or computer generated These are opportunities to create native thorn species visualisations showing the development in context. 4 hedgerows to enhance the local hedgerow habitat net x Landscape plan. work and provide the necessary structure planting. PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS ITEM NO 7

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

REPORT BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS

DRAFT MINI PLANNING BRIEF – WEST OF ST DUNSTAN’S, LILLIESLEAF

1 PURPOSE

1.1 To seek approval for the draft mini planning brief for the West of St Dunstan’s, Lilliesleaf housing site (see Appendix A) to be used as a basis for public consultation for a 12 week period.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 The site is allocated in the Finalised Local Plan Amendment for housing (ALILL003). The site is 1.5ha and is allocated under Policy H3. It has an indicative figure of 15 units.

2.2 The open site is located at the extreme western edge of Lilliesleaf and fronts onto the B6400. It is currently used for grazing and has a general purpose agricultural shed positioned in the north east corner. There is a hedge which runs along the roadside boundary and the existing access is located along the south west corner.

3 CONSULTATION

4 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

5 RISK COMMENTARY

5.1 The key risks are considered to be:

Risk of not providing guidance

(ii) Failure to produce a mini planning brief would reflect badly on the Council’s commitment to improve the design of new development.

(iii) It is considered that the failure to approve the draft planning brief for public consultation would have resource impacts in the Development Management Section, potentially resulting in delays processing planning applications. In addition, it may ultimately have both a negative impact on the development and on the thorough assessment of the environmental impact of development.

Risk of providing guidance

(i) There are no perceived risks related to the adoption of the guidance by the Council.

6 EQUALITIES

6.1 An equality impact assessment identified that there are no negative equality issues arising from this Brief.

6.2 In terms of rural proofing the Brief for this redevelopment site will not have a negative impact on the rural area.

7 SUMMARY

7.1 The draft planning brief seeks approval for public consultation to provide guidelines for development of the site.

8 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 It is recommended that the Planning and Building Standards Committee:

(a) Approves the draft mini planning brief as detailed in Appendix A as a basis for public consultation for a 12 week period, and that if there are any substantive comments then they should be reported back to this Committee.

(b) Agrees that if there are no substantive comments arising from consultation that the mini brief should be delegated for approval to the Head of Planning and Regulatory Standards. Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Standards

Author(s) Name Designation Martin Wanless Plans & Research Manager Laura Hill Assistant Planning Officer (Plans & Research)

Background Papers: None Previous Minute Reference: None

West of St Dunstans, Lilliesleaf Draft Mini Planning Brief September 2010 West of St Dunstans, Lilliesleaf Mini Planning Brief Introduction Policy context

This mini planning brief sets out the main opportunities and Structure & Local Plan constraints of this short term housing site in Lilliesleaf. It Lilliesleaf is located in the Primary Development Hub, as part provides a framework vision for the future development of the of the Development Strategy approved in the Consolidated site which is allocated for housing in the Finalised Local Plan Structure Plan 2001-2018. Amendment. A number of policies included in the Finalised Local Plan

Amendment will be applicable to this site including ’Principle Local context 1-Sustainability’, ‘G1-Quality Standards for New Lilliesleaf is located seven miles south east of Selkirk set within Development’, ‘G7-Infill Development’, ‘H1-Affordable the wooded upland fringe valley of the Ale Water with the Housing’ and ‘H3-Land Use Allocations’. Furthermore, key Minto Hills to the South. To the north is part of the River Tweed Supplementary Planning Guidance include ‘Placemaking Special Area of Conservation, a wildlife site of international and Design’, ‘Renewable Energy’ and Landscape and importance. Development’.

Figure 1 - Aerial image of the site Figure 2 - Local context 1 West of St Dunstans, Lilliesleaf Mini Planning Brief Site analysis

The site is located within Lilliesleaf, where the settlement layout is predominantly linear and development of this site, on its western edge will continue the existing pattern, forming an extension to the settlement.

The site is located next to St Dunstan Farm, where an existing housing allocation is under development. The site is currently used for grazing and has a general purpose agricultural shed in the north eastern corner. Vehicular access is achievable from the B6400 to the south.

The site is allocated for Housing within the Finalised Local Plan Amendment and has a site area of 1.5ha with an indicative capacity of 15 units. The Access into the site from the south existing site boundaries consist of post and wire fencing and hedgerows. The Plan sets out a requirement for new Structure Planting/Landscaping along the northern and western boundaries of the site. Figure 4 - Views of the site

View to the north of the site

Figure 3 - Views from the site to the south View to the east of the site 2 West of St Dunstans, Lilliesleaf Mini Planning Brief Opportunities Constraints x The design and layout of the site should optimise the southerly x The existing hedges and aspect to make best use of the microclimate and reduce trees along the southern energy usage. boundary of the site should x The site benefits from attractive views of the Minto Hills to the be conserved and south. enhanced wherever x Structure planting along the western boundary of the site is possible. required to define the edge of the settlement and enhance its x Due to the distance of the setting. A management scheme for planting would be site from the centre of required. Lilliesleaf it x The site benefits from good should not feel vehicular access onto the disconnected from the rest of B6400 to south of the site. Figure 6 - the settlement. x Development offers the Existing x Any opportunity to create a new properties development frontage on to the road within must not have a providing a sense of arrival Lilliesleaf into the settlement and negative creating a definitive sense of impact on any place. protected species within the area. Improved pedestrian links to Entrance to Lilliesleaf x the centre of the settlement should be created. x The rural character and hedging on the western edge Figure 5 - Images of settlement should be of Lilliesleaf retained as part of the development of the site.

Site under construction at St Dunstans Farm 3 West of St Dunstans, Lilliesleaf Mini Planning Brief Development Vision Figure 7 - Development Vision - for illustrative purposes

The aspiration is to develop a high quality housing development that is responsive to the local context. Careful consideration is to be given to the relationship between the proposed new development and the existing properties within the vicinity. It is envisaged that a courtyard layout or tiered terraced housing would best suit this site and the following must be considered: xThe site should continue the linear layout of the village and should have a key frontage onto the road. The building frontages should define the key entrance to the site, creating a definite sense of place. xExisting hedgerows and trees should be retained wherever possible and incorporated into the design of the development. xThe design, orientation and layout should create optimum microclimate and maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, including the use of renewable energy. xThere should be a landscape buffer to the north incorporating two clumps of larger trees. The west of the site should provide an attractive settlement Submission Requirements edge, incorporating a hedge with individual smaller trees. These are The following should be provided alongside the opportunities to create native thorn species hedgerows to enhance the planning application: local hedgerow habitat network and provide the necessary structure planting. xDesign statement x xProperties should preferably be no higher than one and a half storeys in Energy statement height to ensure minimal impact on the views and the rural aspect of the xContext study: demonstrate an understanding of entrance to the village. context xSite photos: highlight key views and how the Development Contributions design will respond to these xAffordable Housing - The requirement for affordable housing should be met x3D visualisation material: sketches or computer in line with Local Plan Policy H1. Currently a developer contribution of 25% generated visualisations showing the would be required from this site (based on SPG Affordable Housing development in context approved 2007). xLandscape plan xWaverley Railway Contributions - the site falls within the area where contributions towards the Waverley Railway Reinstatement will be required. 4 PLANNING & BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE ITEM NO 8

13TH SEPTEMBER 2010

REPORT BY HEAD OF PLANNING & REGULATORY SERVICES

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION UNDER SECTION 36 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 – PROPOSED WIND FARM AT AIKENGALL II

1. PURPOSE OF REPORT:

1.1 To advise the Scottish Government of the response from Scottish Borders Council on the application by Community Windpower Ltd for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 57(2) of the Town and Country (Scotland) Act 1997 for a wind farm, comprising of 22 wind turbines and ancillary equipment at ‘Aikengall II’ (Wester Dod), in the Lammermuir Hills.

1.2 The development proposal has been revised since Scottish Borders Council submitted its objection to the Scottish Government in respect of a 30-turbine scheme in February 2010. 8 Turbines within the Scottish Borders have been deleted from the proposal and the site now entirely lies within East Lothian. An addendum to the original Environmental Statement (ES) has been submitted.

1.3 The consultation response required from Scottish Borders Council is now one of a neighbouring authority. Previously, the SBC Planning Department considered the proposal as a relevant authority.

2. PROCEDURE

2.1 The Scottish Government processes applications for wind energy developments exceeding 50MW generating capacity, not the local planning authority. Consequently, Government has consulted East Lothian and Scottish Borders Councils for the authorities’ views on the proposal. They have also advertised the application and have carried out direct consultation with other interested bodies. There is therefore no need for Scottish Borders Council to undertake a tandem process although consultation has been undertaken with relevant officers within the Council.

2.2 Having previously objected to the 30-turbine scheme, Members of the Planning and Building Standards Committee must now consider the revised scheme for 22 turbines within East Lothian Council, as a neighbouring authority.

2.3 The response of Members in relation to the planning recommendation within this report will constitute the formal opinion of Scottish Borders Council and will be reported to Government to aid in its consideration of the Section 36 Application.

3. BACKGROUND TO REPORT

3.1 A screening opinion was sought on 12th December 2008 in relation to a potential 30 turbine wind farm with blade tip height of 126.5m by Community Windpower Ltd. A 1 revised scoping request was sought 16th March 2009, but for taller turbines with a tip height of 145m. On 4th September 2009, a Section 36 application for the development considered in this report was submitted to Government.

3.2 In February 2010, Members of the Scottish Borders Council Planning and Building Standards Committee opted to object to the 30 turbine proposal. The objection was notified to Government immediately thereafter. The decision of Members referred to Government reads as follows:

“The proposed development would be contrary to Policies I19, I20 and N11 Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001- 2018 and Policies EP2 and D4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in that:

x it would have a significant adverse impact on the landscape character, integrity and countryside amenity of the Lammermuir Hills Area of Great Landscape Value;

x The land form containment is very limited and the turbines will have a significantly harmful visual impact on high sensitivity receptors that include residential properties within the 5km zone of the windfarm, public viewpoints and recreational users of the Lammermuir Hills ;

x The development will result in unacceptable cumulative landscape and visual impacts

x The proposal will be located out with the preferred Area of Search as identified in Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001- 2018”

3.3 An addendum to the Environmental Statement, dated July 2010 shows the site boundary revised so that the entire site is now exclusively within East Lothian, and the southernmost 8 turbines that were within the Scottish Borders have been removed. The layout of the remainder of the development remains the same.

4. SITE AND APPLICATION DESCRIPTION

4.1 The site, which has an overall area of 627 hectares, is within the Lammermuir Hills, a landscape designated as an Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). The nearest village within the Scottish Borders is Abbey St Bathans, approximately 4.5km to the south-east. The site is irregular in shape, and does not strictly follow any physical or topographical boundaries.

4.2 The application site is bordered to the north-west by the existing Aikengall I Wind Farm, to the south-west by Upper Moneynut Forest, to the south-east by open upland moor including Ewielairs Hill, to the east in part by plantation woodland and elsewhere by the open moor. It includes Monynut Edge, which is prominent in views from the west and east.

4.3 The proposed windfarm comprises of the following elements:

x 22 wind turbines @ 79.2MW, ground to blade-tip height 145m x Access tracks x Crane pads x Temporary construction compound x Borrow pits x One meteorological mast x On-site control room x Electrical substation and compound

2 The vehicular access to/through the site is intended via the existing route to the north currently serving Aikengall I. The access road would be continued with no direct access proposed from the Scottish Borders into the wind farm site.

4.4 The application is supported by an Environmental Statement and the July 2010 addendum. It deals principally with matters of visual impact, noise, access and shadow flicker.

5. THIRD PARTY RESPONSES

5.1 Third party representations are submitted to the Scottish Government and it is for the Scottish Government to take these into consideration when assessing the proposed development. A number of representations have been made to the Council by the Community Council and it is legitimate for members to give consideration to these submissions in their deliberations on the proposal.

6. PLANNING ISSUES

6.1 The key factors relevant to the determination of this application are whether the proposed wind farm complies with Scottish Borders development plan policy, particularly policies relating to renewable energy development, designated landscape areas and nature conservation.

7. SCOTTISH PLANNING POLICY – RENEWABLE ENERGY

7.1 Of relevance to the consideration of this proposal is the Scottish Planning Policy from February 2010. Sections 182-186 refer generally to renewable energy; Sections 187- 191 refer specifically to on-shore wind farms. This superseded the previous SPP6 ‘Renewable Energy’ in February 2010.

7.2 The SPP states that Planning authorities should support the development of wind farms in locations where the technology can operate efficiently and environmental and cumulative impacts can be satisfactorily addressed. It confirms that the current target for renewable energy generation in Scotland is 50% by 2020. The Aikengall II site has the potential to make a significant contribution towards assisting the fulfilment of this policy and considerable weight must to given to this consideration. This factor is also linked with the reduction in the remaining opportunities for windfarm proposals of sufficient scale to meaningfully contribute to Government targets in (or in this case, adjoining) the Scottish Borders.

The SPP highlights that planning authorities should identify areas for search for onshore windfarms within their areas and guide developers to suitable areas for windfarms. The basis of the work carried out by the Macaulay Institute on the Council’s behalf identified those areas of the Borders where wind turbines could be located with least visibility as seen by the most sensitive receptors i.e. residential properties. It identified that wind turbines located towards the centre of undulating uplands and avoiding the outer hill tops will benefit from the screening provided by the surrounding landform and therefore have limited impacts on the wider public perception of their surroundings i.e. from the more densely settled lowlands. This effect is particularly relevant in the rolling Border hills and provides an effective way of minimising impacts on well known views and skylines. 8 ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

8.1 The revised ES has given coverage to the potential magnitude, the significance and the acceptability of the predicted changes to the landscape and visual amenity in the study area. Through reference to national guidance, Council policies and through the use of zones of theoretical influence mapping, photomontages, wireframe drawings, the ES draws a number of conclusions.

3 8.2 The development requires to be assessed against a number of relevant policies in the Approved Structure Plan 2001-2018 and Adopted Local Plan 2008 and these are listed in full in appendix A, along with a note of the relevant government policy and advice.

8.3 Of the listed policies, the key criteria based policies relevant to the determination of this proposal are:

x Policy I20 of the Approved Structure Plan and criteria (i) of the policy states that wind energy developments will be assessed against the landscape character of the area.

x Policies N9 and N11 state that proposals for development and land use change will be guided by the Scottish Borders Landscape Assessment with the aim of maintaining the integrity of the landscape character and enhancing its quality and the later policy specifically seeking to safeguard the intrinsic qualities and character of the Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV).

x Policy EP2 and Policy D4 of the Adopted Local Plan support Structure Plan Policies N11 and I20 respectively with regard to landscape character and development within an AGLV. Policy D4 develops the policy position further by identifying the key features considered necessary in identifying appropriate locations for wind farm developments. Appropriate locations normally being (a) within large scale landscape settings defined as Upland Type in the Landscape Classification hierarchy contained in the Borders Landscape Assessment, and (b) enclosed by surrounding landform thereby minimising external visibility of the development.

8.4 Many of the environmental impacts of the development could be mitigated or controlled by imposing conditions and these relate to archaeology, noise, rights of way/public access, and nature conservation. The principa concern therefore relates to landscape and visual impact (including cumulative impact). However, each individual subject area will be given specific coverage in the next few sections of this report.

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

8.5 The site is known to be of archaeological interest. The original ES gives coverage to matters of archaeology, but not to the complete satisfaction of the SBC Archaeology Officer. This did not present a reason to resist the development, but did identify a potential requirement for specific planning conditions relating to the entire area, that would require investigation prior to development as per the following:

x A systematic field survey (incorporating transects of an orientation, dimensions and shape to be agreed) of the total development area excluding areas already studied for the ES. x An evaluation of peat deposits, depths and potentials for archaeological and paleoenvironmental survival. Additionally, an assessment of possible direct impacts is necessary along with recommendations for avoidance or mitigating impacts. x A Watching Brief over all areas where ground breaking takes place. This should involve an archaeological monitoring of top-soil stripping to sub-soils and the identification, recording and recovery of any buried features or artefacts. x If significant archaeology is located as a result of the Watching Brief, an agreed strategy will be devised to either preserve in situ buried features and finds, or to fully excavate, record, conserve, report and publish the discoveries. x All results will be presented to the Planning Authority as a synthetic report. In addition, an entry in Discovery and Excavation in Scotland is expected. 4 8.6 In summary, in respect of archaeology there is no planning objection, but conditions would be recommended to the Government in relation to this subject.

Landscape and Visual Impact:

8.7 The site lies along a hill ridge called Monynut Edge and includes the summit at Wester Dod. The highest point of the site is 416m AOD. In East Lothian the land area is described as “Lammermuir Plateau Character Area” and this is essentially a continuation of the same character type as “1LP: Dissected Moorland Plateau: Lammermuir Plateau”, (an Upland Type) as defined the Borders Landscape Assessment.

8.8 The key policy for consideration of landscape impacts of the development is ‘Policy D4 – Renewable Energy Development’ in the Adopted Local Plan dated 2008. The policy develops the Council’s position in respect of the consideration of impact on landscape character and countryside amenity by identifying the key features that locations should exhibit in order to be considered appropriate locations for proposed wind farm developments. It is contended that that the development complies with points 1 and 2, as set out in Policy D4, in that such adverse effects as are indentified in the ES can be mitigated and that any wider economic and environmental benefits outweigh the potential damage the development will cause. Taking the defined criteria of the Policy D4 in turn:

Criteria 1 - The site is not within a ‘preferred area of search’ as defined by Structure Plan policy I19; because it is within the Lammermuir Hills AGLV but this would not in itself exclude the site for consideration for a windfarm. This requires more detailed analysis of the characteristics of the site and its surroundings and the constituent elements of the application proposal. On a qualified basis, the proposal could comply with the terms of criteria 1.

Criteria 2 - The site is within a large scale landscape (Upland Type) as defined by the Borders Landscape Assessment, the preferred type in terms of policy D4. This is an important consideration because larger scale landscapes, lacking the detailed pattern of field enclosures, houses etc, found in the smaller scale landscapes, can visually accommodate the large size of turbines more easily because there are no features to emphasise their height. The development is considered to be consistent with criteria 2.

Criteria 3 - The best integrated windfarms developments in the Scottish Borders have benefited from being enclosed by surrounding landform with screening from surrounding hills thereby minimising external visibility of the development. PAN 45 suggests that up to 2km away the proposal will have a prominent impact, while a 2- 5km distance will result in a relatively prominent impact, with 5km or more having an impact in clear visibility. Landform containment for the original proposal was best illustrated by Figure 7.10 of Volume II of the applicant’s ES dated July 2009. It showed very limited containment within the most sensitive 2km range but also very little receptor sensitivity. Within the wider 5km range, there was some landform containment to the north and south but there was also a band of visibility to the east including parts of Oldhamstocks and the building groups at Hoprig, Fulfordlees, Ecclaw, Blackburn Mill and Whiteburn but overall, the ZTV area had relatively low receptor sensitivity within the 5km range.

This situation is considered not have changed adversely in the context of the revised Addendum. Furthermore, in particular when viewed from B6355 at Moss Law (Figure 7.36 rev. a), Ewielairs Hill now acts to contain the development to some extent whereas previously the turbines crept behind and southwards beyond it and in this context were not particularly well contained. The development is considered to be consistent with criteria (3) of Policy D4.

5 Criteria 4 - In terms of impacts on other high sensitivity receptors, there are some views from the A1 trunk road and the A6112 Duns to Grantshouse road and from a short stretch of the A1107 Coldingham Moor road as well as from the village of Cockburnspath but these should be within acceptable limits given the distances involved and as compared to the existing landscape condition i.e. where wind turbines are already part of the established view. It is contended that the turbines will have a limited harmful visual and landscape impact on high sensitivity receptors from a range of public viewpoints and users of footpaths and bridle paths in the vicinity of the site and that the proposal is consistent with criteria 4.

Criteria 5(i) - In terms of landscape character, the area is a large scale landscape and therefore better able to accommodate large turbines. Any qualities of remoteness have already been considerably reduced by the existing windfarm to the north at Aikengall I and to the west at Crystal Rig. It is accepted that the site does not display “remote” or “wildland” qualities such as to become a determining factor in this application. The development complies with the terms of criteria 5(i).

Criteria 5 (ii) - See 4 above. The most successfully integrated windfarms, in respect of visual impact on receptors, combine a limited numbers of properties with a limited % ZTV coverage. However, it is also argued that where the ZTV percentage has been relatively high the impact is off set by very few residential properties existing. The Council’s policy framework that encourages development into the Upland Landscape Types, such as this, has been successful in allowing the integration of windfarms into the Borders Landscape, whilst limiting their impact on existing residents and visitors alike. The development is considered to be consistent with criteria 5(ii) of Policy D4.

Criteria 5(iii) - See 4 above. There will be ‘coincident’ cumulative impact as the proposal will appear as an extension to Aikengall I and there would be a significant concentration of wind turbines in the Aikengall / Crystal Rig area as illustrated by a number of the viewpoint studies in the ES. However, in most of these examples, the receptor sensitivity is already lowered by the presence of existing windfarms and it can be argued that it is preferable to accept coincident cumulative impact and concentrate on the sequential cumulative effects.

The level of sequential cumulative impact with Aikengall I can be gauged from figure 7.54 rev. a, the additional ZTV attributable to this application being the pale blue area. Sequential cumulative effects including Crystal Rig are illustrated at figure 7.58 rev. a. In both these cases the major part of the ‘additional’ area is to the east and south east and the application would undoubtedly become a significant skyline feature when viewed from these areas. However, as already noted above, the receptor sensitivity is generally low. The development is considered to be consistent with criteria 5(iii) of Policy D4.

Criteria 5(iv) – (viii) – The issues relating to generation of noise, traffic generation, including access during construction, ecology and ornithology, interference with radio telecommunications and aviation and the provisions for decommissioning are dealt with elsewhere in this report. Any adverse impact in respect of these matters can be mitigated either through actions already identified in the ES or through the imposition of suitably worded conditions. The development is considered to be consistent with criteria 5(iv) – (viii) of Policy D4.

Criteria (ix) - In terms of consideration of cumulative impacts See 5 (iii) above and 7.11 – 7.15 below.

The policy also requires that the development be considered within the context of national policy. It is contended that the application is in alignment with the provisions of SPP and PAN45 and that it has been found to be consistent with policy for the reasons set out in this report.

6 8.9 The landscape assessment of proposed windfarms is always problematic as there are a number of variables that influence human perceptions of landscape change and these vary widely over time, from landscape to landscape and between different individuals. In terms of visual impacts on receptors such as residential properties or road users, this application is considered to be within the tolerances accepted elsewhere in the Borders. There is a degree of concern about the potential of this proposal to increase the visual effects as skyline features within the Lammermuir Hills AGLV. However, the degree of sequential cumulative impact is relatively low and receptor sensitivity is also already lowered by the existence of constructed windfarms in the same view. The area largely lacks the qualities of remoteness that might make development unexpected and unacceptably intrusive and it may therefore be concluded that there is not sufficient basis, on landscape and visual grounds, to oppose the application.

8.10 In summary, the landscape impact of the proposed development is considered to be acceptable, and no conditions are to be recommended that would seek modify height, siting or type.

Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact

8.11 Matters relating to the cumulative impact of the proposed development with existing and consented wind farms have been considered in the previous section. However, it must be acknowledged that other developments, either the subject of undetermined planning applications, or schemes at scoping or screening stage may be influential at some stage in the future, if not presently. The submitted ES addendum does not give coverage to the planning permission at Brockholes Farm under ref. 09/00516/FUL, for 3 no. turbines nor the as yet undetermined application for two large turbines at Neuk Farm (Kinegar Quarry) near Cockburnspath (10/00364/FUL).Whilst the Council is aware of interest in developing other sites in the locality it is only applications that are in the planning process that can be taken account of in its deliberations on cumulative impacts.

8.12 It must be noted that since this application was considered at the February 2010 Planning and Building Standards Committee, 09/00516/FUL at Brockholes has now been determined favourably. It must also be noted that the Neuk Farm/Kinegar application was submitted early in 2010 and was did not become part of the consideration of cumulative impact in the report presented to Members in February 2010. The latter proposes 2 turbines with a blade tip height of up to 130m.

8.13 It is likely that there would be a degree of cumulative visual impact involving the Brockholes Farm permission for three turbines (79m to tip as approved) – this is reflected in the Landscape and Visual Assessment submitted with 09/00516/FUL.

8.14

8.15 It is reasonable to conclude that the primary cumulative visual impact concerns relate to the interaction of the current Aikengall II proposal with existing and consented developments at Crystal Rig (built), Aikengall I (built) and arguably Drone Hill (consented), although the Kinegar scheme is realistically likely to introduce a level of sequential cumulative impact if it also receives planning permission.

Ecology, Habitats and Wildlife:

8.16 The Council’s Structure Plan Policies N1: Local Biodiversity Action Plan; N2: International sites; N3: National sites; N5 Local Biodiversity Action. Also, adopted Local Plan Policies NE1: International Nature Conservation Sites; Policy NE2: National Nature Conservation Sites; and NE3: Local Biodiversity apply. Guidance on the Council’s requirements is given in the Supplementary Planning Guidance for

7 Biodiversity, which sets out the Council’s requirements in Sections 4.1 Environmental Impact assessment, 4.2 Ecological Impact Assessment and for species and habitats in Sections 5 and 6 of the SPG. No reference has been made to this document or in parts to the requirements of the Scottish Borders LBAP.

Ornithology:

8.17 It is considered that there are a number of deficiencies in the way the data within the EIA has been presented and analysed

x Collision Risk Modelling is assessed per vantage point and assumes 25% shutdown periods. It is not clear that this is consistent with standard methodology (SNH 2005).

x It is not clear whether any data on breeding protected raptors has been obtained from the Lothian & Borders Raptor study group and been used to inform the EIA.

x There has been no assessment of cumulative effects, the site is adjacent to four consented wind farms (Crystal rig I, II, IIa and Aikengall I) and is approximately 10km from Black Hill and 12km from Drone Hill.

x The registrations from Moorland Bird surveys are not clearly presented in Fig. 8.5. A series of three maps would have been helpful to show breeding waders, moorland passerines and other species. There appear to be three curlew registrations (3 pairs?) and seven snipe registrations (seven pairs). The results are presented as two pairs of curlew and 6 pairs of snipe (Table 8.5 p167)

8.18 The Environmental Statement (ES) suggests that there will be a moderate impact on merlin, peregrine, goshawk and golden plover and low impact on other species (p179 Table 8.27). Recent research (Pearce-Higgins et al. 2009) suggests that some moorland breeding birds including curlew and snipe, may be displaced from areas within 500m of turbines. This should be used to inform the suggested species and habitat mitigation proposals.

8.19 The records for wintering twite and ring ouzel (breeding season) are noted. However, measures should be included within the habitat management plan proposals to provide enhancements for these species.

8.20 Section 8.2.6 p179 of the EIA Reducing Impact and mitigation recommends a species and habitat management plan which is to be welcomed (see also Habitats below). The following section, Reducing Impact: Removal of Red-legged Partridge pens, suggests that the developer had advocated removal of these pens prior to survey as they were attracting raptors onto the site. This would appear to be a rather unfortunate admission that they sought to manipulate the baseline data.

8.21 Nonetheless, it would be reasonable to adopt creative mitigation measures to ensure that areas away from the turbines and development area are made more attractive for foraging raptors through moorland and grassland enhancements to increase prey outside the site and so that raptors are not moving across the wind farm site from breeding site to foraging grounds. Such off-site measures can be secured through legal agreement.

8.22 The Species and Habitats Management Plan should include moorland enhancement measures for breeding and wintering waders, on-site and off-site measures for raptors and golden plover, woodland edge improvements for merlin and black grouse (in areas where they do not increase the collision risk for these species), farmland

8 improvements at Aikengall and Monynut for farmland species and waders and enhancement for twite and ring ouzel.

8.23 For moorland breeding birds, avoidance of the breeding bird season as far as possible is a sensible mitigation (section 8 Reducing Impact p179).

8.24 Despite the deficiencies in the assessment of impacts on ornithological interest, it is unlikely that there will be a significant impact on regionally important ornithological interest and, therefore, appropriate mitigation, compensation and enhancement applies. A condition requiring that no works are to commence during the breeding bird season (March- August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority is recommended, if planning permission is granted.

Mammals:

8.25 It is not clear when, specifically, surveys occurred and what the survey effort was. Desk top studies were carried out but it is unclear whether local biological records were obtained and used.

Otter:

8.26 A couch/ lying up site was located just outside the Scottish Borders part of the sites and there is activity along the Crib burn/ Short Crib burn within Scottish Borders. The distance from the couches to turbines and infrastructure appears to be several hundred metres. It is not clear whether Monynut water (part of the River Tweed SAC) was surveyed.

Bats:

8.27 A bat survey was carried out, but it is not clear whether this met the requirements of standard guidance (Natural England Technical note TIN051 is currently widely adopted as standard guidance). Further advice on statutory protected species will be available from SNH. It is not clear whether local biological records have been obtained or used. To note (p202), the CRoW act does not apply to Scotland.

Badgers:

8.29 Limited badger activity was recorded on and adjacent to the site. It is accepted that there is unlikely to be significant impacts on the regional or local badger population.

Other:

8.30 There were no records of water vole or red squirrel recorded.

8.31 The ES advocates a species and habitat mitigation plan as part of a programme of mitigation for construction and operation. This notes measures for tracks and crossings, riparian corridors, measures to prevent pollution of watercourses, marking buffer areas around sensitivities and pre-construction checks. A condition is recommended in the event of planning permission being granted, which would require that prior to the commencement of works checking surveys for protected species (including otter, badger, breeding birds) be undertaken. The results of these surveys should be used to inform construction activities, micro-siting and any required mitigation proposals for protected species on the site to be agreed with the planning authority.

River Tweed SAC:

8.32 The ES provides very little assessment of impacts on the River Tweed SAC. The designated part of Monynut water (part of the River Tweed SAC) occurs along the far

9 south-western boundary of the site and burns drain directly off the site into the designated Monynut water (Crib burn, Short Crib burn, Pyat Grain. There appears to be an absence of deep peat on site (although no peat survey has been submitted) and therefore, low risk of peat slide. There also appears to be no significant areas of glacial deposits that may be affected. However, it is noted that Section 10 Hydrology (p265) suggests that information in the East Lammermuir Deans Wildlife Management Plan indicates that the area is susceptible to flash flooding with surges and erosion events. It may be unlikely that the development would have a likely significant effect on qualifying interest of the River Tweed SAC (otter, atlantic salmon, river, brook, sea lamprey species and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation) or an adverse effect on the integrity of the River Tweed SAC. Advice on statutory protected habitats will be provided by SNH, SEPA will provide guidance on the requirements to protect water bodies.

8.33 The fisheries section (p220) identified good populations of trout but no evidence of salmon or lamprey. This report also advocates future monitoring of trout populations. It suggested that the likelihood of impacts on the local trout population to be low.

Non-statutory habitats:

8.34 Phase1 habitat survey the Scottish Borders component of the site is dominated by dry dwarf shrub heath and unimproved acid grassland. There is some scattered tree cover in cleuchs, areas of bracken, areas of wet heath (possibly modified bog), acid and basic flush and some interesting residual areas of unimproved calcareous grassland. Coniferous plantation forms the western and eastern boundary. Several burns drain the site down the cleuchs and join the Monynut water and in the eastern part (East Lothian) of the site drains into the head waters of the Eye water. Direct impact p212 suggests that it is not possible to state quantitatively the extent of loss. However, the Ornithology section identifies that direct habitat loss is estimated to be approximately 38ha (Section 8.2.5 Predicted Impact and effects p171)

Invertebrates:

8.35 A survey to assess impacts on invertebrates is to be welcomed. However, the results presented are very generalised and the appendix 1 referred to in the text was not available.

Reptiles and Amphibian:

8.36 No information is provided on survey effort or dates of survey. Low level of reptile activity was found, common lizard and adder. It is recommended that pre- construction surveys are carried out to guide any mitigation requirements.

Forestry and Land Management:

8.37 An area of 25.1 ha of coniferous plantation is to be felled (in East Lothian). Forestry Commission Scotland/ Scottish Government guidance on the control of removal of woodland should apply. Enhancement measures for the cleuchs are to be welcomed, though it is important that these measures are consistent with protecting grassland interest (e.g. common rock-rose on Camy cleuch) and ornithological interest (ring ouzel). Opportunities to enhance the Forest Habitat Network are to be welcomed. This would be complementary to developed proposals for East Lothian and Scottish Borders for priority habitat networks in the Lammermuirs, Scottish Borders Woodland Strategy and Scottish Borders LBAP objectives and the emerging SESPlan Green Networks. Opportunities may arise off-site which can be secured through legal agreement, such measures may provide multiple benefits in terms of River Basin Management Plan/ water quality objectives(Monynut water, Eye water ) and biodiversity enhancement (River Tweed SAC).

10 8.38 In the event of planning permission being granted, it is recommended that a condition be imposed requiring that, prior to the commencement of works a Species and Habitat Management Plan, including on-site and off-site measures as appropriate for breeding and wintering birds, moorland, woodland and grassland enhancements be submitted to and approved in writing with the Planning Authorities in consultation with SNH and RSPB. The condition would also require that any works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Ecological Clerk of Works

8.39 It is recommended that an Ecological Clerk of Works is appointed prior to construction, to ensure pre-construction checking surveys for protected species are carried out, ensure compliance with Construction Methods Statement and Environmental Management Plan requirements, ensure implementation of the Species and Habitat Management Plan and to ensure compliance with Decommissioning Methods Statement requirements.

Post Construction Monitoring:

8.40 In the event of planning permission being granted, it is recommended that a ‘Before- After-Control-Impact’ (BACI) monitoring programme is required. This should be subject to the approval of the Planning Authority. The monitoring programme should include a breeding bird survey at 1, 3, 5, 10 and 15 years intervals after the completion of the wind farm, and monitoring of other key species such as geese and protected mammals as appropriate.

Summary:

8.41 The Environmental Impact Assessment is deficient in adequately assessing impacts on habitats and species, including the River Tweed SAC and European Protected Species (notably bats). Adopting the Structure Plan Policy N5 Local Biodiversity Action, Local Plan Policy NE3 Local Biodiversity as informed by the Supplementary Planning Guidance for biodiversity, reaching a final conclusion on the assessment of ecological impacts is not possible.

8.42 However, on balance, provided that SNH do not consider there to be a likely significant effect on the qualifying interest of the River Tweed SAC, and if they consider there will be no significant adverse effect on the integrity of the River Tweed SAC, it is considered that there is a low likelihood of there being a significant adverse impact on the ecological interest provided further impact assessment is carried out to guide mitigation. This will inform the Construction Methods Statement, Environmental Management Plan, Decommissioning Methods Statement and Species and Habitats Management Plan.

Traffic and Transport

8.43 The proposal would not give rise to a new road access. The existing access serving Aikengall I would be utilised for all traffic but extended to make new roadways within the current site. The resultant planning position in relation to traffic and transport is that there would be no objection.

Access

8.44 The site does not contain, nor is it bounded by, public footpaths or rights of way. The development would, however, be highly visible from the Southern Upland Way, a nationally important and nationally designated coast to coast public path.

11 8.45 The Landscape Value of the Lammermuirs is reflected in its designation as an AGLV, and if the development goes ahead there will be a cumulative visual impact that will be observed by its users. Arguably, the cumulative impact of wind farms causes diminishment to the intrinsic value of the Lammermuirs and impacts upon its attractiveness as a wilderness.

8.46 On this basis, although the principle of the development is not objected to from an Access viewpoint, it is proposed that a Section 75 Legal Agreement includes a provision for a local/community educational ranger (cross-border, East Lothian and SBC) to be established.

8.47 On a similar basis, but potentially via planning condition insofar as it is only reasonable to relate this requirement to the site and not to land in separate ownership nearby, there is a requirement for a public access study to provide for access on site and connection to other paths. Any such study would demonstrate fully what access would be available to the site and how it would be managed during the lifespan of the wind farm.

Noise

8.48 The SBC Environmental Health Officer has not raised an objection to the principle of the development and has not identified any specific noise-related issues. Recommendations are made that specific maximum noise levels are stipulated. Monitoring of noise output from the development would form part of a noise management strategy, which could be obligated via planning condition.

Scottish Natural Heritage Comments

8.49 Although not part of the Council’s consultation process, Scottish Natural Heritage was formally consulted by the Scottish Government. SNH in their reply to the Scottish Government indicate that it supports the development of renewable energy as an integral part of the Government’s climate change programme, where the impacts on the natural heritage and enjoyment of it are acceptable. SNH is particularly concerned with the impact of a potential development on the landscape character of the area, its visual amenity, nature conservation and recreational value.

8.50 SNH states its position in respect of the development proposal in its formal consultation response to Scottish Government dated 15th October 2009 that it does not object to the proposal, however it strongly recommends conditions & Legal Agreement to minimise impacts of development in relation to:

x mitigation measures to avoid suspended solid run-off, pollution run-off and impediment of water flow in to the SAC x produce Construction and Decommissioning Plans to avoid damage to SAC x employ 2 no. Clerks of Works to oversee implementation of construction and decommissioning plans x habitat management plans (birds/bats/raptors)? x No tree removal during bird breeding season (March to August inclusive) x Relocation/omission of 3 turbines seen from Oldhamstocks x Layout of turbines redesigned to improve overall appearance of turbine areas x Revise (reduce) height of turbines so that they would be more compatible with existing at adjacent sites x Construction of tracks to accord with SNH guidance

8.51 The submissions of SNH outlined above are clearly material considerations for the Scottish Government to consider when assessing the windfarm application. Members are entitled to consider these views, and to consider what weight to attach to them in reaching a decision. SNH’s comments are publicly available and may be used as a

12 guide in order to assist decision making based on the internal consultation responses detailed above.

9. CONCLUSIONS

9.1 In preparation for submission of this report to Scottish Ministers, all necessary internal consultations with specialist officers within the Planning and Economic Development/Technical Services Directorates were undertaken. None of the consultation responses received raise objections to the principle of the development, although planning conditions are recommended as a result of some of the information contained therein.

9.2 The potential of this development to impact on the landscape of the Lammermuir Hills AGLV is of the greatest significance and translated into the reason for the objection submitted to Government after the February 2010 Committee. There is an acceptance that previous development at Aikengall I and Crystal Rig has already changed the local landscape significantly. Views from the west from Wether Law and Moss Law show the stark contrast between the existing turbines and the dark landscape; submitted graphics and photomontages in the EIA show the increased landscape impact from these and other viewpoints. Cumulative visual impact would occur if the development applied for is now implemented and the ability of the landscape to accommodate this impact would be tested.

9.3 However, as is reflected in the section above relating to landscape impact, balancing the additional visual impact of this development against the requirement to give positive consideration to renewable energy development would lead to a conclusion that the development would accord with both national and local policy in this area. The locality is already characterised by wind farms and turbines, and the increase in impact would be, on balance, within tolerable levels.

10. RECOMMENDATION OF HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS

10.1 That the Council indicate to Scottish Ministers that it does not object to the application at Aikengall II for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development would be consistent with policy I20 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018 and Policy D4 – Renewable Energy Development of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in that the erection of 22 wind turbines and associated equipment would cause an acceptable level of impact on the landscape character of the surrounding area. The proposed wind turbines would not prejudice any relationship with high sensitivity receptors, focussing in particular on the area of the site which is within Scottish Borders.

2. The proposed development would be consistent with Policy N11 – Areas of Great Landscape Value of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2011 and Policy EP2 – Areas of Great Landscape Value of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in that the erection of 22 turbines and associated equipment would cause an acceptable level of impact on the landscape quality of the Lammermuir Hills Area of Great Landscape Value. Taking into consideration the change to the AGLV landscape already imposed by adjacent wind farms, the current development could be accommodated without undue harm to the wider landscape.

10.2 The Council recommends a full range of conditions relating to the development, which have been informed in part in relation to advice from SBC internal consultees, and in part through dialogue with East Lothian Council’s Planning Department, bearing in mind the relationship of the site to both Councils’ geographical areas. The Council also recommends that a Section 75 Legal Agreement is concluded in relation to cross-

13 border community resources, specifically in relation to provision of a community ranger service. Potential conditions are listed in Annex B, attached to this report.

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning & Regulatory Services

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

Author(s) Name Designation John Hiscox Planning Officer (Development Management)

Background Papers: APPENDIX A - LIST OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES & GOVERNMENT POLICY AND ADVICE APPENDIX B – DRAFT LIST OF PROPOSED CONDITIONS (UPDATED AUGUST 2010) APPENDIX C – Response from Cranshaws, Ellemford & Lonformacus Community Council

Previous Minute Reference: None.

14 Item No. 8 Appendix A Aikengall II Section 36 Planning Application

APPENDIX A - DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

(I) SCOTTISH BORDERS STRUCTURE PLAN 2001-2018

PRINCIPLE S1 - Environmental Impact Proposals for substantial development will be assessed against relevant sustainability criteria with the aim of minimising harmful environmental impacts and moving towards sustainable development.

POLICY N1 - Local Biodiversity Action Plan The Council will continue to promote the implementation and ongoing review of the Local Biodiversity Action Plan, as part of the Local Agenda 21 process and the drive towards sustainable development, in partnership with all interested parties.

POLICY N2 - International Sites Development proposals likely to have a significant effect on a designated or proposed Natura 2000 site, or a listed or proposed Ramsar site, and not directly connected with or necessary to the conservation management for that site, will be subject to an assessment of the implications of the site's conservation objectives. The development will only be permitted where the assessment demonstrates that: (i) it will not adversely affect the integrity for the site; or (ii) there are no alternative solutions, and (iii) there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature that clearly outweigh the international nature conservation value of the site.

POLICY N3 - National Sites Development proposals likely to have an adverse effect, either directly or indirectly, on a Site of Special Scientific Interest will not be permitted unless: (i) the development offers substantial benefits, including those of a social or economic nature, that clearly outweigh the national nature conservation value of the site, and (ii) there are no reasonable alternative means of meeting that development need. Where the site concerned is a National Nature Reserve, particular regard will be paid to the site's national importance.

POLICY N5 - Local Biodiversity Action Development likely to have an adverse effect, either on a locally important wildlife site, or on habitats or species identified for conservation action in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan, will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that the benefits of the proposal will clearly outweigh the intrinsic nature conservation value of the site, feature or area and its role in contributing to the development of regional habitat networks. POLICY N6 - Environmental Impact All proposals for development will be assessed for their environmental impact. The Council will, where appropriate, request the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment in accordance with the Environmental Assessment Regulations. Where necessary, the Council will require developments to be subject to an Appropriate Assessment¹ of the implications for the conservation objectives of the site.

POLICY N7 - Protection of Nature Conservation Interest Where development is approved which would damage the nature conservation value of a site or feature, the Council will seek to ensure that such damage is kept to a minimum. Where appropriate, the Council will consider the use of conditions and/or planning obligations that will modify proposals to maintain as far as possible existing nature conservation interests and/or will mitigate the effects of damage by the creation of new habitats or features.

POLICY N8 - River Tweed System The Council in partnership with the Tweed Forum and relevant agencies and organisations will seek to protect and enhance the heritage, landscape, amenity, nature conservation, and fisheries interests of the Tweed. Development which is considered likely to have an adverse effect on the Tweed resource, will be subject to rigorous examination under the Structure Plan's nature conservation policies.

POLICY N9 - Maintaining Landscape Character Proposals for development and land use change will be guided by the Scottish Borders Landscape Assessment with the aim of maintaining the integrity of the landscape character and enhancing its quality. The Assessment will be used to inform policy reviews and guidelines on topics, which have implications for the landscape resource.

POLICY N11 - Areas of Great Landscape Value In assessing proposals for development in Areas of Great Landscape Value, the Council will seek to safeguard landscape quality and will have particular regard to the landscape impact of the proposed development. Proposals which have a significant adverse impact will only be permitted where the impact is clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national or local importance.

POLICY N14 - National Archaeological Sites Development proposals, which would destroy or adversely affect the appearance, fabric or setting of Scheduled Ancient Monuments or other nationally important sites not yet scheduled will not be permitted unless: the development offers substantial benefits, including those of a social or economic nature, that clearly outweigh the national value of the site, there are no reasonable alternative means of meeting that development need, and the proposal includes a mitigation strategy acceptable to Historic Scotland (in the case of Scheduled Ancient Monuments). POLICY N15 - Regional and Local Archaeological Sites Development proposals which will adversely affect an archaeological site of regional or local significance will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that the benefits of the proposal will clearly outweigh the archaeological value of the site or feature.

POLICY N16 - Archaeological Evaluation, Preservation and Recording Where there is reasonable evidence of the existence of archaeological remains, but their nature and extent are unknown, the Council may require an Archaeological Evaluation to provide clarification of the potential impact of a development before a planning decision is reached. Where development is approved which would damage an archaeological site or feature, the Council will require that such development is carried out in accordance with a strategy designed to minimise the impact of development upon the archaeology and to ensure that a complete record is made of any remains which would otherwise be damaged by the development. Such a strategy might include some or all of the following: (i) the preservation of remains in situ and in an appropriate setting, (ii) surface or geophysical survey, (iii) archaeological excavation, (iv) study of the excavated evidence and publication of the results. The preferred solution will be influenced by the value of the site in national, regional or local terms.

POLICY N20 - Design The Council will encourage a high quality of layout, design and materials in all new developments, including redevelopments and alterations. Favourable consideration is more likely where development proposals: (i) provide a design brief or design statement, where required, as part of a submission for planning permission (ii) incorporate a landscape plan, where required, as part of the application, (iii) demonstrate an appropriate use of building materials in keeping with their surroundings, (iv) promote the use of recycled building materials where possible, (v) demonstrate a consideration of energy efficiency in orientation and design, (vi) demonstrate a consideration of water minimisation measures, and (vii) demonstrate a consideration of safety and security.

POLICY E22 - Protection of the Tourist Industry Development proposals which are considered likely to have a significant and sustained adverse impact on tourism will not be permitted.

POLICY C8 - Access Network The Council will support the protection, development and enhancement of a comprehensive access network in the Scottish Borders in accordance with the principles of the Access Strategy. POLICY I13 - Water Quality The Council, in association with East of Scotland Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, will seek to ensure that water quality is protected from the adverse effects of development. In particular: (i) development involving the leaching of pollutants into groundwater sources will not be permitted, (ii) development will be assessed against the Groundwater Protection Strategy for Scotland, and, (iii) any development with potentially adverse impacts on the water environment will be subject to consultation with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and/or East of Scotland Water.

POLICY I19 - Renewable Energy The Council supports the development of renewable energy sources that can be developed in an environmentally acceptable manner.

POLICY I20 - Wind Energy Developments Proposals for wind energy developments will be assessed against the following criteria: 1 the landscape character of the area, as guided by the Landscape Character Assessment, 2 the Structure Plan's environmental policies, 3 the impact of noise on residential and other noise-sensitive developments, 4 interference with aircraft activity, 5 a significantly increased risk of 'shadow flicker' or 'driver distraction', or, 6 any unacceptable cumulative impacts. (II) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL LOCAL PLAN 2008

PRINCIPLE 1 - SUSTAINABILITY Substantial development will be assessed against the under noted sustainability indicators that relate to the local environment, community and economy, demonstrated by whether the proposal: 1. is concerned with the long term sustainable use and management of land, 2. minimises the need to travel using private cars, by being close to existing public transport or allowing safe, easy access by walking and cycling, 3. does not significantly damage valuable natural resources, habitats, species or the environment, 4. does not significantly damage built or cultural heritage resources, 5. does not have a significantly detrimental impact on the character, environment or amenity of the surrounding area, 6. makes full use of design and technology to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, and minimise light pollution, 7. does not prejudice future development opportunities nor create a precedent for inappropriate future development patterns, 8. reduces the production of waste and manages it as a resource in accordance with the waste hierarchy i.e. Reduce, Reuse, Recover, Dispose, 9. does not give rise to hazards, pollutants, flooding or nuisances in the surrounding area, 10. does not compromise public health or safety, 11. provides new, or helps support existing, local employment, 12. helps support existing community services and facilities.

POLICY G1 – QUALITY STANDARDS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT All new development will be expected to be of high quality in accordance with sustainability principles, designed to fit with Scottish Borders townscapes and to integrate with its landscape surroundings. The standards which will apply to all development are that: 1. It is compatible with, and respects the character of the surrounding area, neighbouring uses, and neighbouring built form, 2. it can be satisfactorily accommodated within the site, 3. it retains physical or natural features or habitats which are important to the amenity or biodiversity of the area or makes provision for adequate mitigation or replacements, 4. it creates developments with a sense of place, designed in sympathy with Scottish Borders architectural styles; this need not exclude appropriate contemporary and/or innovative design, 5. in terms of layout, orientation, construction and energy supply, the developer has demonstrated that appropriate measures have been taken to maximise the efficient use of energy and resources, including the use of renewable energy and resources and the incorporation of sustainable construction techniques in accordance with supplementary planning guidance referred to in Appendix D, 6. it incorporates appropriate hard and soft landscape works, including structural or screen planting where necessary, to help integration with its surroundings and the wider environment and to meet open space requirements. In some cases agreements will be required to ensure that landscape works are undertaken at an early stage of development and that appropriate arrangements are put in place for long term landscape/open space maintenance, 7. it provides open space that wherever possible, links to existing open spaces and that is in accordance with current Council standards pending preparation of an up-to-date open space strategy and local standards. In some cases a developer contribution to wider neighbourhood or settlement provision may be appropriate, supported by appropriate arrangements for maintenance, 8. it provides appropriate boundary treatments to ensure attractive edges to the development that will help integration with its surroundings, 9. it provides for linkages with adjoining built up areas including public transport connections and provision for bus lay-bys, and new paths and cycleways, linking where possible to the existing path network; Green Travel Plans will be encouraged to support more sustainable travel patterns; 10. it provides for Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems where appropriate and their after-care and maintenance, 11. it provides for recycling, re-using and composting waste where appropriate, 12. it is of a scale, massing, height and density appropriate to its surroundings and, where an extension or alteration, appropriate to the existing building, 13. it is finished externally in materials, the colours and textures of which complement the highest quality of architecture in the locality and, where an extension or alteration, the existing building, 14. it incorporates, where required, access for those with mobility difficulties, 15. it incorporates, where appropriate, adequate safety and security measures, in accordance with current guidance on “designing out crime”. Developers may be required to provide design statements, design briefs or landscape plans as appropriate.

POLICY BE2 - ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES and ANCIENT MONUMENTS Where development proposals impact on a Scheduled Ancient Monument, other nationally important site not yet scheduled, or site of regional or local significance developers may be required to carry out detailed investigations to ensure compliance with Structure Plan policies N14, N15 and N16.

POLICY NE1 – INTERNATIONAL NATURE CONSERVATION SITES Sites of international importance for nature conservation will be afforded the highest level of protection from development. Development proposals that impact on an internationally important wildlife site must comply with Structure Plan Policy N2.

POLICY NE2 – NATIONAL NATURE CONSERVATION SITES Where development proposals impact on a national nature conservation site, developers will be required to submit sufficient information about the impact of the development on the features of interest of the site to ensure compliance with Structure Plan Policy N3. Information should include the consideration of alternative sites for the development and opportunities for mitigation of potential damage.

POLICY NE3 - LOCAL BIODIVERSITY 1. The Council will seek to safeguard the integrity of wider countryside habitats which are a major importance for wild flora and fauna. Development that would have an adverse effect on habitats or species identified as a priority in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP), or on other valuable habitats, will be assessed against the following criteria: i) the public benefits of the development at a local level clearly outweigh the value of the habitat for biodiversity conservation, and ii) the development will be sited and designed to minimise adverse impacts on the biodiversity of the site, including its environmental quality, ecological status and viability, and iii) the development will not result in further fragmentation or isolation of habitats.

2. Where the reasons in favour of development clearly outweigh the desirability of retaining particular habitat features, mitigation measures, including habitat creation and enhancement of retained habitats will be sought on land within the developer’s control. This will be secured through appropriate conditions attached a planning consent and /or the use of Section 75 or other agreements as appropriate. Where such habitats are to be unavoidably lost, compensation measures on land within the developer’s control will be required to offset the loss, in order to ensure no net loss of LBAP habitats. 3. Where there is evidence to suggest that a habitat or species of importance exists on the site, the developer may be required, at his own expense, to undertake a survey of the site’s natural environment. 4. Wherever possible, developers should incorporate existing habitats and identify suitable opportunities for creating and restoring habitats, wildlife corridors and enhancement schemes, using best practice.

POLICY NE5 – DEVELOPMENT AFFECTING THE WATER ENVIRONMENT The Council aims to protect the quality of the water resource and requires developers to consider how their proposals might generate potentially adverse impacts and to build in measures that will minimise any such impacts and enhance and restore the water environment. Development affecting a water body, water catchment area, river corridor or other waterside areas, that is judged to have an unacceptable impact on nature conservation, biodiversity, landscape, fisheries, recreation, riverworks or public access, will be refused. Decision-making will be guided by an assessment of: (i) pollution of surface or underground water, including water supply catchment areas, as a result of the nature of any surface or waste water discharge or leachate, (ii) pollution resulting from the disturbance of contaminated land, (iii) flooding risk or the exacerbation of existing flooding problems, within the site or the wider river catchment, (iv) compliance with current best practice on Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS)

POLICY EP2 – AREAS OF GREAT LANDSCAPE VALUE Where development proposals impact on an Area of Great Landscape Value, developers will be required to carry out detailed investigations to ensure compliance with Structure Plan policy N11.

POLICY D4 – RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT The Council will support proposals for both large scale and community scale renewable energy development including commercial wind farms, single or limited scale wind turbines, biomass, hydropower, biofuel technology and solar power where they can be accommodated without unacceptable impacts on the environment. The siting and design of all renewable energy developments should take account of the social, economic and environmental context.

Renewable energy developments will be approved provided that, 1. there are no unacceptable adverse impacts on the natural heritage including the water environment, landscape, biodiversity, built environment and archaeological heritage, or that any adverse impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated; 2. there are no unacceptable adverse impacts on recreation and tourism, including access routes, or that any adverse impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated.

If there are judged to be significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated, the development will only be approved if the Council is satisfied that the contribution to wider economic and environmental benefits outweighs the potential damage to the environment or to tourism and recreation.

Commercial Wind Farms 1. Commercial wind farm development will normally be more acceptable in locations within “preferred areas” outwith environmental designations as set out in Structure Plan Policy I 19. As noted in the justification of the local plan policy on Areas of Great Landscape Value (page 60), the Council proposes to carry out a review of the whole Council area with a view to adding additional areas which merit safeguarding under Policy EP2. The results of that review will also be taken into account in assessing the suitability of locations for commercial wind farms 2. Locations within large scale landscape settings defined as Upland type in the Landscape Classification hierarchy (contained within the Borders Landscape Assessment) will normally be more acceptable than other landscape character types subject to detailed assessment of the fragility of the area to change. 3. Locations where there is surrounding landform that minimises the external visibility of the development, where there is no interference with prominent skylines or where there is no conflict with sensitive habitats will be looked on more favourably than other locations. 4. In assessing the landscape impacts of windfarm developments, particular attention will be given to the effects on high sensitivity receptors including major tourist routes and important landscape viewpoints. 5. In addition to the general provisions for assessment as set out in paragraph 2 of this Policy, proposals for commercial wind farms will be assessed against the following criteria and will be approved where the overall impact is judged acceptable: (i) Impact on landscape character and areas exhibiting remote qualities as guided by expert advice and relevant research including the Scottish Borders Landscape Assessment 1995; (ii) Views of the turbines and associated transmission lines, tracks, plant and buildings from “sensitive receptors” that include residential properties, important landscape features, prominent landmarks, major tourist routes and popular public viewpoints, including those outwith the Scottish Borders boundary; (iii) Visual impact assessment will include cumulative impact, shadow flicker and the potential for driver distraction, and take account of the distance of the facility from receptors and screening. Decision making will be guided by expert advice and relevant research. (iv) Generation of noise; (v) Traffic generation, including access during construction; (vi) Ecology and ornithology, particularly statutorily protected species and habitats, species and habitats of conservation concern or species vulnerable to wind farms by virtue of their behaviour. Assessment of cumulative impacts on regional populations of birds will be required as appropriate. (vii) Interference with radio telecommunications and aviation; (viii) Provisions for decommissioning, land restoration, after care and after use; (ix) Cumulative impact of wind farm development, including developments in adjoining local authority areas. Unacceptable cumulative impact may restrict development potential in otherwise appropriate areas. In assessing potential cumulative impact, account will be taken of the effect of perceived visual impact.

6. Reference should be made to NPPG6 Renewable Energy Developments (reviewed 2000) and PAN 45 Renewable Energy Technologies (revised 2002) in respect of assessing visual and other impacts of wind farm proposals, giving consideration to the size and the number of proposed turbines, the position and number of receptors affected and the distance of the receptors from the turbines.

Developers must demonstrate that they have considered options for minimising the operational impact of the development including: 1. Positioning of the wind farm in relation to landscape character, surrounding landform, wind farms and power lines; 2. Positioning of the wind farm in relation to the biodiversity interest of the site and surrounding area 3. Siting and design of tracks and ancillary development; 4. Turbine positioning and separation from residential properties and radio telecommunications; 5. Turbine specification and technical controls, including consideration of predicted noise levels at specific properties closest to the wind farm at wind speeds corresponding to cut-in, full rated power and maximum operational wind speed, along with background noise levels and wind speeds; 6. Colours and finishes; 7. Routeing and timing of construction traffic; 8. Road access and improvements, taking account of constraints posed by wetland and upland habitats.

Other Renewable Energy Development Small scale or domestic renewable energy developments including community schemes, single turbines and micro-scale photovoltaic/solar panels will be encouraged where they can be satisfactorily accommodated into their surroundings in accordance with the protection of residential amenity and the historic and natural environment.

Renewable technologies that require a countryside location such as the development of biofuels, short rotation coppice, “biomass” or small scale hydro-power will be assessed against the relevant environmental protection policies.

Waste to energy schemes involving human, farm and domestic waste will be assessed against Policy Inf 7 Waste Management Facilities.

POLICY Inf2 – PROTECTION OF ACCESS ROUTES 1. When determining planning applications and preparing development briefs and in accordance with the Scottish Borders Access Strategy, the Council will seek to uphold access rights by protecting existing access routes including: statutorily designated long distance routes; Rights of Way; walking paths; cycle ways; equestrian routes; waterways; identified Safe Routes to School and in due course, Core Paths.

2. Where development would have a significant adverse effect on the continued access to or enjoyment of an access route or asserted Right of Way, alternative access provision will be sought at the developer’s cost either by diverting the route or incorporating it into the proposed development in a way that is no less attractive and is safe and convenient for public use. Unless such appropriate provision can be made, the development will be refused. OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

A Planning Framework for Wind Energy Developments: Policy Guidelines 1995. The Borders Landscape Assessment 1998. Visibility Mapping for Windfarm Developments – The Scottish Borders 2003. National Planning Policy Guideline 5: Archaeology and Planning1994. National Planning Policy Guideline 14: Natural Heritage 1998. National Planning Policy Guideline 15: Rural Development 1999. National Planning Policy Guideline 18: Planning and the Historic Environment 1999. National Planning Policy Guideline 6: Renewable Energy Developments (Revised 2000). Planning Advice Note 42: Archaeology – the Planning Process and Scheduled Ancient Monuments 1994. Planning Advice Note 51: Environmental Protection 1999. Planning Advice Note 56: Planning and Noise 1999. Planning Advice Note 60: Planning for Natural Heritage 2000. Planning Advice Note 45: Renewable Energy Technologies (Revised 2002). Scottish Planning Policy – February 2010 Siting and Designing windfarms in the landscape - version 1 – December 2009 - SNH Item No. 8 Appendix B REVISED DRAFT CONDITIONS SCHEDULE 28.1.10

Aikengall II Section 36 Planning Application

APPENDIX B – Suggested Planning Conditions

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.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Safety:

3 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:

4 At least 1 month prior to the Commencement of the Development, the Company shall provide to the Planning Authority written details of the bond or other financial provision which it proposes to put in place to cover all site restoration costs at the end of the period of this consent. Said bond/provision shall be sufficient to meet the full estimated costs of decommissioning, dismantling, removal, disposal, site restoration, remediation and incidental work as well as associated professional costs. No work shall commence on site until written confirmation has been given by the Planning Authority to the Company to the effect that the proposed bond or other financial arrangement is satisfactory and the Company has confirmed to the Planning Authority that it has been put in place. Reason: To ensure financial security for the cost of the reinstatement to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, in the interests of public amenity, safety and for the protection of the local environment. Decommissioning:

5 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.

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, and in the case of road reinstatement to meet the terms of the Land Reform Scotland Act 2003 as concerns asserting public access rights.

6 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 the restoration and aftercare scheme. 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. Notwithstanding this requirement, no later than one year prior to commencement of the restoration and aftercare scheme, the Planning Authority, following consultation with SNH, shall review the retention of other hardstandings, cables/ducts and access tracks within the context of the restoration strategy, landscape strategy and access strategy to identify any elements to be retained on site or requiring alternative reinstatement. 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.

Wind Speed Data:

7 Wind speed data must be maintained for a period of no less than 12 months from the date of final commissioning and subsequent output of electricity to the grid network from the wind farm, and for each 12 month period of operation of the windfarm and be made available to the Planning Authority on request.

Reason: To contribute to the safeguarding of the amenity of neighbouring properties.

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

10 All turbines shall be positioned as shown on Fig 1.4 rev. a of the July 2010 Addendum to the ES or as varied by this consent. A variation of the indicated positions in respect of all access roads and turbines (except those shown on the plan as 8, 11, 12 and 15) on the said drawing by less than 50 metres shall only be permitted following the approval of the Ecological Clerk of Works. A variation in the indicated positions of over 50 metres in relation to all access roads and turbines (except those shown on the plan as 8, 11, 12 and 15), or any variation to the position of turbines 8, 11, 12 and 15 shall be submitted to and require the approval in writing of, Scottish Ministers after consultation with the planning authorities and any consultees the planning authority deem appropriate on a case by case basis. Reason: To ensure micro-siting decisions take account of environmental considerations.

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, 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 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

14 Access tracks shall be constructed using stone from borrow pits on site. The borrow pits shall be re-instated within 12 months of construction of the windfarm. Reason: to protect visual amenity. Noise:

15 Noise limits shall be set at the nearest noise sensitive dwelling. Noise from the combined effect of the wind turbines shall not exceed an external free- field level LA90, 10 min level of 35dB or 5dB above the agreed prevailing background noise level (whichever is the greater) at any 10m height wind speed up to 12m/s. Any tonal elements in the noise spectra shall be assessed using the Joint Nordic Method. The tone level shall not exceed 2dB above the 'Masking Threshold for Tones in Noise'.

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

16 Details of sound levels of the chosen turbine shall be provided to the authority prior to commencement of development. The noise assessment shall be updated as necessary to reflect the turbine specification chosen.

Reason: to protect amenity.

17 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.

18 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a further dB assessment relating to the turbine shown as no. 15 on the drawings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Said assessment shall be undertaken using the same impact model used in the original noise assessment. The assessment shall include updated findings specific to the relationship between turbine no. 15 and the noise–sensitive dwelling known as Upper Monynut (approximately 800m south-west of this turbine), and shall include mitigation measures necessary to enable this turbine to co-exist in a manner that meets guidelines endorsed by the Scottish Government. The identified mitigation measures shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the updated dB assessment as agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Ecology:

19 No works on the site shall commence within the bird breeding season i.e. March to August unless formal written consent is obtained from the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development does not prejudice the birds and their habitat which, during breeding season, are protected by law.

20 Prior to the development commencing a Landscape and Habitat Management and Enhancement Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The Landscape and Habitat Management and Enhancement Plan will set out proposed long-term management of the wind farm site incorporating details such as repairs to walls, enhancement of woodland cover, repair and restoration of hedgerows and field boundary trees, protection and enhancement of habitats for protected species and other Borders Species of Conservation Concern and shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed programme. The actions and mitigation agreed by the planning authority shall be fully implemented unless otherwise agreed formally in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining and enhancement the ecological interest of the site.

21 Prior to the commencement of any development works on the site, checking surveys for protected species (including otter, badger, breeding birds) shall be undertaken in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority. The results of these surveys shall be used to inform construction activities, micro-siting and any required mitigation proposals for protected species on the site to be agreed with the planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that species protected by law are given satisfactory consideration and are properly protected.

22 Prior to the commencement of the development, the applicant shall appoint an independent full-time Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) acceptable to the Planning Authority, in consultation with SNH and SEPA. The terms of the appointment shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with SNH and SEPA, and shall include that the appointment shall be for the period of wind farm construction, including micro-siting and the finalisation of the windfarm layout, as well as subsequent post-construction restoration.

The ECoW shall have a duty to monitor compliance with all the ecological and hydrological aspects of the Construction Method Statement including post- construction restoration, which have been approved by the Planning Authority pursuant to any permission.

The ECoW shall have a duty to report promptly to the Applicant’s nominated Construction Project Manager any non-compliance with the hydrological or ecological aspects of the Construction Method Statement. The ECoW shall have the power to stop any construction or restoration activity on-site which in his or her view (acting reasonably) could lead to significant effects on local water quality and protected species and their habitat at the locus and shall without delay, report the stoppage – with reasons – to the applicant’s nominated Construction Project Manager and to the Planning Authority, SNH and SEPA.

Reason: To avoid/ mitigate potential impacts on the local ground water resource and other ecological assets at the site.

Construction:

23 Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant shall prepare, for the approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with SNH, Scottish Water and SEPA a Construction Method Statement, Risk Assessment and Environmental Management Statement for construction and operation of the windfarm and agree to be bound by this statement, the Construction Method Statement shall comprise:

x Detailed and scaled map to include the anticipated layout and width of temporary and permanent tracks, cable routeing, turbine bases, crane hard standing areas, site storage compound, substation, on site switch gear and equipment store and any ancillary buildings. Details of any change to the layout shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority; 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 phased 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, including waste water treatment from the mess facilities for the substation, the construction compound and wheel wash facilities; 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 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, particularly of watercourses, over the construction period of the windfarm development; x The principles of the Land Management Plan. x Details of contingency planning in the event of accidental release of materials which could cause harm to the environment. 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 and habitats, to avoid disturbance to ecology during the construction phase of the wind farm and that the site is satisfactorily restored.

Access:

24 The developer shall undertake a public access study, which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved. The study shall include measures for enhancement of public access to/through the site. Any measures identified shall be undertaken in accordance with the agreed study, which should include timescales for implementation of the access works.

Reason: In the interests of public amenity, to mitigate against the impact the development will have on the public realm, in particular when it is viewed in the landscape context from the nationally important coast to coast public path, the Southern Upland Way.

25 All gates or access controls installed on access roads must not obstruct pedestrian, disabled, cycling and horse passage. As access rights apply throughout the operational turbine site the applicant should give due consideration to the safety of the public.

Reason: to comply with the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003

Archaeology:

26 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, the following actions relating to the archaeological significance of the development site shall be undertaken:

x A systematic field survey (incorporating transects of dimensions, shape and orientation to be agreed by the Planning Authority) of the total development area excluding areas already studied for the ES. x An evaluation of peat deposits, depths and potentials for archaeological and paleoenvironmental survival. Additionally, an assessment of possible direct impacts, along with recommendations for avoidance or mitigating impacts. x Terms of an archaeological Watching Brief over all areas where ground breaking takes place. This should involve an archaeological monitoring of top-soil stripping to sub-soils and the identification, recording and recovery of any buried features or artefacts. x If significant archaeology is located as a result of the Watching Brief, an agreed strategy shall be devised and implemented to either preserve in situ buried features and finds, or to fully excavate, record, conserve, report and publish the discoveries. x All results will be presented to the Planning Authority as a synthetic report and approved in writing before any ground within the site is disturbed, which would incorporate an entry in ‘Discovery and Excavation in Scotland’. Reason: The site is of archaeological significance.

Roads and Traffic:

27 A detailed dilapidation condition survey (video (both directions) and detailed photographic records logged and recorded on detailed drawings) of the public roads (including verges, culverts, bridges, walls and fences) below shall be undertaken by the developer for the route from/to the A1 prior to commencement of the development:

a) C122 from it’s junction with A1 to C123 Smithy Row (approx 1520m) b) C123 Smithy Row to U202 north of Thurston Mains (approx 264m) c) U202 north of Thurston Mains to U204 Aikengall Road (approx 713m) d) U204 Aikengall Road (approx 3573m)

Damage caused to the above routes (including verges, culverts, bridges, walls and fences) during the period of construction shall be repaired by the applicant at no expense to and to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority.

Reason: to ensure any damage to public roads from the development is made good without recourse to public funds

28 A detailed and accurate swept path / vehicle track analysis of the above routes (i.e. to/from the A1 from the site) shall be undertaken to include vertical and horizontal alignments of the existing public roads. This will identify areas of the existing public roads that require remedial works and / or “off road” works for the unobstructed passage of vehicles. Any works to be carried out on the public roads and / or “off road” works shall be detailed and submitted for approval by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority.

Reason: in the interests of road safety and to avoid accidental blockage of public roads.

29 Access to the site from the public road shall be detailed in accordance with a swept path assessment of the junction. The first 15 metres, in length, of the access shall be constructed to ELC Standards for Development Roads. In addition all vehicles must be able to access / egress the site in a forward gear.

Reason: in the interests of road safety.

30 Prior to the commencement of development a Transport Assessment/ Method Statement shall be undertaken by the applicant and agreed with the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority.

Reason: in the interests of traffic management and road safety

Informative Notes:

1 In relation to Condition 12 above, the following advice is given: x Design of the turbines and transformer housing should be similar to those used in the existing Aikengall windfarm in terms of number of blades, speed, direction, axis and cut in/cut out, wind speeds of rotors; x All wind turbines should be finished in a non-reflective / matt pale grey; x The blades of all the turbines should rotate in the same direction; x Prior approval will require samples of colour to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Item No 8 Appendix C

Response from Cranshaws, Ellemford & Lonformacus Community Council to Scottish Borders Council re the amended scheme for 22 145m wind turbines at Wester Dod.

The local community and the Community Council have grave concerns about the impact of this revised scheme. Unless objected to the tallest turbines in Scotland would dominate much of the Lammermuirs and beyond. The revised scheme remains highly damaging to the Scottish Borders & should be objected to as robustly as the original scheme was.

It is clear that the Borders has done more than enough. "Enough is enough!" was often heard ahead of the Fallago Rig Inquiry in 2008 when there were "just" 264 turbines at some stage of the planning process across the Lammermuirs. Now, exceeding 500, the situation is critical and we risk changing a landscape character entirely.

We ask that before they take a decision as to object, or not, to the amended scheme, Members are fully briefed on the manoeuvrings that have taken place between the windfarm developers & the ECDU since February. Members should be fully aware that the only reason this matter is before them again is that the developers have done everything possible to avoid the proper of a Local Public Inquiry.

The Community Council objected to the initial proposal for 30 wind turbines at Wester Dod. Welcomed Scottish Borders Council’s exceptional robust objection to the proposal in February 2010 when they voted 10 to 2 to object on the grounds of;

Adverse impact on the Lammermuir Hills AGLV Harmful visual impact . Unacceptable cumulative impacts The proposal is out with the Preferred area of search.

All of those reasons remain as valid reasons to continue to object.

Local concerns include; x Despite the reduction in turbine numbers the visual and landscape impact remains similar to the original scheme. These tall turbines, on the highest ridge in the Eastern Lammermuirs will have a devastating effect. x The developers argue that as the area is already impacted by turbines then more are acceptable. The opposite is the case, because of the existing impacts the landscape has a reduced capacity to accommodate further turbines. x The deliberate avoidance of a Local Public Inquiry which would allow this huge and prominent scheme the scrutiny it requires. x The amended scheme reflects none of the concerns raised by the Community Council, East Lothian Council, SNH or SBC in their responses to the original scheme. x The likelihood of damaging cumulative impacts has grown since February with nearby schemes consented at Brockholes and other nearby schemes, including Hoprigshiels and Crystal Rig III entering the process. x The proposed site is within 700m of the nearest home in the Scottish Borders at Upper Moneynut. x The MOD have objected on the grounds that air defence radar cover will be impossible. We are concerned that there is a growing safety risk now that the MOD have advised that cover damaged due to Crystal Rig is already worse than they feared. x Effect on key local and national routes. x Damage to the area’s tourism prospects & the opportunities to attract investment. x The revised scheme takes on board none of the mitigation options suggested by SNH or East Lothian Council, it simply drops turbines in the objecting area. x There has been a lack of open and public scrutiny of this major revised scheme. x The scheme will do little to help the Government’s targets and the significant adverse impacts would not justify these.

Reason for an amended scheme is the developer's aim to avoid scrutiny of a Public Local Inquiry. The developers have stated, the Scottish Government acknowledge and SBC are aware that the only reason there is now an amendment to 22 turbines s to avoid the proposal having to go through the rigorous public scrutiny that a Public local Inquiry would offer. As you'll know, there are published documents that make this an incontestable fact! This issue alone should mean that SBC robustly sticks to its February decision and objects to the scheme.

It is clear, from correspondence received from the Scottish Government, that since February Community Windpower Limited, has worked hard to find a way to avoid the proper and open scrutiny that a Public Local Inquiry would have given this proposal. The developer has suggested a number of schemes to tempt SBC to withdraw its objection, including tree planting near Oldhamstocks

Controversially the Scottish Government have allowed the developer a significant length of time to amend their proposal, despite initially being of the view that it should either proceed to Public Local Inquiry, or be withdrawn.

Unusually the developer has now amended the proposal to reduce the number to 22 turbines, removing only the turbines that were to be located on SBC territory. The community’s clear view is that whilst there may be a reduction in the number of turbines the landscape, the visual and cumulative impacts remain much as they were in February and SBC’s robust objection should be maintained.

The revised scheme does not reflect any concerns raised in response to the original scheme. East Lothian Council raised concerns over a number of the turbines impacting significantly on the conservation village of Oldhamstocks. ELC recommended removal & height reduction to several of these turbines. None of these suggestions have been taken up, the turbines remain in the amended scheme. Design and height of the scheme, none of its suggestions have been reflected in the amended scheme.

The reasons to object to the revised scheme remain. The 22 turbine scheme would still inflict the highest turbines in Scotland on the highest ridge in the eastern Lammermuirs. Though not located within Scottish Borders much of their impact would be felt here. Some of the turbines are sited just a couple of hundred metres from the county boundary and, with micrositing, could be even closer. Lammermuir Hills AGLV. In February most Members disagreed strongly with the report’s assertion that “Taking into consideration the change to the AGLV landscape already imposed by adjacent windfarms, the current development could be accommodated without undue harm to the wider landscape.” There would clearly be significant adverse impacts and they are understated in the developer’s documentation. Any site visit would show the magnitude of impacts.

Most of the impact on the AGLV remains in the amended proposal, with the remaining turbines sited just metres over the SBC/ELC boundary. Approving the 22 x 145m high turbines, at such close proximity would clearly be contrary to N11 in that it would not “safeguard the intrinsic qualities and character of the Area of Great Landscape Value.”

Landscape & Visual Impact. The site for the 22 turbines remains on a high ridge, with turbine bases as high as 392m AOD. It is a highly visible site from large areas within the Scottish Borders and from much of the Lammermuirs.

There is already a very significant visual impact on the Lammermuirs from the adjacent windfarms including Aikengall, Crystal Rig I, II, IIa and the recently proposed Crystal Rig III.

Since Members had their site visit in January 2010 the visual impact has worsened as the latest tranche of turbines at Crystal Rig have been constructed. The visual impact on the ground is significantly worse that that demonstrated in the developer’s SEI.

These are the tallest turbines in Scotland at 145m high and on an exceptionally elevated and visible site too. They are 40% larger than most of those turbines at Crystal Rig (100m), 67m taller than those at Black Hill (78m), more that double the height of those at Dun Law I (63.5m). They would be an "Angel of the North" (20m) higher than those at Aikengall already.

The developer’s SEI notes that trees to be felled for turbines are close to maturity, yet doesn’t highlight that most of the forestry at Moneynut that provides some screening, will in fact be removed during the lifetime of the consent, further heightening the visual impacts. Indeed, some of this felling has already started.

Impacts on key routes. It should also be noted that the report to Committee on the original proposal the analysis of impacts on high sensitivity receptions oddly omitted the impacts on the key routes through the centre of the Lammermuirs – from Gifford to Duns via Cranshaws, or more significantly, via Lonformacus.

These two hill routes have a long history and are a key part of the experience of most people living, working in or visiting the Lammermuirs. They both have significant cultural and historical significance and have a high recreational value. Wester Dod would be a prominent, significant and inescapable feature on receptors using these routes. The receptors themselves are highly sensitive as the majority of users are residents who have no choice but to use these routes and recreational visitors & tourists who choose them in part for their scenic quality. In assessing the proposal under criteria 5 the report notes no “remote or “wildland” qualities on the site yet there are significant areas of the Lammermuirs that currently have a high degree of wildness that would be impacted by this development.

The report noted that “no modifications are to be recommended that would seek to modify height, location or type”. Whatever your view on windfarms this is contrary to accepted design practice which seeks to create a harmonious composition in the landscape – as these turbines are significantly (20 – 45mm) higher that nearby wind turbines maintaining them at 145m would lead to a jarring & discordant effect.

Preferred Area of Search Under both East Lothian & SBC's guidelines this is not in a preferred area of search. The SBC's SPG on wind energy puts the land adjacent in the Moderate/Higher constraints category though, arguably, this ought to be an even higher status.

The AGLV status of the area should confirm this is an inappropriate site. There is no degree of landform containment whatsoever, the development of the tallest turbines in Scotland is proposed on one of the highest and most visible ridges in the Lammermuirs.

Cumulative impact. The level of cumulative impacts that would accrue were Wester Dod consented have increased since February;

x The latest phase of Crystal Rig has been constructed and the impacts are significantly greater – this can be seen particularly from the Gifford to Longformacus Road, but crucially on the A1 where the spread across the Lammermuirs is becoming increasingly evident. x Crystal Rig III phase is now proposed nearby – potentially another 18 x 125m turbines. x Brockholes windfarm has been consented – the SBC report noted there would be “a degree of cumulative visual impact involving the Brockholes Farm application. In February this was an application, it is now a consented scheme. x Other nearby schemes are progressing including Kinnegar, Dunbar, Penmanshiel Moor, Blackburn Farm, Hoprigshiels etc x There are also a number of applications for smaller numbers of turbines north of the site in East Lothian that would increase the cumulative impact - they are not assessed in the SEI. x There are a number of proposals emerging for sites to the west & south of the Lammermuirs such as Corsbie Moor & a clutch of proposals around Oxton.

As the report on the original application notes “the cumulative impact of windfarms causes diminishment to the intrinsic value of the Lammermuirs and impacts on its attractiveness as a wilderness".

Tourism & Recreation. The impacts on tourism were understated in the previous report. SBC will be aware that there is growing awareness of the impact on key routes such as the Southern Upland way, our only coast-to-coast national path. It passes close to Wester Dod and would have repeated and significant views of it.

Detrimental impacts on the recreational value of the Southern Upland way were recently cited as reasons for refusing the Minch Moor application. VisitScotland has also noted concern over the impacts of nearby windfarms including Kinnegar. Policy E22 notes that proposals likely to have a significant & sustained impact on tourism will not be permitted.”

Public Safety & Aviation. The Council will be aware that the MOD objected to both the initial application and to the amended one on the grounds that it would significantly reduce their Air Defence Radar capabilities in the area. The local community is extremely concerned that the risks to public safety are not being robustly scrutinised.

MOD documents released to the Community Council show that the MOD already have serious concerns that the damage to radar cover caused by Crystal Rig is already greater than envisaged and more than they feel comfortable with! Councillors will be aware, as every local resident is that we are notably close to Torness. Whilst MOD documents decline the mention the security target of concern in the documents, it is clearly perceived as a risk & consenting Wester Dod would add to that.

Supplementary Planning Guidance on Wind Energy The Cranshaws, Ellemford & Longformacus Community Council hope to offer their experience as one of the communities most affected by windfarms in the Scottish Borders during the consultation process.

We note that currently in draft form the SPG suggests strongly that Wester Dod is an inappropriate development and that the SPG notes Scottish Borders Council has "raised concerns over the cumulative impact of turbines within the Lammermuir hills."

The draft SPG already understates the current situation affecting the Scottish Borders. e.g. Crystal Rig is defined as a 25 turbine windfarm when in fact it is an 81 turbine one. The SPG shows that SBC already does far more that its fair share in terms of windfarms. The SPG notes no possibility of extension of Crystal Rig I, the closest windfarm to Wester Dod.

The scheme is not necessary to meet Government Policy. All targets for renewable energy are well on track and exciting offshore developments will soon add a reliable source of renewable energy to the mix. The very modest capacity of this scheme would do little to help meet targets and would be at too high a landscape and visual cost.

Members of the Scottish Borders Council Planning & Building Standards Committee gave clear political direction on the Council’s stance on windfarms in the Lammermuirs when they met in February. Then they were clearly of the view that, whilst officers may have considered this proposal “finely balanced”, Members saw Wester Dod as a windfarm too far. This view is now supported by SBC’s own SPG and we hope that a recommendation to retain that objection is offered to Members.

Yours

Mark Rowley Vice Chairman Cranshaws, Ellemford & Longformacus Community Council. Item No. 9(a) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13TH SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING CONSENT FOR THE WINNING AND WORKING OF MINERALS

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00469/MIN

OFFICER: Stuart Herkes WARD: Mid Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Extraction of sand and gravel SITE: Land Northwest of Rumbletonlaw Farmhouse APPLICANT: Alex Brewster & Sons Partnership AGENT: AMS Associates

SITE DESCRIPTION

The application site is situated approximately 3.5km northeast of Gordon and 4km to the west of Greenlaw, and lies to the immediate south of the A697, on open agricultural land within the holding of Rumbletonlaw Farm. The nearest dwellings are at Hexpath Farm, the closest of which are within 250m of the site boundary, and around 500m of the proposed extraction area. Rumbletonrigg Farm is roughly 650m from the site; and Rumbletonlaw Farm and Farm Cottages, are within roughly 1.1km. The surrounding area is a gently undulating landscape of open fields, with occasional shelter belts and farm buildings. The bank of the Eden Water forms part of the western boundary.

The site occupies an area of 49ha, and is currently in use as three fields in grazing, the most northerly of which is directly accessible from the A697 between Hexpath (west) and Rumbletonrigg (east). Within the site, the land generally slopes downwards from the A697 to the Eden Water, that is, in a northeastern to southwestern direction. Although there are mature shelter belts to the immediate southeast and southwest, the site is otherwise open, and because of the topography of the surrounding area, various sections of it are highly visible, albeit at a little distance (roughly 400m) from the public road (A697) to the north and west.

There are no specific protective landscape designations at the site or in its immediate vicinity, and the land is not prime quality agricultural land.

There are no operational quarries within 5km. The closest operational quarry, is the hard stone and rock quarry at Blinkbonny Farm, more than 7km to the south. The latter is also the only operational quarry within 10km of the site.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The applicant seeks planning consent to extract sand and gravel from a 15ha area of the site, which would be worked over a 15 year period. During this time the site would be subject to soil stripping, sand and gravel extraction, and reinstatement. Beyond this period, an additional 18 months would be allowed for final restoration

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 and aftercare. It is advised that up to 100,000 tonnes of material would be extracted per annum during the 15 years that the quarry would be in operation. The total potential tonnage is expected to be in the order of 840,000 tonnes (allowing for a washout percentage of 20%).

It is proposed that the site should be accessed from the A697 and that it would be served by a compound area, to be located in the southeast corner of the extraction site.

Extraction Area

The 15ha extraction area would be located roughly 250m to the south of the A697. At its highest point, the land within this area is slightly over 190m, which falls away towards the west, to slightly over 166m. Much of this area, particularly towards the west would inevitably be visible from the public realm, most noticeably from the A697 and the vicinity of Hexpath Farm. From here it is viewed as a grass topped area forming part of a wider amorphous landscape of gently undulating farmland.

Extraction would take place in 10 phases between Year 1 and Year 14, while restoration works would be completed in Years 14 to 15.

There would be no buildings within the proposed extraction area. Two settlement lagoons (each 35 by 25m) would be located to the immediate south of the extraction area. After the conclusion of extraction operations, it is proposed that these are retained as wetland habitat.

Compound Area

The compound area would be located within the southeast corner of the extraction site, and would accommodate:

x a site office (7.5 by 4m; 2.8m high); x concrete batching plant (maximum height, 6m) x horizontal silo (4.2m high); x weighbridge (15 by 3m; 1m high); x storage container (4 by 3m; 3m high); x ponds x parking area and x floodlighting.

It is advised that the highest structure located within the compound area would be the batching plant at no more than 6m high.

Access Road

The quarry would be directly accessible off the A697 from a new internal access road, the first 15m of which, would be surfaced. While the access road would be 7.3m immediately behind the junction, it would narrow to 5m for the remainder of its route into the compound area. However, in response to concerns about the need to ensure that two lorries could pass on the access road, the applicant is agreeable to the access road being widened to 7m.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Enclosure

The quarry area and access route would be fully enclosed with fencing, while appropriate warning signs would be displayed. The quarry entrance would be gated. Material from that section of the existing stone wall adjacent to the A697 which would be removed in order to accommodate the site access, would be retained and reused within the new quarry entrance.

Along the northern boundary, temporary soil bunds would be created. These would have a multi-purpose role in that they would store topsoil, provide a degree of visual screening and act as barriers for noise attenuation. It is advised that these would be about 3 to 4m high. Along the eastern boundary of the site, a permanent amenity bank would be created to screen views and attenuate noise from the compound area and access road.

Operations

The development would comprise surface removal of sand and gravel to an average depth of 3.5m with minor extraction to 5m. No underground workings (mining) would take place. Excavation would be conducted by front end loading shovel or tracked excavator operating on the quarry floor. These would load dump trucks that would transport the material to the on-site plant area for processing. Although the extraction site would be 15ha in extent, only 2 to 3ha would be worked at any one time.

Overburden would be re-used to fill the worked out quarry. From Year 2 onwards, a programme of restoration would be operated in conjunction with extraction work. Top soil and sub soil would be transported out with the extraction area and stored separately from one another to prevent intermixing. These would then be used in the restoration works.

The applicant has supplied details and supporting drawings of a detailed phasing of operations on the site, indicating the progress of both extraction and restoration operations. Sand and gravel extraction would occur within Phases 1 to 5.

The processing plant would comprise mobile screening and wash plant located at the quarry compound area with dust suppression arrangements fitted. Conveyor discharges and other relevant areas would be fitted with suitable belt scrapers designed in such a manner that all material recovered would be returned to the process flow.

It is anticipated that the quarry would be operated for 50 weeks annually. Proposed hours of operation would be 07:00 to 19:00 from Monday to Friday; and 08:00 to 16:00 hours on Saturday, with no operations on Sundays.

In terms of traffic impact, it is estimated that there would be no more than 20 HGV movements in and out of the site per day. It is anticipated that the majority of vehicles would be 20 tonne trucks, with more limited use of larger artic lorries.

Employment

It is advised that the proposal would provide direct employment for 8 people, with indirect employment within the region for a further 15 people, mainly within the haulage sector.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 Water Environment

Lagoons constructed within the operational area would serve as water balancing ponds to control flow and quantity into the adjoining watercourse running along the southern boundary of the site.

The plant would operate on a closed cycle system, with clarified water being returned from the silt settlement lagoons to the plant.

Lighting

Lighting would only be operated during hours of darkness and would be contained within the compound area. It would be fitted with shields filled to direct the light downwards and restrict the spread of light. The alumina would be examined to control the intensity of light.

Within the extraction area, the only lighting would be at the working face, the operating machines having their own lights.

All lighting would comply with the Quarry Regulations 1999 Health and Safety at Quarries Approved Code of Practice.

Restoration

Throughout the operation of the proposed development, no previous restored area would be traversed after final reinstatement works have been carried out.

After 15 years, the soils from the baffle embankments would be spread over the final areas to be reinstated (compound and infrastructure areas); all site plant removed; and the site settlement lagoons would be formed into wetland features.

It is advised that a detailed restoration plan would be prepared for the quarry in consultation with the site owner and Planning Authority. However, indicative restoration proposals are provided in the Environmental Statement. This shows that restoration of the site would include a new layout, with the land being profiled more simply. The land would be graded to tie with the surrounding land at the site boundary and graded to allow run-off and to alleviate ponding. The applicant has provided a photo montage to indicate this appearance.

On completion of the restoration works, the land would be managed for a rehabilitation and management period of 5 years.

PLANNING HISTORY

None

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Five representations from six members of the public have been received in response to the public consultation. These object to, or raise concerns about, the proposed development for the following reasons:

x The proposed development would have an unacceptable noise impact upon nearby residential properties and the surrounding area, due to the operation of plant and machinery.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 x The proposed development would have an unacceptable air quality impact upon nearby residential properties and the surrounding area due to dust and fumes.

x The proposed development would raise road safety concerns due to the mixing of quarry traffic with speeding traffic on the A697, and due to the damage to local roads that would be caused by vehicle movements serving the quarry. It is advised that the access would be onto one of the fastest parts of the A697, which would be exacerbated by the slow speeds associated with lorries that are typically in use at quarry sites in the area. It is further observed that this stretch of the road, is a notorious accident spot, and that slow moving lorries would be liable to increase the risk of accidents in this area. One representation has included a table indicating the number of accidents (393 in total) on the A697 occurring between Carfraemill and Coldstream, between 01 January 1999 and 24 March 2010.

x The proposed development would have an unacceptable visual impact in an area of hitherto unspoilt beauty. It is advised that the A697 is a tourist route into the Scottish Borders, which provides panoramic views across the Scottish Borders to the Eildon Hills, which would be ruined by the prominence of the proposed quarry within this landscape. This would translate into a damaging effect on the local tourist economy. One representation has included photographs of the views from the A697 and Hexpath.

x The proposed development would have an unacceptable impact upon local wildlife (barn owls, pewits, badgers, foxes, deer, birds of prey are specifically mentioned), protected and migratory species due to disturbance and loss of habitat.

x The proposed development would pollute the Hexpath Burn, which runs alongside the proposed works.

x The proposed development and all its associated impacts, are unnecessary since the need for sand and gravel can be met by existing quarries, or through the extension of existing quarries.

x It is understood from the Pre-application consultation that the applicant is ultimately seeking to operate for 30 years.

x In the event of planning approval, the site should not be allowed to be used as a landfill site for waste.

x The public consultation has not been full and open because local residents have been following developments online by using the link to 09/01773/PAN. A clear link should have been provided to 10/00469/MIN.

In addition to the responses submitted directly to Planning Application 10/00469/MIN, 21 members of the public submitted comments to the Pre-Application Notification 09/01773/PAN. The majority of these comments were submitted before the planning application was received by the Planning Authority, and in response to information presented directly to the public by the applicant at a pre-application public event held on 02 March. In these comments, members of the public have advised of their concerns with regard to the following issues:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 x Landscape impact x Environmental impact x Noise impact x Traffic impact, including noise and dust from lorries using local roads, travelling through settlements x Air quality impact x Impact upon amenity of local residencies x Impact upon biodiversity x Impact upon surface water drainage x Road Safety x Reuse as landfill site x No need for another quarry, particularly of the proposed size, and x An Environmental Impact Assessment should be undertaken

With regard to the 21 people who commented on 09/01773/PAN, 2 also submitted comments to the public consultation on 10/00469/MIN (noted above). Of the 21 comments, 16 are objections, while the remainder are expressions of concern. 3 of the objections were submitted by the members of the same household.

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Besides a Supporting Statement, the basis of which is summarised above under the heading ‘Proposed Development’, the applicant has also provided the following documents:

x Non-Technical Summary and Environmental Statement; x Community Engagement Report; x Agents’ letters and emails providing additional information and clarification; and x Additional Drawings and Supporting Details.

Beyond the documents of the formal submission, the applicant’s agents have provided additional clarification in the form of letters and emails and a range of additional drawings and supporting details.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads & Fleet Management): does not object to the application. It is considered that the position and design of the junction with the A697; the construction of the access road; and the availability of suitable wheel washing facilities, are acceptable in terms of addressing road safety issues. With regard to objectors’ advice about the access being located in an accident ‘black spot’, it is noted that there have been no recorded injury accidents within 1 mile either side of the proposed access location within the past five years, and accordingly, this location is considered to be acceptable. It is advised that the average volume of HGV traffic liable to be generated by the operation of the proposed development, would be 20 HGVs (40 trips) per day; and the average volume of other traffic, 12 vehicles (24 trips) per day. It is advised that this is considered likely to translate into a 0.7% increase in HGVs and a 0.6% increase in cars on the local road network. These increases are considered to be minimal and to represent no significant impact on the road network. With specific regard to HGV movements, it is advised that this

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 can be averaged out at 2 vehicles every 30 minutes, though this is likely to fluctuate depending on demand.

In response to an amended site proposal in which the road was shown as narrowing to 5m, it is advised that the road should be at least 7m wide to ensure that two lorries can pass. With regard to road construction, it is advised that the road should only narrow to 7m, 20m back from the road junction with the A697. It is confirmed that a slight movement in the position of the junction and additional clarification with regard to the type of vehicles that would be used to transport aggregates from the site, are not considered to change the advice given at the time of the original consultation response.

It is advised that the radii should be 15m either side of the road junction instead of that to the west being 7.5m as is shown on Drawing 6859 B. It is clarified that the visibility splays should be a minimum of 4.5m by 215m.

Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health): has identified an appropriate noise level for the proposed operations and has advised that the hours of work should be restricted to between 07:00 to 17:00 Mondays to Fridays, and 07:00 to 14:00 on Saturdays, except for any maintenance work necessary for site safety. Operation outside these hours should only take place after prior notification to, and approval in writing by, the Planning Authority. It is advised that noise attenuation barriers should be provided as detailed in Section 11.4 of the Applicant’s Environmental Impact Statement. It is further advised that the dust monitoring regime undertaken by the operators should incorporate a means of establishing wind speed and directional data so that the source of any dusts can be identified. It is considered that there is unlikely to be any risk to any private water supply as a consequence of the proposed development. It is advised that in the event of planning approval, a planning condition should be imposed to ensure that a rolling programme of restoration is adhered to.

Director of Technical Services (Flood Prevention): has advised that the site is not at risk from a flood event with a return period of 1 in 200 years and is content on the basis of information provided by the applicant, that there would be no increased flood risk from the Eden Water downstream as a consequence of surface water discharge from the quarry. Additionally, it is advised that in accordance with SEPA’s statement, when the site is restored after the sand and gravel extraction is complete, it should be restored to the levels recorded in the topographic survey prior to the extraction work commencing. The applicant’s proposal that discharge from the quarry should be limited to the greenfield run-off rate by controlling out flow from the settlement lagoons, is considered to be acceptable.

Statutory Consultees

Greenlaw and Hume Community Council: No objections.

Gordon and Westruther Community Council: No objections.

SEPA: initially objected on the grounds that there was a lack of information on watercourse engineering works, but withdrew this in light of further information provided by the applicant, which indicated the applicant’s intention to realign the existing culverted watercourse and maintain this as an open channel.

However, it maintains an objection to the proposed development unless planning conditions are imposed. The first proposed condition is to ensure that concerns

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 relating to the impact on the water environment that would otherwise be out with SEPA’s control could be appropriately regulated by requiring that these aspects should be subject to further scrutiny in the form of an appropriate environmental management plan.

The second proposed condition is to ensure that an appropriately detailed restoration and aftercare scheme in accordance with Scottish Planning Policy, Paragraph 235, is submitted and approved prior to the commencement of the restoration work.

With regard to flood risk, it is recommended that the restoration of land in the floodplain does not increase the ground levels, above those encountered on the topographic survey prior to the development taking place. This is to prevent land raising within the floodplain, increased flow and any related flood risk downstream of the development site. Further, it is recommended that any drainage during the operation and final restoration of the site is controlled to greenfield runoff rates to be agreed with the Flood Prevention Authority to prevent increased flow downstream of the development.

With regard to surface water management, it is advised that the proposed surface water scheme is considered acceptable in principle. However, it is recommended that prior to discharge into the lagoons, source control (silt traps etc) should be used to control sediment runoff from the areas used for mineral processing activities, excavated surfaces, site compound and access roads as appropriate. The proposed wheel washing facility should be operated on a closed cycle system. If a closed cycle system is not employed, any overflow from the wheel wash system should discharge to the settlement lagoons. Further, each phase will require soil stripping and whilst good practice should be followed such as minimising run-off and seeding soil storage mounds, significant runoff during heavy rain must be directed to the settlement lagoons.

Scottish Natural Heritage: Requested further information from the applicant which was duly provided, and which it has since advised is satisfactory in providing reassurance that the potential impacts of the development on European protected species have been adequately covered within the Environmental Statement. It is advised that there are no nationally important sites within or adjacent to the development site, but it is noted that the Eden Water, which lies adjacent to the site, joins the River Tweed SAC, some 10km downstream of the Development Area. However, SNH is content that the best practice guidelines set out in the Environmental Statement, if followed, would be appropriate to prevent contamination to the water body. It endorses the recommendation that further surveys should be undertaken for badger setts immediately prior to work commencing. It is advised that the final mitigation/species protection plan should include, where relevant:

x The use of noisy plant or machinery in the vicinity of the protection zone to cease at least 2 hours before sunset; x Security lighting to be directed away from setts; x Chemicals should be stored as far away as possible from setts and badger paths; and x Any temporarily exposed open pipe system should be capped in such a way as to prevent badgers gaining access.

Transport Scotland: advises that the proposed development represents an intensification in the use of this site but that the percentage increase in traffic on the

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 trunk road is such that the proposed development is considered likely to cause minimal environmental impact on the trunk road network.

Historic Scotland: advises that it is satisfied that the proposed development would be unlikely to have a significant impact on any historic environment assets where Historic Scotland has a remit, and accordingly no objection is made to the proposal.

Rural and Environmental Directorate: notes that the noise assessment has concluded that the predicted levels of noise at the quarry may result in complaints and that mitigation measures would be necessary.

Health & Safety Executive: Environmental Impact Assessments are concerned with projects, which are likely to have significant effects on the environment. HSE's principal concerns are the health and safety of people affected by work activities. HSE has no comments on this environmental statement.

Other Consultees

RSPB: has advised that it has no objection to the proposed development. The site is not known to contain any species or populations of birds of significant conservation interest that might be negatively impacted by the proposed development. However, it recommends that if the application is approved, the works may allow for the creation of temporary habitat that can be utilised by birds and other wildlife during the lifespan of the operation. The opportunity should therefore be taken to create and maintain features such as shallow ponds with islands, or bunds and embankments suitable for Sand Martins to nest in, wherever possible. This would have nature conservation benefits and improve the visual and amenity value of the site. Final after-use habitat restoration presents a very rare, and consequently valuable, opportunity for major biodiversity gain. Rather than restore the site to its former condition, the nature of the works would allow for the creation of wetland areas and associated wildlife habitat.

Rural Scotland: responded to advise that it had no comment.

Scottish Wildlife Trust: advises that its main concern would be to ensure that the mitigation is fully implemented to safeguard the wildlife interests present on and within the vicinity of the site. A habitat management plan, post operation, should seek to enhance the biodiversity of the site and hence increase its ecological value. It welcomes the creation of new ecologically diverse habitats with the addition of new planting and water features, but urges that restoration strategies are adopted that would complement the Scottish Borders Biodiversity Action Plan.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2011:

Policy N6 – Environmental Impact Policy N7 – Protection of Nature Conservation Interests Policy N9 – Maintaining Landscape Character Policy N16 – Archaeological Evaluation, Preservation and Recording Policy E6 – Safeguarding Mineral Deposits Policy E7 – Minerals and Sustainability Policy E8 – Local Market Areas for Minerals Policy E9 – Mineral Developments

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Policy E16 – Rural Economic Development Policy I11 – Parking Provision in New Development Policy I12 – Provision of Water and Sewerage Services Policy I13 – Water Quality

Scottish Borders Local Plan: September 2008

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy BE2 – Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments Policy NE3 – Local Biodiversity Policy NE4 – Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy NE5 – Development Affecting the Water Environment Policy EP5 – Air Quality Policy ED2 – Employment Uses Outwith Employment Land Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy Inf2 – Protection of Access Routes Policy Inf4 – Parking Provisions and Standards Policy D1 – Business, Tourism and Leisure Development in the Countryside Policy R3 – Mineral and Coal Extraction

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

x Biodiversity (December 2005) x Landscape and Development (March 2008)

Scottish Government Policy:

x Scottish Planning Policy x PAN 50 (Annex A) – Controlling the Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings x PAN 50 (Annex B) – The Control of Dust at Surface Mineral Workings

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

x whether land-use policy would permit the principle of this proposed use on this land area x compatibility of proposed development with adjacent/adjoining occupiers and uses x acceptability of landscape impact in the short and long-term x ability of road infrastructure to accommodate new development and associated traffic x other planning considerations:- archaeology, ecology.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Planning Policy Principle:

The site lies within the ‘Area of Search’ identified within Diagram 11: Minerals Development – Zones of Sensitivity, of the Consolidated Approved Scottish Borders Structure Plan and is not subject to any environmental, natural heritage or cultural heritage designations.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Policies E9 (approved Structure Plan) and R3 (adopted Local Plan) are specifically intended to allow the principle of minerals development to be supported where it would be compatible with other cross-referencing policies. These acknowledge the need for such development proposals to be carefully considered since they have the potential to conflict with existing uses and in particular, to impact upon the landscape.

SPP is positive towards minerals development proposals but is clear that a systematic approach must be adopted when considering applications, and that a rigorous assessment must be made to ensure mitigation is successful.

Policy D1 of the adopted Local Plan and E16 of the approved Structure Plan are concerned with the broader principle of rural economic development, but reiterate the objectives of the specific minerals policies in the need to ensure that positive consideration is given only when the development proposals are compatible with the local environment and surrounding uses.

It is important to consider the likely benefits of enabling rural economic development such as this, but in so doing to weigh them carefully against the likely development impacts that would be experienced by local residents, communities and by visitors. Mitigation measures proposed are essential to achieving minerals development that would be compatible with their localities, and in this instance a good level of mitigation has been proposed, though in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that a number of aspects are subject to further and closer scrutiny to ensure that the operation of the proposed development would limit and mitigate unacceptable impacts.

The site lies close to Hexpath Farm, where residents would experience a significant level of change if the development occurs. However, if the development is undertaken in strict accordance with the mitigation proposals identified by the developer, and provided those aspects that require further and closer scrutiny are appropriately controlled by planning conditions, it is considered that the new and existing uses would be compatible. Accordingly, it is considered that the principle of the proposed land-use may be supported.

Air Quality:

Given their proximity to the site, it is conceivable that residencies in the general area and the nearby watercourse (Eden Water) would experience the impacts of dust pollution, both from operations on-site and from the movement of HGVs transporting aggregates from the site.

The Environmental Statement considers the issue of dust pollution, taking into account arisings from a variety of circumstances. It advises that while dust impact is likely to be minor or negligible in most respects, at the nearest dwellings at Hexpath, the impact has the potential to be deemed ‘moderately significant’. However, it concludes that with appropriate mitigation measures in place and/or in operation, this impact would be insignificant. Appropriate dust control measures are identified in Section 9.8 of the Environmental Statement.

The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has reviewed the air quality impact assessment, and has advised that in the event of planning approval, the dust monitoring regime undertaken by the operators should incorporate a means of establishing wind speed and directional data, so that the source of any dusts can be identified. Accordingly, and in the event of planning approval, it is considered that it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition to require that details of a dust

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 monitoring regime based on the dust control measures set out in Section 9.8 of the Environmental Statement, should be provided for prior approval. Critically this dust monitoring regime should be informed by appropriate wind speed and directional data, in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health).

Provided an appropriate planning condition was imposed to address the above highlighted concern, it is considered that the impact on local air quality would not present a reason to resist the principle of the development proposal.

Noise:

Due to the use of machinery, plant and heavy transport associated with the development, a significant amount of noise would likely be generated by the proposed development. It is necessary, therefore, to assess whether adequate mitigation has been proposed to take account of the potential noise issues.

The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has identified an appropriate noise level for the proposed operations and has advised that the hours of work should be restricted to between 07:00 to 17:00 Mondays to Fridays, and 07:00 to 14:00 on Saturdays, except for any maintenance work necessary for site safety. It is further advised that operation outside these hours should only take place after prior notification to, and approval in writing by, the Planning Authority. The applicant has sought to bring the start time forward to 06:30 on weekdays, but Environmental Health has maintained its position. Accordingly, in the event of planning approval, it is considered that the hours of operation identified by the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) in the original consultation response would appropriately be imposed by a planning condition.

In the interests of providing appropriate mitigation measures, the Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has advised that noise attenuation barriers should be provided as detailed in Section 11.4 of the applicant’s Environmental Impact Statement. Section 11.4 of the Environmental Statement recommends that barriers, a minimum of 2.5m in height should be erected from the beginning of operations to mask noise emanating from inside the site compound. Further, it is advised that a soil bund should be constructed along the northern boundary of the site to attenuate noise at Hexpath. This would need to reach 5.5m in height by Phase 5 to reduce noise at Hexpath cottages to +4dB above background. However, the information provided by the applicant does not fully address the recommendations of 11.4 in that no noise attenuation barriers are shown along the north and west perimeter of the compound area, while it has been advised in writing that the temporary bunds along the northern boundary would be in the order of 3 to 4m. In addition to their role as noise attenuation barriers, there is also a need to consider the appearance of these bunds in terms of their use in screening views of the extraction area and in terms of their own visual impact within the wider landscape. Accordingly, it is considered that it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that details of the noise attenuation barriers should be subject to further consideration.

Providing appropriate planning conditions are imposed to address the above concerns relating to noise impact, it is concluded that, in the matter of noise, there is no overriding planning issue that would prevent support of the proposals.

Road Safety and Traffic Impact:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 Objectors have raised concerns about the impact of the proposed development upon the local road network both in terms of road safety at the proposed road junction, and more generally in terms of the additional traffic of HGVs that would be generated.

With regard to road safety at the junction between the proposed access road and the A697, the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) is supportive of the proposed junction provided it is constructed with radii of 15m and provided appropriate visibility splays are maintained (minimum of 4.5m by 215m). It is advised that the proposed access road is acceptable, provided this is widened from 5m to 7m. The applicant has forwarded a detail of the original drawing (Drawing 6859 B) amended by hand, with the radii and access road width adjusted to the Road User Manager’s specification. It is considered that it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that amended drawings of the junction and access road should be submitted for the Planning Authority’s approval. This condition could usefully require that these drawings should be based on the details shown in the supporting drawings (that is, Drawings 6857B, 6858, 6859B and 6860) except that the access road should be widened to 7m and both radii should be 15m (instead of the western radius being 7.5m as currently shown on Drawing 6859 B).

With regard to objectors’ advice about the access being located in an accident ‘black spot’, it is noted that there have been no recorded injury accidents within 1 mile either side of the proposed access location within the past five years. Although the access has been repositioned on the amended drawings, the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has confirmed that this is not so significant a movement as to invalidate the advice that was given at the time of the Road User Manager’s consultation response.

With regard to traffic impact on the local road network, the applicant has advised that up to, but no more than, 20 HGVs would leave and return to the site during the course of a working day. The applicant has clarified that these vehicles would have a 20 tonne load capacity, although there would be limited potential for the use of larger vehicles if this was practical for delivery purposes on the site to which the material was being distributed. The agent’s additional supporting information is accepted by the Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management), who maintains the position set out in Roads’ formal consultation response, which is that the proposed traffic impact is considered likely to translate into a 0.7% increase in HGVs and a 0.6% increase in cars on the local road network. These increases are considered to be minimal, and to represent no significant impact on the road network.

The Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has explicitly identified the proposed provision of wheel washing facilities as an important consideration. Accordingly, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by condition that these facilities are provided and maintained in good working order.

The applicant has advised that eight workers would be employed on the site during its operation. It is noted that provision has been made for eight car parking spaces within the compound area, but a concern would be that some additional provision should be available for any visiting vehicle or vehicles. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that the number, location and surfacing of the car parking spaces should be subject to further consideration.

Overall, it is considered that during the lifespan of the quarry, usage of the local road network would not significantly change. The Director of Technical Services (Roads and Fleet Management) has considered the application and has not raised any

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 objections. In this context, it is considered that provided appropriate planning conditions are imposed to address the above highlighted concerns, no sustainable road safety concerns would arise.

General Amenity:

The proposed quarrying operations would take place in what is presently a quiet, rural locale with a small population of residents in close proximity. There would inevitably be a perceptible diminishment in the level of peacefulness, while local residents would encounter change to their living environment during the extraction period, which would potentially prevail for up to 15 years. However, although the overall site is a significant size, the phasing of the development would help to reduce its impact. In assessing the likely level of change that would occur for the residents against the positive economic development it would bring to the local economy, on balance any change to private amenity would not bring about a reason to resist the development.

The Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health) has advised that there is unlikely to be any risk to any private water supply as a consequence of the proposed development, but in the event of planning approval, has sought the imposition of a planning condition requiring that a rolling programme of restoration is adhered to.

Landscape Impact:

The site area is gently undulating arable farmland. It is described within the Borders Landscape Character Assessment as being part of landscape type 8 Rolling Famland WPl: Westruther Platform but also just touching the northern edge of landscape type 17 Lowland Margin Platform GP: Gordon Platform. Key characteristics include:

x Undulating relief and x Large scale field pattern, with scattered coniferous woods

The Landscape Architect has advised that the main impacts of the proposed development that would be routinely visible are the views in close proximity to the site, those from the A697 road and those from the residential properties at Hexpath Farm. Other receptor positions are either from agricultural land, or are from roads and properties that are much more distant and which are also largely screened (e.g. views from Macksmill and Gordon).

Despite some screening from mature trees to the south, and the undulating nature of the surrounding terrain, it is acknowledged that the site is decidedly open, and in places, clearly visible from the A697. Although the applicant has proposed a number of landscaping treatments (grassed over bunds; an amenity bank; tree planting along the route of the access road), these would inevitably take some time to become established as landscape features, and would at no time serve to completely screen views of the site, particularly from Hexpath Farm and the adjacent section of the A697. However, it is relevant that the site is not subject to any landscape designations and that it would ultimately be reinstated as agricultural land, albeit with a new woodland strip and with the settlement lagoons adapted into wetland features. On balance, it is not considered that there can be any objection in principle to the landscape and visual impact of the proposed development but it is acknowledged that in view of the visibility of the site, it would be important to ensure that the detail of the visual impact of the proposed development at all stages, has been properly considered.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 In recent months the applicant has provided amended and additional information requested by the Planning Department, and taking cognisance of this information, the Planning Department is ultimately satisfied that the proposed development would have no significant unacceptable impacts upon the appearance of the landscape provided particular measures are implemented at the appropriate times:

Firstly, it is considered that the proposed amenity banks and attenuation barriers should be given as natural profiles as possible. While the applicant has provided indicative information to show how this might be achieved, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that the detail of the appearance of these banks and bunds should be subject to further consideration by the Planning Authority. A key consideration, particularly with regard to the permanent amenity bank, is that these artificial features should appear as natural in form as possible.

Secondly, the applicant has agreed to the provision of a 30m woodland strip around the access road. As proposed on the Proposals Drawings, a 16m tree planting area would coincide with the permanent amenity banking while a 14m tree planting area would be established to the immediate west of the road. Although the Planning Department is supportive of the principle of this woodland area, some details remain to be clarified. In the first instance, the applicant has only allowed for a 5m wide road between the two areas of tree planting when the Road User Manager would require the road to be 7m wide. Accordingly, two 1m wide strips extending the entire length of the access road would necessarily need to be taken out of tree planting land and used to accommodate the increased width of the access road; thereby inevitably reducing the tree planting area to 28m. In the second instance, the limit of tree planting at both the top and bottom of the access road appears fairly arbitrary. At the top, the applicant has agreed to the trees being extended towards the junction with the A697, and the majority of the amended drawings show this detail. However, in the vicinity of the compound area, an obvious triangular shaped strip has been omitted on the west side of the access road. This omission is partly practical since much of this area actually falls within the Extraction Area, and more specifically within ‘Area 1a’. However, the applicant has agreed that once this area has been restored, it might appropriately be planted with trees to create a coherent tree belt running the entire length of the access road from the road junction down to the compound area. Given the need for certain details of this tree planting to be resolved, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that details of this planting should be submitted for prior approval.

Details provided with regard to the structures and plant to be accommodated within the compound area indicate that these would not be over 6m in height, but there is a lack of detail about certain structures (floodlighting columns), while the relationship between the batching plant shown within the compound layout on Drawing 6882A and the plant illustrated on Drawing 6876 could usefully be clarified. Also it is understood that the access road would be gated, but no details have been supplied as to the appearance of these gates or how the wall would be reinstated either side of this. It would be appropriate to require by planning condition(s) that precise details of these structures should be supplied to the Planning Authority for written approval.

Beyond those measures that would need to be addressed before or during the operation of the proposed development, there is a need to consider the appearance of the restored landscape. A key difference between the existing and restored landscape is that the applicant would not reinstate the ground levels of the extraction area to its former height in that a lower, more simplified profile would be created. At this stage, the applicant has only provided indicative details with regard to landscape

Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 features, but it has been indicated that the lagoons would be formed into a wetland habitat area while it is proposed that an area of new tree planting would be undertaken on the ridge above the Eden Water. The restored landscape would additionally include the aforementioned amenity bank along the eastern side of the site, which would have been planted with trees in advance of operations. Besides these features however, the landscape would otherwise revert to being agricultural land within the agricultural unit to which it currently belongs.

While the Planning Department considers that the main features of the restored landscape would be acceptable, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that more detailed information about the restoration proposals should be submitted for the Planning Authority’s approval. Within this consideration, a point that would need to be addressed, would be the fate of the access road. There is a discrepancy between Drawing 6874B (‘Final Phase’ prepared by AMS Associates) and Drawing 6880E1 (‘Final Restoration Plan’ prepared by SAC) in that the access road is shown as being retained. The principle of the access being retained as an agricultural access is not considered to be problematic, but some consideration would need to be given as to the form in which both it and the road junction would be retained. In the event of planning approval, this might appropriately be addressed within a requirement that details of the restoration scheme should to be submitted for further consideration. It would also be appropriate to require that the applicant should conclude a legal agreement to ensure that sufficient provision should be set aside in advance of works to cover the costs of the restoration of the site.

During the lifetime of the development, a significant level of change would inevitably occur within the local landscape. The first impression of the site is that the landscape is sensitive and would not benefit from disturbance. However, since it is not subject to a landscape designation, and having regard to the Planning Department’s view that the landscape impact could be appropriately addressed, it is difficult to justify refusal of the development principle. Again, the visual impact should also be considered against the potential benefit to the rural local economy and the long-term potential to deliver an ecological benefit through the creation of new habitat. Although 15 years is a considerable period of time, it must also be considered that the proposal would ultimately lead to a reinstatement of an agricultural landscape, albeit with potentially remodelled contours, new planting, and new wildlife habitat. The changes in the eventual topography are agreeable if not ideal, but with the addition of vegetation the landscape framework could be adequately conserved in the long term.

Water Environment:

SEPA has advised that it would object to the proposed development unless planning conditions are imposed to require that the applicant submit an environmental management plan and a detailed restoration and aftercare scheme prior to the commencement of the restoration work. Accordingly, and in the event of planning approval, appropriate planning conditions would need to be imposed to address these concerns.

It is noted that both SEPA and the Director of Technical Services (Flood Prevention) have expressed a preference that in the event of planning approval, the land should be reinstated to its existing height. While the principle of the landscape being remodelled is not considered to be unacceptable from a visual impact perspective, the impact of this remodelling upon the drainage of the landscape would need to be considered in more detail. For this reason, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that the appearance of the

Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 restored landscape should be subject to further consideration. Further, and in the event that it was determined that the landscape should be more faithfully reinstated to address drainage concerns, it would be a vital that an accurate record had been made of the surface of the site. In this respect, and in the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to require by planning condition that a topographical survey of the existing landscape should be undertaken in advance of any works. This record could then be used to inform the compilation and assessment of the Restoration Plan.

SEPA has recommended that any drainage during the operation and final restoration of the site should be controlled to greenfield runoff rates to be agreed with the Flood Prevention Authority to prevent increased flow downstream of the development. The applicant has advised that it is proposed to limit the discharge from the quarry to the greenfield run-off rate through the collection of run-off in perimeter ditches, which would flow into the settlement lagoons, where the out flow would be controlled by a mechanical flume. The Director of Technical Services (Flood Prevention) is content with this in principle.

In the event of planning approval, SEPA’s advice relating to surface water management, might be appropriately made the subject of an informative or informatives.

Natural Heritage:

No statutory or other consultee has raised any objection to the principle of the proposed development on the grounds of it having any unacceptable impact upon biodiversity. However, it is recognised that mitigation is required in order to ensure that there are no such impacts. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to impose planning conditions, firstly, to require that the developer undertake further surveys for protected species (specifically, otter, badger and breeding birds) and that if such a need arises, that these surveys should form the basis of schemes to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Secondly, it should be a requirement that no habitat clearance works should be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express permission of the Planning Authority. Thirdly, prior to the commencement of works, it should be a requirement that a Landscape and Habitat Management and Enhancement Plan (including restoration measures for breeding birds, woodland, hedgerow, wetland and grassland management and enhancements) should be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority in consultation with SNH, RSPB and SWT.

With regard to restoration of the site, it is considered that it is reasonable for significant enhancement to arise from a large scale development of this nature. While the restoration proposals suggested in the Environmental Statement are welcome, these should appropriately include further enhancement measures to be fully satisfactory. Areas of existing semi-improved grassland have potential to be restored to semi-improved grassland, and this should be built into the restoration proposals. This might usefully be made the subject of an informative.

Cultural Heritage:

The site lies in an area that has archaeological potential. While there are no nationally important sites in the vicinity of the proposed quarry, there is one site of regional importance within half a kilometre of the site boundary (the prehistoric hillfort on Rumbletonlaw), while a number of prehistoric finds have been recorded in the near vicinity. Further, given the landscape position of the proposed quarry on an

Planning and Building Standards Committee 17 alluvial terrace overlooking the Eden Water and below three prominent hills (one with evidence of prehistoric occupation) it is considered that there is potential for the development to encounter previously unknown archaeological sites.

The nature of the sub-soils themselves are also of interest, since there is growing evidence to suggest that buried alluvial sands and gravels have a significantly higher potential for containing prehistoric lithics, while buried alluvial soils are excellent sources of palaeo-environmental data pertaining to past human land use. Accordingly, it would be reasonable to impose a planning condition requiring that the developer undertake the following:

x An archaeological evaluation of the proposed quarry area in advance of the commencement of operations on-site; x An integrated strategy of small finds identification in the field in advance of the commencement of operations on-site, and post-excavation analysis; x An integrated strategy of palaeo-environmental sampling in advance of the commencement of operations on-site, and post-excavation analysis; and x Proper dissemination of all results through reporting to the Council and other relevant heritage bodies.

Other Considerations:

The operation of the proposed development does not raise any concerns about having an unacceptable cumulative impact since there is only one other operational quarry within 10km, but out with 5km, of the site.

The proposed development would have no impact on any Core Path or Right of Way.

The proposed development would not result in the loss of prime quality agricultural land.

While it has been advised that excavation would not occur below 5m, Drawing 6879 shows a section (Section C-C) where excavation is shown as occurring almost to a depth of 9m. In the event of planning approval, it would be appropriate to explicitly require by planning condition that excavation should only occur to a maximum depth of 5m unless this has otherwise been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Other Issues Raised in Objections:

Objectors have advised that the proposed development and its associated impacts are unnecessary since the need for sand and gravel can be met by existing quarries, or through the extension of existing quarries. Within the supporting statement, the applicant has included detailed information on the perceived viability of a sand and gravel quarry at the site, with the advice that this would be conveniently placed to serve markets within the Scottish Borders, Edinburgh, the Lothians and northern England. Ultimately an assessment of market need lies out with the concerns that should be appropriately addressed within the determination of this planning application, and it would in any event, need to be conceded that the applicant is better placed to judge whether or not the proposed quarry would be viable.

While the A697 is a major route along which visitors and tourists are likely to travel, it is not considered that the development would be so significant in its visual impact as to impact negatively upon the region’s tourist economy.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 18 An objector has advised that it is understood from the Pre-application consultation that the applicant is ultimately seeking to operate for 30 years. The applicant has not advised the Planning Authority of any longer-term intention than its current proposal. Any proposal to extend operations beyond 15 years would have to be made the subject of a new planning application, which would have to be considered on its own merits at that point in time.

An objector has advised of concerns that the extraction area might be used as a landfill site for waste. Any such proposal would require to be the subject of a new planning application however, it should perhaps be clarified that the applicant (a minerals developer) is not the site owner, and that the stated long-term intention is that the site should be restored to agricultural use and incorporated back into the existing agricultural unit. The applicant would be legally bound to provide a restoration bond to cover the costs of restoring the site for this purpose.

Objectors have advised that public consultation has not been full and open. However, residents have had the opportunity to participate in the pre-application consultation stage as well as commenting at that time and subsequently on the planning application. All their comments have been summarised above under the ‘Representations’ section of this report.

CONCLUSION:

There can be little doubt that the excavation of minerals from this quiet rural site over a 15 year period, would potentially give rise to significant changes to the local environment, principally in terms of:

x landscape and visual impact; and x noise, dust and visual disturbance to local residents

However, in considering all the issues, it is concluded that the development can be supported in that the issues raised in representations do not outweigh the general acceptability of the development proposals.

It is considered that the proposed development would comply with the Council’s planning policies pertaining to minerals development, and that provided appropriate planning conditions are imposed, it would not have any unacceptable impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding area or upon any neighbouring residential properties.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES:

I recommend that the application be approved, subject to a legal agreement relating to the provision of a bond to secure the restoration of the site and subject to the following planning conditions:

2. A site notice or sign shall be displayed in a prominent place at or in the vicinity of the site until the completion of the development, which shall be readily visible to the public, and printed on durable material. The Notice shall take the following form:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 19 “Development at (Note 1)

Notice is hereby given that planning permission has been granted, subject to conditions (Note 2) to (Note 3) on (Note 4) by Scottish Borders Council.

The development comprises (Note 5)

Further information regarding the planning permission, including the conditions, if any, on which it has been granted can be obtained, at all reasonable hours at Scottish Borders Council Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells, Melrose. Telephone (01835) 825060, or by visiting http://eplanning.scotborders.gov.uk/publicaccess, using the application reference (Note 6)”

Reason: To ensure compliance with Section 27C of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.

3. The consented extraction works shall be permitted to operate for a maximum period of 15 years from the date of commencement of works on-site. Within 6 months of this date, or of the cessation of workings, whichever is the earlier, all buildings, structures and plant shall be removed from the site. Within 18 months of the cessation of workings, the site shall be fully restored to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise the environmental effects of the proposed development in a manner that is consistent with its operational capacity.

4. No building, structure or plant which has not formed part of this approval, shall be erected on the site without the prior consent of the Planning Authority. Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to maintain reasonable control of the appearance of the site, and to minimise the impact of the development on its surroundings.

5. The consented development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme of working which is detailed in Section 5.3.4.of the Supporting Statement and the phasing plans accompanying the application (Drawings 6861 B to 6874 B inclusive) unless explicit approval to vary this is provided in writing by the Planning Authority. All work shall be undertaken in accordance with a Method Statement based on the principles set out in the sample method statement provided in support of the application, which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of operations. Reason: To ensure the development of the site is carried out in the manner considered by the Planning Authority.

6. Prior to the commencement of development a drawing indicating the positions of the extraction sections shown in Drawings 6878 and 6879 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: The drawing (6880) showing the positions of the extraction sections, requires to be updated to agree with the information shown on the approved drawings.

7. Notwithstanding the information shown in Drawings 6878 and 6879 with regard to the depth of excavations, excavations shall go no deeper than 5m below the

Planning and Building Standards Committee 20 existing ground level as identified in Drawings 6878 and 6879, unless this has otherwise been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: This represents the depth stated as part of the planning submissions, and is the depth upon which all considerations by the Planning Authority are based.

8. All works, including temporary buildings, plant, machinery and stockpiles, shall be contained within the approved compound area unless specifically used during the initial soil or overburden stripping, or during bunding formation or planting works. Reason: To minimise the visual impact of the development.

9. Notwithstanding the information submitted in support of the application, prior to their installation on site, precise details of the location and appearance of the immobile plant to be operated within the compound area shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To ensure that the Planning Authority retains effective control over the development.

10. The hours of operation for all working, with the exception of maintenance work necessary for site safety, shall be limited to the hours of 07:00 hours to 17:00 hours on Mondays to Fridays, and 07:00 hours to 14:00 hours on Saturdays. Operation outside these hours shall only take place after prior notification to, and approval in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residential properties and the rural amenity of the area.

11. Noise levels, when measured at the nearest noise sensitive dwelling in existence at the date of consent, shall not exceed the background LA90 10min level by more than 5dB inclusive of any tonal penalty. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residential properties and the rural amenity of the area.

12. Throughout the period of operation of the site, noise attenuation barriers shall be provided and maintained in accordance with a scheme of details agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. This scheme of details shall include the location(s), height(s) and profile(s) of the barriers, and shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residential properties and the rural amenity of the area and to minimise the visual impact of the development.

13. Prior to the commencement of the consented operations on site, a dust monitoring regime based on the measures identified within Section 9.8 of the Environmental Statement shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. This dust monitoring regime shall (a) incorporate a reliable means of establishing wind speed and directional data so that the source of any dusts can be properly identified and appropriately addressed, and (b) identify how this wind speed and directional data will be used to inform the dust monitoring

Planning and Building Standards Committee 21 regime. Following the commencement of the consented development, the dust monitoring regime shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, and shall be enforced throughout the period of operation, with dust control measures being applied at all relevant times. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To ensure that the development remains compatible with nearby uses and occupiers by having no unacceptable impacts upon local air quality.

14. Prior to the commencement of development, a topographical survey shall be undertaken by qualified persons for the purposes of making a detailed record of the height and appearance of the existing landscape within the boundaries of the site; and the results of this survey shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a full and proper record of the height and appearance of the existing landscape within the site is made prior to the commencement of works. It is necessary that this information is available to inform the compilation and assessment of the Restoration Plan to allow proper consideration to be given to both the appearance of the restored landscape and to the impact of the restored landscape upon surface drainage.

15. Subsequent to the conclusion of the topographical survey required by Planning Condition 14 and prior to the commencement of development, details of the contours, levels and gradients to which reinstated land shall be made up during the period of operation shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority in liaison with SEPA. Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and minimise and prevent mineral waste on site; to ensure the restoration of the site in the interests of landscape and visual amenity; and to ensure that the development proceeds in a manner that is compatible with the local environment and the amenity enjoyed by occupiers of nearby dwellings.

16. No trees within or on the boundary of the site shall be felled, lopped, 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 the Planning Authority considers should be substantially maintained.

17. Prior to the commencement of development, (a) details of the permanent amenity bank to be formed to the east of the consented access road and compound area, and (b) details of the advance tree planting to be undertaken either side of the access road, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. These details shall make provision for tree planting to occur on that part of Area 1a (that is, the area denoted as ‘1a’ on the approved Phasing Plans, Drawings 6861 B to 6874 B inclusive) where tree planting would be required in order to extend the woodland strip on the west side of the access road down to the perimeter of the consented compound area. These details shall include: i. a scale drawing/drawings indicating the location of the amenity bank and the extent of tree planting, taking account of the need for the access road to be 7m in width; ii. a scale drawing/drawings indicating the appearance (including height and profile) of the amenity bank;

Planning and Building Standards Committee 22 iii. a scale drawing/drawings indicating existing and proposed ground levels, to indicate the change in appearance of the landscape as a consequence of the creation of the amenity bank and any changes in level between the existing and restored ground levels within that part of ‘Area 1a’ that would be used for tree planting; iv. a full planting scheme indicating the locations, numbers and species of tree to be planted; and v. a schedule setting out the phasing of the planting and its subsequence maintenance, including appropriate provision for the need for tree planting on land within ‘Area 1a’ to take place after this area has been properly reinstated. Reason: To minimise the visual impact of the development throughout the period of operation of the consented quarry.

18. Prior to the commencement of development, precise details of the enclosure of the site and the appearance of the entrance, including gates and any fencing or walls, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: This aspect of the development requires further consideration in the interests of ensuring that it has an acceptable visual impact when viewed from the public road.

19. Prior to the commencement of operations, the site access and road junction shall be completed, and thereafter maintained throughout the period of operation of the consented quarry, in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. These details shall be based on Drawing Numbers 6857B, 6858, 6859B and 6860, except that: i. the access road shall be 7m (instead of 5m) in width for its entire length from the compound area up to a distance of 20m from its junction with the A697; and ii. the radii either side of the proposed junction shall both be 15m (instead of that to the west being 7.5m). Reason: In the interests of road safety.

20. Visibility splays of a minimum of 4.5 by 215 metres in both directions onto the public road (A697) from the access track, shall be created prior to the commencement of works on site and shall thereafter be maintained free of obstruction in perpetuity (for the duration of the development). Reason: In the interests of road safety.

21. The approved vehicle wheel cleaning facilities shall be installed on-site prior to the commencement of operations, and shall thereafter be retained in good working order for the duration of the development hereby approved. The public road shall be kept free of debris/mud from the site for the duration of the development hereby approved. Reason: To ensure material from the site is not deposited on the road network to the detriment of road safety.

22. No other access onto the public road shall be formed at any time other than the single access agreed as part of this planning permission. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

23. Prior to the commencement of any works, a full site specific environmental management plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning

Planning and Building Standards Committee 23 Authority in liaison with SEPA. Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plan and shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the agreed details of the Plan. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to minimise and prevent mineral waste on site.

24. Prior to the commencement of any works and notwithstanding the details shown in any information submitted as part of the approved application, details relating to the exact specification and location of the lagoon(s) and associated works/vegetation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall thereafter be strictly adhered to. Reason: To ensure that any issues relating to potential flood risk and contamination of the nearby water course (Eden Water) have been fully addressed.

25. Prior to the commencement of development, further surveys for protected species (otter, badger and breeding birds) shall be undertaken to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. The surveys shall include schemes of mitigation where appropriate. The results of these surveys and mitigation plans where applicable, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Any works identified within the approved mitigation plans shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: Further information is required to ensure that the impact of the consented development upon protected species is properly understood and to ensure that the consented development does not have any unacceptable impacts upon these species.

26. No habitat clearance works shall be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the consented development does not have any unacceptable impacts upon protected species.

27. Prior to the commencement of works a Landscape and Habitat Management and Enhancement Plan including restoration measures for breeding birds, woodland, hedgerow, wetland and grassland management and enhancements, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority in consultation with SNH and taking cognisance of the consultation advice of RSPB and SWT. Any works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To compensate for potential habitat loss associated with the realisation of the development and to ensure that the consented development does not have any unacceptable impacts upon local wildlife.

28. Prior to its installation, precise details of the floodlighting of the site, including all means of support, shall be subject to the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. Floodlighting shall be designed to minimise light spillage and focus on the working area(s). Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to

Planning and Building Standards Committee 24 the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the visual amenity of the area and minimising disturbance to bats and badgers.

29. No development shall take place until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining: i. An archaeological evaluation of the proposed quarry area and associated post- excavation analysis; ii. An integrated strategy of small finds identification in the field and associated post-excavation analysis; iii. An integrated strategy of palaeo-environmental sampling and associated post- excavation analysis; and iv. Proper dissemination of all results through reporting to the Council and to other relevant heritage bodies. This Written Scheme of Investigation shall be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Following approval, the archaeological investigation shall be undertaken by a contracted archaeologist or archaeologists, in accordance with the approved details. The developer shall allow the contracted archaeologist(s) to complete the approved programme of fieldwork prior to the commencement of development. In the event that significant archaeology is encountered during the course of the fieldwork, the Archaeology Officer shall be contacted for further consultation. In the event that the Archaeology Officer would seek to conserve any archaeological deposits and/or features in situ, no development shall take place until arrangements for the conservation of such deposits and/or features have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The approved means/method of conservation shall thereafter be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved details. The developer shall ensure that all data and finds gathered during the course of fieldwork undergo appropriate post-excavation analysis, and that the results of this work are submitted to the Planning Authority for its review and record, and that appropriate arrangements are made for the curation of any finds. Reason: The site is within an area where ground works may destroy or damage archaeological remains, and it is therefore desirable to afford a reasonable opportunity to preserve an appropriate record of these remains.

30. At least one year (12 months) prior to the cessation of mineral workings on site, a detailed restoration scheme, including an after-care and management plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA. The aforementioned plan must include: a) information on any proposals for phased working and progressive restoration, as well as on the effect that any restoration will have on the water environment, including groundwater quality and quantity; and b) an assessment of the effect that any backfilling below the water table will have on groundwater. The scheme shall additionally include: i. the proposed final restoration contours, levels and gradients; ii. means of landscaping and planting, wildlife habitat creation and an implementation programme and maintenance schedule; including planting schedules identifying the species, number, location of all planting and ground cover, and future maintenance; and iii. details of how the site access road, entrance, and site boundaries would be treated.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 25 Following approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Any subsequent change or changes to the approved details shall first have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to the implementation of this change/these changes. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and minimise and prevent mineral waste on site; to ensure the restoration of the site in the interests of landscape and visual amenity; and to ensure that the development proceeds in a manner that is compatible with the local environment and the amenity enjoyed by occupiers of nearby dwellings.

31. Prior to the commencement of operations, car parking provision shall have been provided in accordance with details, including the number, location and surfacing of car parking spaces, which shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road and site safety by ensuring that appropriate provision is made for the parking of workers’ private vehicles within the site.

32. A bond, or other appropriate financial guarantee, of a value to be agreed with the Planning Authority shall be deposited before the development commences to secure provision for the restoration of the site. Reason: To ensure that restoration of the site can be successfully implemented.

Informatives

The Notes above should be completed for Condition 2 as follows:

Note 1: Insert address or describe the location of the development Note 2: Delete “subject to conditions” if the planning permission is not subject to any conditions Note 3: Insert the name and address of the developer Note 4: Insert the date on which planning permission was granted (normally the date of this Notice) Note 5: Insert the description of the development. Note 6: Insert the application reference number.

This planning permission does not purport to grant consent under any other legislation or Regulations operated by bodies other than the Planning Authority, including Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, the Water Authority, Historic Scotland and any other Department of Scottish Borders Council (This list is not exhaustive).

All work within the public road must be undertaken by an approved contractor on the Council’s list (DC-8).

With regard to surface water management, it is recommended that prior to discharge into the lagoons, source control (silt traps etc.) should be used to control sediment runoff from the areas used for mineral processing activities, excavated surfaces, site compound and access roads as appropriate. The proposed wheel washing facility should be operated on a closed cycle system. If a closed cycle system is not employed, any overflow from the wheel wash system should discharge to the settlement lagoons. Each phase will require soil stripping and whilst good practice should be followed such as minimising run-off and seeding soil storage mounds, significant runoff during heavy rain must be directed to the settlement lagoons.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 26 It is advised that the final mitigation/species protection plan for badgers should include assessment of impacts on foraging habitat as per the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance for biodiversity (http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/life/planningandbuilding/plansandresearch/6003.html section 4.3.5, and, where relevant, it should also include provision for the following:

x The use of noisy plant or machinery in the vicinity of the protection zone to cease at least 2 hours before sunset; x Security lighting to be directed away from setts; x Chemicals to be stored as far away as possible from setts and badger paths; x Any temporarily exposed open pipe system to be capped in such a way as to prevent badgers gaining access.

A consideration within the breeding birds survey is that net loss of biodiversity may potentially be incurred, and should be compensated for accordingly.

The semi-improved to improved grassland identified within the Environmental Statement potentially contains areas of poor semi-improved grassland (B6) and, therefore, has potential for restoration to semi-improved grassland. This should be built into restoration proposals.

The habitat restoration measures should include native woodland creation and enhancement contributing to the local Forest Habitat Network, reinforcement of the hedgerow and dyke framework, restoration of semi-improved grassland, enhancement of riparian habitats, creation and management of grass margins and areas of wild bird cover.

The nature of the development lends itself to the creation of a wetland feature which should be included in the restoration proposals within sand and gravel bunds retained to benefit breeding birds. The Borders Wetland Vision model identifies a potential ground water dependent wetland opportunity area in the field identified as containing “Area of gravel mineral resource used throughout phases 1 to 5” in Fig. 3.1 of the Environmental Statement.

The SEPA classification of the water body (Eden water: Source to Hume burn confluence indicates that the water body is of Moderate status. Pressures on this water body include diffuse pollution from agriculture: http://apps.sepa.org.uk/rbmp/pdf/5216.pdf. The restoration proposals could help deliver multi-benefits by contributing to diffuse pollution control through habitat management measures.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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

Author(s) Name Designation Stuart Herkes Assistant Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 27 Planning and Building Standards Committee 28 Item No. 9(b) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING CONSENT FOR THE WINNING AND WORKING OF MINERALS

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00265/MIN

OFFICER: Dorothy Amyes WARD: Galashiels and District PROPOSAL: Extension to quarry for the extraction of hard rock SITE: Hazelbank Quarry APPLICANT: Aggregate Industries UK Ltd AGENT: J W H Ross & Co Ltd

SITE DESCRIPTION:

Hazelbank Quarry is located immediately to the east of the A7 approximately 1.3km north of Fountainhall. There has been extraction of hard rock from the site for a considerable period of time and the existing exposed rock face from earlier quarrying is clearly visible from the road. The surrounding area is mainly forestry plantation,- part of which is included in this application.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:

The application site covers an area of approximately 24.23 Ha, 14Ha of which is for a northerly extension and the remainder is the existing consented area. It is estimated that there is an approximate reserve of 4.2million tonnes of greywacke and it is proposed that this will be extracted in a series of phases over a period of 21 years.

The initial phase, which will last for a period of 12-18 months, will involve the lowering of the existing quarry floor and the establishment of a new internal haulage road towards the extension area to the north. The extraction operations within the extension will take place over a further 5 phases through the establishment of a series of 10m deep cuttings/benches.

It is proposed that in the first planting season following the commencement of operations in the extended area, restoration planting will be carried out within the existing quarry site. Progressive restoration will then be carried out in each of the phases. It is aimed to create a steep-sided, rocky grassland hillside set amongst mixed broadleaved and coniferous woodland and scrub. An area of water would also be created in the lower, deepened part of the existing quarry site. At the end of the working it is proposed that the after-use would be as follows:

6.26 ha forestry 16.6ha woodland and scrub 0.5ha road/access 3.1 ha grassland 2.9ha exposed rock face and bare ground

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 and 1ha of waterbody and wetland

In addition to this, the applicants have agreed to additional tree and shrub planting to be undertaken during the first phase of the development on land along the eastern boundary of the site.

A mobile processing plant will be used on the site. It is proposed that the processed material will be sold at a rate of approximately 200,000 tonnes per annum. This mean that on average there would be 3 lorries entering and leaving the site per operational hour. It is estimated that this will generate approximately 72 vehicle movements per day from Monday to Friday with 46 on a Saturday. In addition, there will be other vehicles using the site including staff cars and maintenance vehicles.

The existing access to the site will be used, although improvements are planned including additional road signage, improvements to visibility splays and lining.

It is proposed that the hours of working shall remain as currently consented ie Monday to Friday 0700-1800 Saturday 0700-1400 Sunday 1000 -1600 Operations on a Sunday are restricted to maintenance works only.

It is anticipated that the development will provide direct employment for 14 persons including hauliers with a further 6 employed on a contract basis for 6 months of the year.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Representations were received from 20 different households and their objections to the development can be summarised as follows;

x impact on the local landscape and scenery x road safety on A7 x increase in traffic particularly heavy vehicles x inadequate access to site x cumulative impact from this development, windfarms and Waverley line x noise x disturbance to local community x increase on pollution – dust and light x impact on health x loss of woodland x reliance on existing woodland to screen development x no need for quarry materials x no benefit to local community or economy x photomantages inaccurate

PLANNING HISTORY:

It is believed that quarrying in this area started in the late 1920s and until 1989 was operated by Midlothian County Council as a source of road stone. It has been leased to a number of companies since that time.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 In 1991 an application for the construction and landscaping of a permanent screening mound was approved (91/00449/FUL).

In March 1999 the then operator, Tarmac Minerals Limited, submitted an application for the determination of mineral conditions as required under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. No decision was taken by the planning authority within the agreed time limit and the conditions submitted as part of the application were subsequently deemed to be approved. A list of these conditions is contained in Appendix 5 of the supporting documents.

The existing consent does not expire until February 2042 and allows for the extraction of 3.7m tonnes from the consented area. The applicants have indicated that should the current application be approved and subsequently implemented this existing consent would be superseded.

The existing access has been utilised more recently as the access route to the Toddleburn Wind Farm (04/01744/FUL)

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Scoping

The applicant requested a scoping opinion under Regulation 10 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999. The council responded May 2009. Details of this response are contained in the supporting information

Pre-application Consultation Report

A Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted to the council on 13 July 2009. This notice set out the process that the applicant proposed to undertake for community consultation.

The PAN was also sent to the community councils of Heriot and Stow and subsequent meetings were held with representatives of each council. In addition meetings were held with a number of individuals who had expressed concerns about the proposal.

A pre-application public event was held on 8 December 2009 and a notice advertising this event was placed in the Southern Reporter. It is estimated that this event was attended by approximately 40 people.

As a result of comments received through the above a number of amendments were made to the proposals prior to the submission of the application.

Environmental Statement

An Environmental Statement has been submitted which examines any likely environmental impacts of the proposed development and outlines measures proposed to mitigate, reduce or prevent any significant adverse effects. The appendices contain the following detailed assessments: x Soil and land capability assessment x Evaluation regarding windblow of trees

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 x Landscape and visual impact assessment x Hydrological and hydrogeological assessment x Ecological assessment x Cultural heritage assessment x Noise assessment x Dust assessment x Blasting assessment x Transport assessment

A Non-Technical Summary was also provided.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees:

Director of Technical Services (Roads): It is acknowledged that the sightlines of the existing junction fall below the standard normally required, however this junction previously served a working quarry and was also used as an access during the construction of the windfarm and was subjected to a significant amount of vehicle movements. With the windfarm construction now complete the amount of vehicles movements at the junction has drastically decreased.

The Transport Assessment (TA) submitted with the application states that the visibility to the south will be improved to provide a splay of 4.5m x 160m, it also proposes to increase road markings on the A7 and provide a Vehicle Activated Sign on the A7 either side of the site warning approaching vehicles of the existing junction. The proposed increase in traffic movements of 6 two-way trips or 2.45% increase in the peak hour can be mitigated by these proposals.

There are no objections to this application provided the measures identified above along with improvements to the existing road signage on the A7 are implemented to the satisfaction of the Director or Technical Services (Roads). The TA confirms that a Travel Plan will be submitted for approval by the Council once the quarrying associated with this application commences. An appropriate planning condition on any consent is required.

Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health):

Noise

Hours of work should be restricted to 07:00 – 18:00 Monday to Friday & 07:00 – 14:00 On Saturdays, with the exception of maintenance work necessary for site safety.

Work outside these hours should only take place after prior notification to, and approval in writing by the Planning Authority.

Noise levels at noise sensitive dwellings should not exceed the undernoted LAeq 1hour figures.

LOCATION NOISE LIMIT (LAeq 1Hour) Crookston Cottage, Crookston Lodge, 50dB Cortleferry Cottages, The Bower, Ellem

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Cottage, Heronshaw Cottage Hoppringle 45dB

Vibration

In respect of inhabited property, vibration levels measured at any sensitive property should not exceed 6 mms -1 peak particle velocity for 95% of blast events. No event should exceed 10 mms -1 peak particle velocity.

As regards the telecommunications premises to the southeast of the development, Vibration levels should not exceed 50 mms -1 peak particle velocity for 95% of blast events.

The applicants should undertake ongoing monitoring that is sufficient to verify that these limits are being met.

The Council reserves the right to require prior notification of blasting operations to enable independent monitoring to take place.

Fugitive Dust Monitoring

The dust monitoring regime undertaken by the operators should incorporate a means of establishing wind speed and directional data so that the source of any dusts can be identified.

General

Should any of the above recommendations conflict with a Condition on the existing Consent, the more stringent of the two should take precedence in respect of this application.

Director of Technical Services (Flood Protection): The Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland) known as the “second generation flood mapping” prepared by SEPA indicates that the site is NOT at risk from a flood event with a return period of 1 in 200 years. That is the 0.5% annual risk of a flood occurring in any year.

In order to ensure that there is no increased flood risk from the Gala Water downstream as a result of surface water discharge from the quarry, it is necessary to determine the Greenfield run-off rates from the quarry to limit any discharges to these rates.

Further information was provided y a specialist company, on behalf of the applicant and the proposals in relation to any discharges are considered to be acceptable.

Statutory Consultees:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Health and Safety Executive: No comments

Transport Scotland: The proposed development represents an intensification of use of this site, however, the percentage increase in traffic on the trunk road is such that the proposed development is likely to cause minimal environmental impact on the trunk road network.

Scottish Badgers: No objection. They are satisfied that the applicant has done sufficient to identify the likelihood of badgers being present on the site or in close proximity.

Scottish Water: No objections. There may be contaminated land issues relevant to the development of the site. The developer must ensure that satisfactory precautionary measures are taken to protect the public water and sewer pipes from any possible contamination. The developer may have to submit a full soil investigation report to Scottish Water.

Scottish Environmental Protection Agency: Object to the application unless certain planning conditions are attached to any consent. These relate to surface water drainage, waste management, restoration of the site and environmental management.

Following further consultation with regards to the Management of Extractive Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2010 which came into effect on 1st April 2010, SEPA have agreed that the requirement for a condition relating to waste management can be removed.

Scottish Natural Heritage: No objections in principle but recommend that further survey work on great crested newts is undertaken prior to consideration of the application and addition surveys undertaken prior to the commencement of any work.

The applicants subsequently carried out a survey for great crested newts and submitted this to the council. No great crested newts were found on the site.

Historic Scotland: The cultural heritage chapter of the Environmental Statement considers impacts on a number of scheduled monuments in the vicinity of the site boundary. Cortleferry, scooped settlement 400m NW of (Index No. 1167) is situated on the southern flank of Hoppringle Hill within a field and is located c. 500m southeast of the site boundary. The ES considers that as the current setting of the monument includes the existing quarry, the development will have a minor impact on its setting, and we are content to agree with this view. Hodge Cairn, fort, Shank Wood (Index No. 1171) is located c. 800m north-west of the site boundary. The ES considered that while the proposed development will be visible from the monument, the impact is likely to be minor and we are content to agree with this view. We are also content to agree that impacts on other monuments assessed in the ES are unlikely to be significant, given that they are all located c. 2.5 km from the proposed development.

No objection to the proposal. HS agree with the findings of the ES that there are unlikely to be any significant impacts on historic environment features within our statutory remit.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 Stow Community Council: The Community Council objects on the following grounds:

1. Road Safety – the only straight stretch of road for many miles where traffic can overtake is south of Hazelbank Quarry. At one end of this stretch of road is Hazelbank quarry and the other end are the junction for Cortleferry and Fountainhall. Traffic can be observed to overtake dangerously along this stretch, already disregarding etc.

2. The plan has to be taken in conjunction with the plan for 2 roundabouts at Falahill and the realignment of the A7. It is a narrow road with many bends. More heavy traffic will restrict traffic which in turn leads to conditions for dangerous driving. Falahill is also snowbound and subject to heavy frost when lower areas of the Borders are not affected.

3. This is not a safe area as far as fatal accidents are concerned.

4. Question the traffic estimates, vehicular movements and operating hours. Consider that the road is already at saturation point with regard to heavy vehicles and they will further damage the road surface.

5. Concerned at the cumulative effect on the landscape when the nearby wind farms and the Waverley line are taken into consideration.

6 Noise and dust levels.

7. Private water supplies.

8. Improvements are needed to A7.

Heriot Community Council: Do not object to the extension of the quarry but do object to the proposals re Traffic, Noise, Cumulative Impact and Visual amenity. They have serious concerns in relation to:

1. Visual impact – the existing planting will not present any screening to the road and will blight the view of the valley from the north

2. Noise – concerned about the noise modelling particularly in relation to crushers and screening plant, reversing beepers and request that there is a condition restricting the number of blasting events per year.

3. Traffic – consider that the HGV movements will have an impact on the road;

4. Cumulative Impact of other developments including Soutra Quarry

Other Consultees

None

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018 S1- Environmental Impact S2 - Development Strategy

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 N6 - Environmental Impact N7 - Protection of Nature Conservation Interest N9 - Maintaining Landscape Character N15 - Regional and Local Archaeological Sites N16 - Archaeological Evaluation, Preservation and Recording N17 - Listed Buildings E7 - Minerals and Sustainability E9 - Mineral Developments Policy E16 – Rural Economic Development E22 - Protection of the Tourist Industry C8 - Access Network I11 - Parking Provision in New Development I13 - Water Quality I14 - Surface Water I15 - Flood Risk Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009

H2- Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

x Biodiversity (December 2005) x Landscape and Development (March 2008)

Scottish Government Policy: SPP1 - Scottish Planning Policy PAN 69 Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding 2004 PAN 75 Planning for Transport 2005 NPPG 14 Natural Heritage 1999 PAN 42 Archaeology 1994 PAN 50 Controlling the Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings (inc Annexes A-D) 1996 PAN 56 Planning for Noise 1999 PAN 58 Environmental Impact Assessment PAN 60 Planning for Natural Heritage 2000 PAN 66 Best Practice in handling planning applications affecting Trunk Roads 2003

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The main planning issues are whether or not this proposed development would comply with development plan policies which seek to secure the development of mineral quarries in a manner which has sustainable environmental implications.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Planning Policy

Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) is broadly positive towards minerals development proposals as there is a need for an adequate and steady supply to support sustainable economic growth. However, it is for the operator to carry out a full assessment of the proposed operation and provide proposals for appropriate control, mitigation and monitoring. The SPP states that ‘Development Management decisions should aim to minimise significant negative impacts from such developments on the amenity of local communities, the natural heritage and historic environment and other economic sectors important to the local economy and should encourage sensitive working practices during extraction.’

The application site lies within an Area of Search as identified in the Diagram 11 of the Structure plan and it is a proposed extension of an existing consented quarry which has a potential working life until 2042. The applicant has carried out a number of assessments and submitted proposed mitigation and restoration measures.

Landscape and Visual Impact

The site includes the existing Hazelbank Quarry and the adjoining Hoppringle Woods that lie immediately to the north. These areas taken together constitute most of the north west side of Hoppringle Hill which attains a height of 344m and lies on the east side of the valley of the Gala Water and the A7 road. In terms of the Borders Landscape Assessment, the site lies within Landscape Type 23: Pastoral Upland Valley and in character area GW: Gala Water. It also lies close to the boundary with Landscape Type 2: Plateau Grassland, Character Area LC: Lauder Common.

The extension of the existing quarry into Hoppringle Woods would more than double its size in terms of land area. The proposed works also have complex implications both for the landscape character of the vicinity and for key views on affected receptors, principally users of the A7 road and any future users of the new borders railway that will run nearby. There are also a small number of residential receptors e.g. at Brockhouse to the west and Crookston to the north.

Much of the north west side of the hill will be removed and more than half of Hoppringle Woods will be converted to quarry void. This has the potential for adverse long term effects as compared to the existing situation and it was considered that the information initially submitted in the ES had failed to identify the considerable change to the landform of Hoppringle Hill.

However, examination of the visual impacts as illustrated by the various computer visualisations at HB-LV-14 to 23 inclusive and the photomontages at HB-LV-24 and 25 indicates visual impacts that seem quite minor and that should be within acceptable limits. This is because of 2 key elements of the restoration strategy i.e.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 x Firstly, the retention of the existing ground at the back (top) of the existing quarry which allows the existing skyline to be retained when viewed from the west (e.g. Viewpoint 7. HB-LV-24) and which means that the new ‘extension’ is screened from the existing void - i.e. it is not really a quarry extension, rather it is a new quarry adjoining the existing one. x Secondly, the retention of the existing and highly visible edges of Hoppringle Woods to the south east and south west prevent visual changes to the skylines when viewed from these directions. It is also indicated (e.g. from viewpoint 5, HB-LV-18) that retained woodland on the north west side would contribute to minimising visual effects from that direction.

Much of the screening relies on the retention of the existing forestry plantation and concern has been expressed regarding the longevity of this woodland and the potential for windblow. In particular, the retained forest edges are very likely to blow down and this will reduce screening effects and may open up unwanted views of quarry faces. Further information was submitted by the applicant in relation to the trees and potential windblow and it is considered that provided there are suitable conditions to ensure that there is sufficient replanting if windblow does occur, the proposals can be significantly screened, thus limiting harmful effects.

The south east edge of Hoppringle Wood is, itself, unsatisfactory in landscape and visual terms and does not comply with landscape design guidelines. This is because as it was initially proposed, it formed a hard straight edge perpendicular to the contours forming an obviously man made line running down the hill that does not relate to topography. To use this edge as the basis for long term land excavations would make an adjustable forest boundary into a permanent quarry edge, effectively etching the existing line into the ground. The applicant has agreed to mitigate this effect by additional planting on additional land to the east to be undertaken during the first phase of the development. This should form a satisfactory edge to the development which will mature as the working progresses subject to regular checks being undertake. This can be part of a scheme of mitigation.

With regards to the plan for the existing quarry the proposed deepening the existing void and then converting this to a water body should be as good an outcome as is possible given the existing workings. The planting proposals will also help to soften and naturalise the scars of the quarry working at an early stage and at a significantly earlier time than can be achieved through the existing consent. To improve this further it is considered that the planting should be extended along the lower edge facing the A7 on either side of the site entrance. This can be covered by an amendment to the planting strategy.

The application has potentially significant long term implications for the landscape of the upper Gala Water Valley and the proposed mitigation strategy relies much on the retention of the edges of existing conifer plantation. Should the committee be minded to approve the application, conditions should be placed on the consent to ensure that satisfactory mitigation and landscaping are undertaken.

Natural Heritage

The site of the proposed development lies adjacent to the Gala Water, which is part of the River Tweed Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and it is essential that any quarrying activities do not affect the quality of the water in the Gala Water. SNH have requested that a detailed surface water management is provided before any work is

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 undertaken and that an assessment of the functionality of the settlement pond is carried out. These matters can be covered by conditions on any consent.

Surveys have also been carried out on breeding birds and badgers and the applicants have indicated that further checking surveys will be undertaken prior to any work commencing and that certain operations will not be undertaken during the breeding season. These surveys are to be welcomed as there may be implications under wildlife legislation for licensing some of the work.

The removal of the woodland resource will result in a loss of habitats although this will in part be compensated by the proposed additional planting out with the application site to the east and the final restoration proposals. It is considered that further offsite measures may be required which could be agreed through a legal agreement

The Council currently has a development related scheme in operation delivering offsite habitat measures in the upper Gala water, creating habitats that contribute to natural flood management. Wider community benefits could accrue for similar habitat provision related to this proposal.

The proposed restoration scheme is to be welcomed and the detail of this can be secured through a planning condition requiring a Landscape and Habitat Management Plan.

Cultural Heritage

The new layout of the proposed quarry extension will avoid any known regionally and nationally important heritage assets. The presence of forestry in the greater part of the development area, forest that has been planted and harvested over the past 150 years, suggests that any archaeological features that had existed on the north slopes of Hoppringle Hill will have been destroyed by ploughing and harvesting operations. The development area is partially within the former Crookston House designed landscape, and historical maps suggest that designed forest features had existed on Hoppringle Hill. In the SPG (draft) on Designed Landscapes the conifer infill planting along the A7 is noted. It is considered to be a designed landscape of regional, high significance.

Again, however, evidence of this has likely been destroyed by modern forestry. However, there remains a possibility that elements of the designed landscape, such as drystone walls, may survive within the forested areas. In order to record any surviving elements of this landscape, and any other features that may survive within the afforested area, it is considered that a condition should be placed on any consent for a programme of archaeological work to be applied following the harvesting of the forestry and prior to ground disturbance related to the quarry extension. Further it is considered that during the felling, the harvesters should be made aware of the possibility of encountering drystone structures, and these should be clearly marked and, if possible, avoided during the felling operation to preserve them for later recording.

Noise

The proposed quarry working will produce noise mainly from blasting, plant and machinery and vehicular movements. The settlements of Fountainhall and Heriot are at a distance of approximately 1.3km and 4km from the site. The nearest potential

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 noise sensitive properties have been identified as being at Crookston Cottage, Crookston Lodge, Cortleferry Cottages, Hoppringle, The Bower, Ellem Cottage, Heronshaw Cottage, Crookston House and Crookston Stables and the applicant commissioned a noise assessment, the results of which are contained in Appendix 13 of the ES. The report concluded that the operations would not exceed the acceptable noise ranges as noted in PAN 50. They also propose a number of mitigation measures to minimise the noise levels from the quarrying operations. Environmental Health have not raised any objections to the proposal subject to a number of conditions being placed on any consent.

Vibration

The main source of any potential vibration will be from the blasting operations. The Blasting Assessment (Appendix 15) identified the potential vibration sensitive properties and structures and the report concluded that, subject to the appropriate blasting be in compliance with the relevant regulations relating to the operation of quarries and by employing good practice as contained in the relevant guidelines, any impacts from blasting were considered to be minimal with no significant effects.

Environmental Health have specified the vibration levels which should not be exceeded at a number of the nearby properties and consider that the applicants should undertake ongoing monitoring to ensure that these limits are not being exceeded.

Dust

It is recognised that unless properly controlled dust from quarries can cause a nuisance and a significant loss of amenity to nearby residential properties. A Dust Assessment was undertaken (Appendix 14) which included a baseline survey of the air quality at the potential sensitive receptors. This baseline survey indicated that existing levels of ‘nuisance’ dust were found to be insignificant and typical of this ‘open country’ location.

The main potential sources of dust will be from the removal of topsoil and overburden, extraction of the aggregate, the mobile processing plant and movement of vehicles along the haul roads. It is recognised that once airborne, dust is difficult to control and any controls are best dealt with at source. The Assessment looks at the potential impacts of the different sources of dust on the sensitive receptors and proposes mitigation measures to minimise any potential impacts. The report concludes that provided these measures are carried out the quarrying operations will not generate excessive levels of dust at nearby properties. A detailed scheme of dust management and monitoring has been prepared and it is considered that this should be part of the Mitigation plan, if the application is approved.

Environmental Health have requested that the dust monitoring regime undertaken by the operators should incorporate a means of establishing wind speed and directional data so that the source of any dusts can be identified. This can be addressed in the Mitigation Plan.

Waste Management

The Management of Extractive Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2010 which came into effect on 1st April 2010, require that a Waste Management Plan is provided at every working quarry although there are exemptions to this. The applicants have submitted

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 a letter detailing the reason why a Waste management plan is not required in this instance and SEPA have agreed that their requirement for a condition on any consent requiring this is not longer required. It is considered that further consideration needs to be given to this but as it is separate legislation it can be dealt with after a decision has been taken on this current application.

Traffic

Concerns have been raised about the current situation on the A7 and the road safety implications of additional heavy vehicles turning onto a comparatively straight stretch of road and the additional vehicular movements that the proposed quarrying activities, combined with the windfarm traffic, will generate.

Now that the construction of the windfarm at Toddleburn has been completed, there has been a considerable reduction in the number of vehicles using the existing access

The level of vehicular movements to be generated by the proposed development is noted above in the description of the development. It is anticipated that 70% of the output will go to markets to the north and the remainder to the south. A Transport Statement has been submitted as part of the application and improvements are proposed at the access and with signage.

The Transport Statement estimates that the impact on the existing traffic flow will be minimal with an increase in traffic flow on the A7 of 1.42% between 0700 and 1900hrs (2.45% increase in the peak hours).

Although at this point the A7 is not a trunk road Transport Scotland were consulted and considered that the development would cause minimal environmental impact on the trunk road network.

Technical Services (Roads) have raised no objections to the proposal subject to the proposed improvements to the access and signage and the submission of a Travel Plan once the quarry is operational.

There are a number of proposed realignments and improvements along this section of the A7 associated with the Waverley Line route. In addition, the applicant is aware of a review of the road accident data along the A7 to the north of the site and has asked that they are kept appraised of the results of this survey.

Further, in order to address local concerns relating to traffic and the other issues noted above, the applicants would be prepared to establish a liaison committee, if desired by local interests.

Given that the access to the quarry is directly onto a main ‘A’ class road running from north to south through the region, and the volume of traffic which will be generated by the development is not of a significantly high level to raise major concerns in relation to the impact that it will have on traffic flow and road safety, there are no justifiable reasons relating to traffic that could be put forward for refusing this application. It must also be born in mind that there is an existing consent to extract the minerals which could generate similar volumes of traffic.

Access Routes

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 There are no claimed rights of way through the site.

Cumulative Impact

The SPP recommends cumulative consideration of any proposal with other quarries located in the area. The nearest operational quarry to Hazelbank is at Soutra just of the A68. This has recently been granted an extension and one of the conditions on this consent requires alterations to the access to ensure that heavy vehicles cannot use the B6368 from Soutra to the A7 close to Crookston Old House. It is considered that there will be no cumulative impact of both quarries being operational.

Conclusion

The application proposed the extension of an existing quarry by extending the site to the north and excavating down into the hillside. The main source of screening of the excavation works will be provided by existing trees and replanting proposals. The proposed work will last for a period of 21 years with continuous restoration work being carried out during this time followed by another short period to complete these works. There is an existing consent for part of the site adjacent to and highly visible from the surrounding area. This existing site could be worked until 2042 with only a limited number of conditions in place to control the working and a restoration plan which is less than would be accepted if it were to be submitted today.

It is considered that the proposals comply with national and local policies in relation to mineral workings and that subject to a legal agreement to ensure that the final restoration is undertaken (through a bond or similar) and conditions, mitigation plans and careful monitoring at all stages, that the final outcome will result in a better environment in terms of landscape, habitat development and that there will be less impact on the local residents through the use of more stringent planning conditions and a shorter working life for the quarry.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved, subject to a legal agreement relating to the provision of a bond to secure the restoration of the site and subject to the following planning conditions:

Development at (Note 1)

Notice is hereby given that planning permission has been granted, subject to conditions (Note 2) to (Note 3) on (Note 4) by Scottish Borders Council.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 The development comprises (Note 5)

Further information regarding the planning permission, including the conditions, if any, on which it has been granted can be obtained, at all reasonable hours at Scottish Borders Council 1Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells, Melrose. Telephone (01835) 825060, or by visiting http://eplanning.scotborders.gov.uk/publicaccess, using the application reference (Note 6).

Reason: To ensure compliance with Section 27C of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.

3. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme of working detailed in the amended phasing plans accompanying the application. Reason: To ensure the development of the site is carried out in the manner considered by the planning authority

4. This quarry shall be permitted to operate for a maximum period of 21 years beginning from the date of this consent. Within six months of this date, or of cessation of workings, whichever is the earlier, all buildings, structures and plant, shall be removed from the site. Reason: To minimise the environmental effects of the proposed development in a manner consistent with its operational capacity

5. The means of fencing the site shall be subject to the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. No other fencing shall be permitted on the site. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the visual amenity of the area

6. A restoration and aftercare plan to be submitted one year prior to operations ceasing. Information on the proposals for phased working and progressive restoration should be outlined. Consideration should also to be given to the effect that any restoration will have on the water environment, including groundwater quality and quantity, including an assessment of the effect that any backfilling below the water table would have on groundwater flow. Restoration proposals should be designed to maximise habitat creation. Various guidance in this regard and if water features proposed documents such as Ponds, Pools and Lochans, should be followed. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the restoration of the site in the interests of landscape and visual amenity

7. A bond, or other appropriate financial security, shall be deposited before the development commences of a value to be agreed with the Planning Authority which secures provision for the restoration of the site Reason: To ensure that restoration of the site can be successfully implemented

8. A detailed scheme of mitigation planting, identifying species, number, location of all planting, and ground cover and future maintenance including specified inspection dates by the planning authority, shall be submitted to and approved

Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 by the planning authority. Once approved, all planting shall be carried out on site in full prior to the commencement of mineral extraction under this consent. Reason: To minimise the visual impact of the development

9. A checking survey of badgers shall be carried out no earlier than one month before any work commences on site, and the scheme revised, where necessary, with the approval of the Planning Authority Reason: To minimise the potential impact of the development on badgers

10. A checking survey for breeding birds shall be shall be carried out and submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before development commences. The survey shall include a scheme of mitigation where necessary and, once approved, the measures shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority as part of the scheme of mitigation, no works shall be carried out during the bird breeding season (March-August) Reason: To minimise the potential impact of the development on breeding birds

11. A Landscape and Habitat Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. Once approved, its requirements shall be carried out on site in full to a programme set out in the agreed plan. Reason: To compensate for potential habitat loss associated with the development

12. 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 Field Survey which has been formulated by, or on behalf of, the applicant and submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow archaeological investigation, at all reasonable times, by a person or persons nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to conduct a systematic archaeological field survey that is likely to include the recording of landscape features of archaeological interest, artefactual evidence or the non-invasive geophysical survey of below ground features to determine the potential impacts of development. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Field Survey 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 located in an area of archaeological potential.

13. Noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive properties noted below shall not exceed the undernoted LAeq 1hour figures:

LOCATION NOISE LIMIT (LAeq 1Hour) Crookston Cottage, Crookston 50dB Lodge, Cortleferry Cottages, The Bower, Ellem Cottage, Heronshaw Cottage Hoppringle 45dB

Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby property occupiers

14. A programme of noise monitoring over the operational period of the development shall be agreed with the Planning Authority prior to the development commencing Reason: To ensure condition 13 is not being exceeded and to apply any necessary mitigation measures

15. In respect of inhabited property, vibration levels measured at any sensitive property should not exceed 6 mms -1 peak particle velocity for 95% of blast events. No event should exceed 10 mms -1 peak particle velocity.

As regards the telecommunications premises to the southeast of the development, Vibration levels should not exceed 50 mms -1 peak particle velocity for 95% of blast events. Reason: To protect sensitive buildings and utilities from the effects of blasting

16. A programme of vibration monitoring over the operational period of the development shall be agreed with the Planning Authority prior to the development commencing. The Council reserves the right to require prior notification of blasting operations to enable independent monitoring to take place. Reason: To ensure condition 15 is not being exceeded and to apply any necessary mitigation measures

17. The hours of operation for all working, with the exception of measures required in an emergency situation, servicing, maintenance and testing of plant, shall be limited to the hours of 07:00 hours to 18:00 hours on Mondays to Fridays and 07:00 hours to 14.00 hours on Saturdays, unless with the prior agreement of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby property occupiers and the rural amenity of the area

18. The dust monitoring regime undertaken by the operators should incorporate a means of establishing wind speed and directional data so that the source of any dusts can be identified.Dust control measures shall include sheeting of all lorries prior to leaving the site. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby property occupiers and the rural amenity of the area

19. Vehicle wheel cleaning facilities shall be retained throughout the operation of the quarry, the siting and design of which shall be subject to the prior approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure material from the site is not deposited on the A road to the detriment of road safety

20. The proposed alterations to the access including lining and the additional signage shall be implemented and approved by the planning authority, prior to any operations commencing on the site. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to minimise the potential impact of the development on the existing public road

21. A Transport Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the planning authority within three months of the start of ant operations.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 17 Reason: In the interests of road safety and to safeguard the amenity of nearby property occupiers and the rural amenity of the area

22. Prior to the commencement of any works on the site full details of the surface water drainage regime demonstrating, but not limited to, the structural integrity of the existing settlement pond, maintaining flow through the system to Greenfield run-off rates and an appropriate maintenance regime shall be submitted to and approved by the planning authority in consultation with SEPA and other relevant stakeholders The reason : to ensure the protection of the Gala Water and the River Tweed SAC

23. No development can commence until a full site specific environmental management plan (EMP) is submitted at least one month prior to commencement of development and approved by the planning authority, in consultation with SEPA and other agencies such as SNH, should this be desired. Full details of what should be included in the EMP are detailed on the SEPA website. Reason : To ensue a satisfactory form of working

24. All soils shall be retained on the site and none shall be sold off or removed from the site. Reason : To enable sound agricultural restoration; to minimise the movement of soils and to minimise traffic movements outwith the site.

Information for the applicant

The Notes above should be completed for Condition 2 as follows:

Archaeology During felling, the harvesters should be made aware of the possibility of encountering drystone structures, and these should be clearly marked and, if possible, avoided during the felling operation to preserve them for later recording.

This planning permission does not purport to grant consent under any other legislation or Regulations operated by bodies other than the Planning Authority, including Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, the Water Authority, and any other Department of Scottish Borders Council (This list is not exhaustive).

Planning and Building Standards Committee 18 Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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

Author(s) Name Designation Dorothy Amyes Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 19 Planning and Building Standards Committee 20 Item No. 9(c) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00900/FUL

OFFICER: Carlos Clarke WARD NAME: Galashiels and District PROPOSAL: Replacement monopole supporting 6 no antennas and installation of 2 no street cabinets and ancillary equipment SITE: Land South West of Galamoor House, Netherdale Industrial Estate, Galashiels APPLICANT: Vodafone Ltd AGENT: Lorna Kennedy (Tyco Electronics Ltd)

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located on the corner of Netherdale Brae and Tweed Road and comprises a wide area of public footpath. Woodland bordering the edge of the Netherdale Industrial Estate flanks the site to the north, and residential properties are located beyond the public roads to the west and south. The site currently contains an existing 14.3 metre high monopole, equipment cabinet and mains pillar.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This application seeks consent to replace the existing monopole with a 17.5 metre high monopole, and to replace the existing equipment cabinet with two cabinets to be sited either side of the monopole. The monopole would support six antennae, comprising three used by Vodafone and three by O2.

PLANNING HISTORY

The existing installation was granted planning consent in September 2008 (08/01326/FUL) subject to conditions on colour and works to trees

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

One representation has been received from Scottish Power who advise that there are high and low voltage underground cables and that the applicant should contact them to obtain cable information.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant has submitted various documents (available on ‘Public Access’) in which, in summary, they include the following:

Planning and Building Standards Committee x A certificate of compliance with the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP declaration); x Comments that the network in the area has been reviewed and evaluations undertaken of potential site shares, existing structures and buildings on a sequential approach, and the above site is identified as the most suitable site option and design that balances operational need with planning policies x Information on infrastructure sharing between Vodafone and O2 x General information on health issues and mobile phone installations x Comments that the proposals are the minimum necessary to secure both O2 and Vodafone’s coverage requirements; will involve mast sharing and negate the need for a separate O2 installation; is considered the best planning solution compliant with the sequential approach to site selection; will provide coverage to the university campus; an increase in monopole height is required because of topography and adjacent trees and is the minimum height required; and, the monopole will not unduly impact on visual amenity x Coverage maps suggesting the development will improve coverage for O2.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2009

I23 Telecommunications Infrastructure

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

Inf 8 Radio Telecommunications

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

SPP 2010 Planning Advice Note 62 Radio Telecommunications 2001

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): The replacement monopole and two cabinets have plenty space to be accommodated on site and there are no road issues associated with such a proposal. No objections.

Statutory Consultees: None

Other Consultees: None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

Whether or not the proposal would comply with development plan policies with respect to its siting and design.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Policy Principle

Siting of telecommunications infrastructure is generally supported by Structure Plan Policy I23. Local Plan Policy Inf 8 also provides a presumption in favour, subject to consideration of

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 environmental impacts. An ICNIRP declaration has been submitted and, therefore, no further account needs to be taken of potential health effects.

Siting and design

Policy Inf 8 generally notes that sites within industrial/commercial areas are preferable to those in residential areas. Here the site is on the edge of the Netherdale Industrial Estate, with residential properties nearby, approximately 40 metres to the south, and 70 metres to the west. These properties are, however, visually separated from the site by trees, public roads and, to the south, by level changes. Moreover, the site already accommodates a smaller installation of the same type. It is considered that this location, on the edge of the residential area, is acceptable, in principle.

The applicants have advised that the proposal is designed to allow for site sharing between two operators, each with an equipment cabinet and three antennae, and the height of the monopole is increased in order to allow for stacking of the operators’ antennae, and to provide increased coverage for O2. They have advised that they have evaluated other options and that this is the minimum height to accommodate requirements. In terms of planning policy, the information provided by the applicant is not particularly comprehensive. Nonetheless, the proposal to use an existing site, and to provide a shared installation is reflective of the sequential approach required for such developments, ultimately to discourage the need for a plethora of new ground based mast installations. In this case, the approach to the development is considered acceptable when applied against this objective.

The monopole will be 3.2 metres taller than the existing and will be more prominent as a result of both this and the bulkier antennae. However, while the site is clearly visible from nearby roads, its impact would remain localised as a result of nearby tree cover. It is not considered that this larger installation would be significantly harmful to the character of this street or surrounding area. The monopole and antennae are to be finished with galvanised and grey finishes respectively, which will make them appear no more discordant than oversized street furniture. A green finish, which would allow the monopole to blend into the trees a little better can, however, appear incongruous against the trees when they lose their leaves. The colour choices of these elements, therefore, are considered acceptable. The equipment cabinets are also proposed to be finished grey. These will be viewed more in the context of ground cover to the rear and under the shade of the trees and a darker finish, such as dark green, would reduce the potential for a more conspicuous cluttered effect. Accounting for this, and a condition to ensure any pruning back of trees is carried out sensitively, it is considered the proposed development would not significantly harm the character of the area or the visual amenity available to nearby residential properties.

Pedestrian safety

The Director of Technical Services appears to be content that the works will not cause an obstruction on this wide section of footpath.

Conclusion

It is considered that the proposed development would comply with development plan policies relating to the siting and design of telecommunications infrastructure, subject to compliance with the schedule of conditions

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

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

2. Notwithstanding the references to external colours on the approved drawings and specifications, an alternative colour for the external elevations of the proposed equipment cabinets shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority and, once approved, the works shall be installed in accordance with the approved colour Reason: It is considered that an alternative external colour, such as dark green, would reduce the potential visual clutter that may arise from the provision of the equipment cabinets

3. Any proposed pruning of trees which may be overhanging the development site shall be carried out by a competent arborist in accordance with BS3998. Reason: In order to ensure that works to remove overhanging branches is carried out in a manner which safeguards the visual integrity of the trees and therefore limits the visual impact of the development

Information for the applicant

Scottish Power advise that there are underground cables in the area and recommend contact with EnergyNetworks Data Management (North) 55 Fullarton Drive, Cambuslang G32 8FA

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

Author(s) Name Designation Carlos Clarke Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Item No. 9(d) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00720/FUL 10/00721/LBC

OFFICER: Carlos Clarke WARD NAME: Leaderdale and Melrose PROPOSAL: 10/00720FUL: Erection of visitor reception and associated car parking and access, partial change of use to provide short term holiday letting, office accommodation and re roof external store; 10/00721/LBC: Internal and external alterations and refurbishments SITE: Land east of Abbotsford House and Abbotsford House, Melrose APPLICANT: The Abbotsford Trust AGENT: LDN Architects

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site comprises part of the estate of Abbotsford House, and land to the north east (owned by the Council), located on the north side of the B6360 which links to the A6091 further north-east. The house is a Category A Listed Building which is considered a pioneering Baronial Revival house built for Sir Walter Scott and one of most important 19th Century buildings in Scotland. It is considered the first house of its type where a conscious effort was made to create an authentic Scottish Castle, to achieve a degree of “antiquarian correctness”. Scott died in 1832, but later additions and alterations were made for his granddaughter, Charlotte Hope-Scott to the south-west. The Listing includes walled gardens and a range of ancillary structures and buildings. The house is set within a designated Designed Landscape which is part of an extensive estate, the layout for which is understood to remain much as it was conceived and laid out by Scott himself and regarded as of iconic, national significance.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This report relates to two applications, one for Listed Building Consent relating to works directly affecting the fabric of Abbotsford House (and related structures) and a second for Planning Permission for the erection of a visitor reception building, formation of car park and access onto the public road, pathways, children’s play area, re-roofing of an external store and parking area alongside it and the provision of holiday letting accommodation within the house itself.

The proposed development involves the general refurbishment of Abbotsford House, mainly by way of internal alterations, including alterations to walls, additional walls, doorway alterations and the provision of a lift from the basement to the first floor. The alterations will provide for public access to the basement and ground floor; for holiday letting accommodation in the basement, ground floor and first floor; and offices and storage accommodation for the Abbotsford Trust in the basement, ground floor and first floor. A one-bed caretaker’s flat is proposed in the basement. External alterations to the house are largely limited to repairs (which do not require Listed Building Consent), though a new roof over stores to the south west is proposed. A new driveway and small parking area are also proposed alongside the stores.

The more substantial elements of the proposed development involve the erection of a new visitor reception building (VRB) and car park within and beyond the woodland to the north-east. It is proposed that a new access is formed from the public road leading to the car park which would straddle the existing woodland, and be framed by new woodland planting to the north east. The car park has been adjusted in layout since the original submission, and would now accommodate 72 cars, including room for 27 overspill parking and a bus drop-off area. It would incorporate a road network that circles a group of trees to be retained and which would be finished in a sprayed grip surface, with the parking spaces finished in reinforced grass. Pathways would lead from the car park, across the Borders Abbey Way, towards the VRB.

The VRB would include a shop and exhibition space on the ground floor, and a café/restaurant and terrace on the upper floor. The design has also changed a little since the original application submission though the overall form (that of a timber portal frame over largely glazed elevations, and including a terrace on the upper floor) remains unchanged. A flat, sedum finished roof edged with zinc (changed from aluminium), untreated oak clad walls, grey aluminium framing to the glazed elevations, set within the timber portal frame, would comprise the principal external finishes. Two paths (one for visitors) would then lead from the building directly towards Abbotsford House. A further path would lead to a children’s play area proposed to the north- west.

PLANNING HISTORY

There is no relevant planning history.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Two representations have been received. The following is a summary of the issues raised, and full copies can be viewed on ‘Public Access’:

1. Significant inconsistency in the application regarding the screening and visibility to and from Abbotsford. Selective intervisibility is impossible and it cannot be both screened and visible. 2. Concerns with the design and appearance of the VRB which does not seem to differ substantially, if at all, from that presented during the public consultation exercise. 3. More acknowledgement and reflection of the style and grandeur of the house should be had in its design, the stark design does not reflect Scott’s love of landscape, beauty, form and romance. 4. It is difficult to see what the VRB’s modern appearance would offer Abbotsford 5. The square Dutch barn like end makes it appear generally overwhelming and very visible to and from the house. 6. The design is likely to derail the appropriately lofty aspirations set out in the design statement and our national phenomenon Walter Scott deserves better.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant submitted the following supporting documents with the original application and

2 which can be reviewed in full on ‘Public Access’:

1 Pre-application consultation report 2 Design Statement incorporating conservation policies and access statement

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2009

N5 Local Biodiversity Action N6 Environmental Impact N7 Protection of Nature Conservation Interest N9 Maintaining Landscape Character N10 Areas of Great Landscape Value N13 Gardens and Designed Landscapes N15 Regional and Local Archaeological Sites N16 Archaeological Evaluation, Preservation and Recording N17 Listed Buildings N20 Design E21 Tourism Development C3 Development of Arts and Cultural Facilities 17 Walking I11 Parking Provision in New Development I14 Surface Water I15 Flood Risk Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

G1 Quality Standards for New Development G4 Flooding BE1 Listed Buildings BE2 Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments BE3 Gardens and Designed Landscapes NE3 Local Biodiversity NE4 Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows D1 Business, Tourism and Leisure development in the Countryside EP2 Areas of Great Landscape Value H2 Protection of Residential Amenity Inf 2 Protection of Access Routes Inf 4 Parking Standards Inf 5 Waste Water Treatment Standards Inf 6 Sustainable Urban Drainage Inf 9 Development within exclusion zones Inf 11 Developments that generate Travel Demand

Finalised Local Plan Amendment 2009

H2 Protection of Residential Amenity EP3 Countryside Around Towns

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

3 SPP 2010 Scottish Historic Environment Policy 2009 SPG Biodiversity 2005 SPG Landscaping and Development 2008 SPG Trees and Development 2008 SPG Placemaking and Design 2010 SPG Renewable Energy 2007 SPG Draft Gardens and Designed Landscapes 2009

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

The following paragraphs comprise summaries of consultation responses. Full responses are available on ‘Public Access’.

Scottish Borders Council Consultees:

Director of Technical Services (Flood Prevention Officer): The site is at risk in a 1 in 200 year event. Has no objections provided the following considerations are taken. Although approximately half the site is in the flood plain, the actual development itself is outwith the risk area. The addition of the new car park will undoubtedly increase surface water run off and recommends that the greenfield rate is calculated and that this rate is not exceeded for the surface water run-off from the car park.

Director of Technical Services (Roads): No objections in principle and confirms the access location and visibility splays generally meet with approval. The parking layout seems quite good and the route for buses has improved. However, the very short length of access road will be very awkward for buses and recommend this be addressed by widening the bend or increasing the radius. Also has a visibility concern with the proposal to plant a hedge along the frontage, particularly the effect on the splays either side of the right of way. The plan lacks basic information such as dimensions and construction details and it would be helpful if these were added, particularly the junction and short length of access road must be created to a very high standard. There are no road levels shown either and it would helpful if these were on the plan. It should be noted that these levels must be engineered so that surface water will not egress to the road and be taken to some form of SUDs system.

Recommends a public footway be created from the site to the Tweedbank roundabout and link to the existing footpath network and bus stops, noting that this will require discussion with Transport Scotland. Has some safety concerns that traffic could increase on the B6360 from the west which is quite a bendy, narrow section with limited visibility and not a route to be encouraged for visitors. There would be some merit in removing the signage pointing to Abbotsford.

The more recent revision to the layout of the car park is considered objectionable because the alignment of the road is still not addressed and the roads between the spaces are too narrow. Dimensional and constructional information is still required.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Heritage and Design Officer): Has been involved from an early stage and the applicant has submitted a detailed design report which is very helpful. In terms of the principle of the VRB and general location, is content that a case has been made for a new building which is linked to improvements in car parking and access. The

4 applicant has sequentially examined the scope to provide within the existing building, reusing the stables and a number of other sites. While reuse of the stables is highly desirable the fact that it lies on a flood plain is a major constraint. Considers the location is the best fit and least obtrusive location in terms of impact on the setting of the principal building. The building does not impact on the principal views to and from the house and retains the approach view, albeit partially framed by the new building, that has been visitors' entrance to Abbotsford for nearly 200 years. The new car parking and drop off area is well screened and allows for a significantly improved access arrangement. Understands the chosen site is of secondary importance and the tree belt dates from the mid 20th Century.

The design is very much a contemporary solution which does not try to reflect the Baronial style of the house. This approach is supported and in line with Designing Places and is a continuum of approaches used for other national visitor centres across Scotland. The slope of the site is clearly used to advantage by allowing pedestrian access to the upper floor, the buried part of the building used for ancillary accommodation. The building itself is understated and relatively simple with a limited palette of materials. The design has been modified from earlier proposals at the pre-application stage by introducing stone walling on the exposed sides at the back in place of white render. The flat roof will be covered with sedum and this is a conscious effort to keep the roof thin. The simplicity of the materials helps make the building recede into the landscape when viewed back from the house. Supports the design approach but recommends conditions on samples of materials.

The alterations to the house can be assessed on two levels, the principle and the detailed design. In terms of the principle, a key issue was the need to make rational use of all the building and the Design Statement explains how it can earn its keep better. A solution has been explored and is set out in diagram form dividing the house into three areas – public access, Abbotsford Trust, holiday lets. This approach is sensible and informs the detailed design proposals. The conservation plan highlights where some change is possible and where virtually no changes should be made. There are references to fire suppression systems and upgrading doors to meet current Building Standards and further detail is required. Notes various areas where clarification and further details are required. Recommends that the overall arrangements be supported, that the zoning makes sense and that access to public rooms is enhanced. The lift is necessary and the location selected should have the least impact. It is clear that details are not available of some elements and appreciates this will become available as the scheme progresses, however it is the detail that is important and conditions are required to control various elements. Has some concerns regarding the works necessary to provide the holiday lets and satisfy the Building Standards and wishes to have sight of the Building Warrant plans to ensure there is no conflict. Overall considers the applicant has approached the challenge of upgrading the house with a sensitive touch.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Landscape): The car park and access are on Council land. The area is part of the Designed Landscape considered one of the pre- eminent Designed Landscapes in Scotland. The proposal to reinvigorate Abbotsford is supported and the detailed proposals are generally well considered, in particular, moving the car park to the north of the road makes sense. A shortcoming is the lack of tree information in accordance with BS5837 which would have allowed better informed decisions. Raised concerns with the removal of the large oak tree to allow for the VRB given its significant amenity value and historical value as possibly the only surviving tree in the locality which was part of Sir Walter Scott’s planting plan. Retaining it would require a substantial redesign however it has the potential to become a significant feature and focal point. The car park design will be reasonably screened by retained perimeter woodland and new planting. However, considered there was

5 potential to retain trees within the woodland itself. Noted it would be preferable that parking bays were in a permeable surface to give a more informal character and assist sustainable drainage and better rooting conditions for existing trees. Is satisfied with hedge reinstatement. Considered that the approach from the VRB to the house might be more dramatic if views were more restricted. Another consideration is Scottish Government policy that woodlands be replaced by compensatory planting and an area south of the road which is Council-owned land could be available for this purpose. Overall the proposal is generally well considered and appropriate but further consideration recommended in relation to trees and restoration of the wider landscape.

Since the original comments, has considered the revised car park layout and supports it, with a number of trees now retained and the possibility to retain more. Supports the aspiration to form a footpath along the public road and there might be room for a half-avenue of trees. Limited views from the A7 of the VRB will not have an undesirable impact. Notes the oak tree cannot be retained and that in view of the retention of other trees this should not affect the setting of the wider landscape. Notes there is no funding for the compensatory planting south of the road. Does require fully detailed planting plans but content for a condition as the proposal is now adequately developed as a basis for approval.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Archaeology): There is heightened potential for archaeological materials and features surviving in the development area. There are reasons to believe that land to the east of Abbotsford has greater potential for containing archaeology than land to the north and south, as the land sits at the end of a glacial/post glacial sand and gravel terrace which have been attractions for human settlement and other activity; sits near the junction of the Tweed and Gala Water and the land between the VRB and the car park is bisected by a road leading to the former Abbot’s ford, which sits just below Galafoot Bridge, which may have been a medieval fort possibly associated with Melrose Abbey or abbots who served at Lindean. The ford is likely significantly older than this. This interest provides an opportunity to examine the local pre-history and history, in the spirit of Sir Walter Scott himself and to feed any discoveries into the interpretation programme. Recommends a programme of mitigation called a “strip, map and sample” for the footprints of the VRB, car park and access.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Access): There is a Core Path in this area, part of the Borders Abbey Way. This is a rough forestry farm track and can be muddy and descends and ascends, forming one link for countryside path users to the VRB. The development has implications for the public’s ability to exercise rights of access and it is essential those rights are not restricted. It would be beneficial if access along paths off road was available for walkers to and from the VRB and house to link into paths on the A6091, linking with local towns and villages and public transport links. Off road access would prevent conflict with vehicular use. One option would be to form a path link from the car park path through the woodland and along the road verge of the B6360 with safe crossing points. There are also paths in the area the public have a ‘right of responsible access’ to under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003

Statutory Consultees

Scottish Environment Protection Agency: Object unless a planning condition is imposed requiring one level of SUDs. Wording to that effect is given in their response. The application notes that areas for goods vehicles, coaches etc will be tarmacadum and car parking will be cellular plastic grass. The car parking is acceptable as it will be porous but the macadam areas will need to drain to peripheral swales or filter trenches. Parking areas in general could also be

6 drained to a small wetland pond if space allowed.

There is an existing licence for a septic tank and connection to it would be acceptable if there is spare capacity. New waste water proposals for the VRB would need to be discussed with SEPA. Preference is for a septic tank to a soakaway but if the soakaway is not possible then additional treatment is likely to be required such as a reed bed before discharging to the River Tweed.

The site lies adjacent the 1 in 200 year envelope and may be at risk of flooding. There is no increase in footprint of the house itself and the VRB lies outwith the flood envelope. On this basis do not object. However, there may be a record of flooding at the site. It is unclear if the property or surrounding grounds flooded in 1977, and recommend contact with the Flood Prevention Officer.

Scottish Natural Heritage: No objection. Do not consider it will adversely affect the qualities or integrity of the National Scenic Area and it is unlikely it will have a significant effect on the qualifying interests of the SAC or SSSI directly or indirectly. An appropriate assessment is not, therefore, required. There are records of bats using the building and ground and surveys will be needed before works take place and a licence application may then need to be made.

Support the approach taken to the location and design of the VRB, car park and access and note why building in the field immediately east of the walled garden isn’t possible. The development involves felling and planting of trees. There is an opportunity for the design of the woodland planting to be created in a form that reflects the principles of the landscape aesthetics of Sir Walter Scott, a woodland that follows the lie of the land and uses native species. New planting along the northern edge of the existing woodland that is to be retained could create a more fluid edge that relates better to the landform. Suggest the use of native species in the new planting.

Melrose Community Council: Support the applications

Architecture and Design Scotland: Applaud the team’s aspirations and are supportive of the scheme as it has the potential to underpin and enhance Sir Walter Scott’s legacy for many years. Generally support the design approach. In terms of the house itself, the move to allow entry via the front door appears at once to improve the visitor experience and improve accessibility and are content, provided the internal alterations are carried out in close dialogue with Historic Scotland. Encourage efforts to ensure the estate as a whole benefits including the stables.

Consider the car park to be over engineered and support a commitment to retaining as many trees as possible. Suggest a series of smaller areas or glades are sculpted out of the woodland. A unique art and lighting strategy could be developed to define a series of character zones and assist wayfinding to and from the house. Any new planting should be in accordance with the Conservation Plan and compliment the Designed Landscape and suggest that the regimented structure of new planting be relaxed. Question the location of the new play area which seems adhoc and encourage integration of more meaningful spaces to play as part of the wider landscape strategy.

The VRB is a once in a lifetime opportunity and deserves a unique solution. Support for the concept. Encourage the designers to engage more with the topography and recommend continued refinement. Like the contemporary nature but recommend simplification and more

7 subtle definition, refining of the relationship of the portal structure to the main envelope and simplifying the roof form and consider the storage building to be an unwelcome appendage. Recommend reviewing and potentially reducing the number of materials. The building has the potential to benefit from substantial daylighting. Consider that a ground source heat pump is a good concept combined with under floor heating but expect alternative systems would provide a much reduced carbon footprint. Consider the environmental impact has not been considered at the level expected and encourage the team to include a BREEAM assessment as an integral part of the developing design and consult on the energy requirements of the estate as a whole. Ultimately, commend the vision and aspirations and encourage further design development for a site which has the potential to produce an excellent modern building characterised by high quality architecture that is distinctly Abbotsford.

Scottish Civic Trust: Have no objections to the new VRB design. The building would seem to be designed to sit comfortably within its landscape setting and would make an attractive and contemporary addition to the estate. However, main concern is the condition and future of the stables which are included in the ‘defining issues’ of the Design Statement due to their condition and the need for a sustainable new use, and have been on the Buildings at Risk Register since 2001. The trust is disappointed the application does not include any proposals apart from some repairs to stabilise its deteriorating condition. The Trust is unconvinced by the justification to build a new VRB rather than reuse the stables. The prohibitive costs of restoration is an unacceptable argument given that any new use will incur costs. As long as cost is a preventing factor the building will continue to languish in its current state. Do feel the huge benefit from its restoration and reuse of what is a Category A listed Building would outweigh the potential negatives. The added value of reusing a significant Listed Building and part of the historic estate group is not acknowledged in the Design Statement. Do not object, but a new use is needed for the stables as soon as possible and the Abbotsford Trust and the Council should pursue this urgently.

Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland: Welcome the investment. Opening the Breakfast Room and Religious Corridor to the public allows a greater understanding of the complex development of the building but it is disappointing that the opportunity has not been taken to include Scott’s bedroom suite. Visiting three levels of the house could also provide better visitor value. Have reservations on some aspects. The means of access and the viability of the Hope- Scott wing for upmarket holiday rental. The entrance is of historic value dating from circa 1857 and maintaining the route would negate the need to switch routes in wet weather which is highly impractical for a major tourist attraction. Access via the basement also means visitors would continue to enjoy using the spiral staircase and if the existing arrangement was maintained the circulation of the ground floor could be reversed so visitors ended up in the ‘Sanctum Sanctorium’ of Scott’s Study. A high quality VRB should dispel any perception that visitors are not valued. Not convinced that the layout of the Hope-Scott wing lends itself to upmarket holiday letting. Note new kitchen and toilet are detailed in specified rooms and suggest no mechanical vent system is allowed to pierce the fabric of the outside walls. Encourage the Council to discuss these matters further with the Trust and Historic Scotland.

Historic Scotland: Abbotsford is of international significance due to its association with Sir Walter Scott and the first Baronial Revival house to try to recreate authentic Scottish vernacular architecture. The surrounding garden and landscape are recognised as of national importance. The works to the main Scott block on the ground floor are light touch. Housing the array of Scott’s collections, the main ground floor rooms are possibly the best preserved suite of Georgian interiors in Scotland. Further clarification at this time must be sought with regard to references to a fire suppression system and upgrading doors. Any proposed changes should be

8 considered with very great care and attention. Note that no works are proposed to the Scott bedroom suite as any malfunction of services could damage or destroy important historic fabric on the ground floor. The Scott block and Hope-Scott block are less sensitive. The overall ethos here is also largely non-interventionist, where works are identified to impact on character and fabric they have on the whole been fully justified. There are a few proposals that further clarification is required for, including the same references to fire suppression systems and upgrading doors as for the main block.

The re-adaptive use of the ruined stable block would have been greatly welcomed however its location on a flood plain is a major constraint. The chosen location they would concur is a best fit. Pleased to see it does not impact on principal views to and from the house. Designed in a modern idiom it proudly stands as a building of its time and does not try to pastiche Abbotsford. The limited palette of materials ensures it blends successfully into its landscape setting. The new parking and drop-off area is well screened. Are unclear as to how much of the surface is to be cellular plastic and how much grass and advise that only the smaller overflow area to the far east uses it as it can become tired and bald of grass. Also seek clarification of maintenance of the tree belt as one of the key factors for locating the visitor centre and car park is the surrounding tree cover.

Health and Safety Executive: Do not advise against the development

Other Consultees:

Visit Scotland: Tourism is a key sector and major contributor to the Scottish Borders’ economic. The national strategy identifies a 50% growth ambition by 2015 and any development which would add to this would be a benefit. The proposal for Abbotsford House has the potential, particularly with the proposed development being of a high standard, to improve prospects to the Scottish Borders. The Borders is predominantly a leisure tourism destination and this development would add to the breadth of offering and contribute to the area becoming a sustainable year-round destination. Visitors come not just for the scenery but activities such as walking, cycling and visiting historic attractions. Abbotsford is in the top 5 attractions in terms of visitor numbers and is iconic to the Borders and nationally with its connection to Sir Walter Scott. Visitor numbers increased by 2.1 % in 2007/8 and a purpose built VRB could be a draw which sees these figures further enhanced. There is a demand for short term letting accommodation particularly in an unusual location such as a castle or historic house and this proposal would add value to the development. Providing a quality product is crucial and a development of this nature is a good opportunity for the area to develop its sustainability product. Research has shown that businesses achieving higher quality grades achieve higher visitor numbers. The provision of a variety of reasons to visit Abbotsford would encourage visitors to spend longer and make repeat visits. The development aims to build on growth of the existing business which has for a number of years been very successful with a proven track record and would be an opportunity to increase employment in the construction and operation phases.

Garden History Society: The Society accepts that for the future protection and conservation of Abbotsford and its nationally significant Designed Landscape visitor facilities need updated and this will inevitably involve amendments and insertions into the Designed Landscape. Ideally would have preferred the reuse of the existing but from the evidence this does not appear to be feasible. Of all the sites considered, this is the least intrusive. However, while not part of the core landscape, it is still a sensitive site and the avoidance of visual impact on outward views from the house will depend on the landscape treatment of both the VRB and car park. Are not

9 convinced that glimpses of the house from the new VRB are necessary or should be encouraged and would advise that planting should be robust enough to ensure neither the centre nor the car park are visible from the house at any time of the year. As some views from the house have already become eroded by development it is important that these and more immediate views are not allowed to deteriorate further. Although some details of the landscaping have been provided would advise that the plant species around the car park and VRB should as far as possible reflect those already present to allow both the planting and structures to mature and blend into the existing landscape.

Scotland Gas Networks: There is high pressure apparatus in the vicinity and the responsible engineer will write separately in due course. No works should occur until detailed consultation has taken place. Later confirmed the presence of a high pressure gas pipe with a proximity distance of 16 metres.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The principal planning issues are whether the development is supported by planning policy in terms of the principle of a new-build visitor reception building and car park and whether the development is of a design, layout and materials which would respect the setting of the Category A Listed House and that of the Designed Landscape. With regards to works to the house itself, the key consideration is whether the works would safeguard the special architectural and historic interest of the Listed Building.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

10/00720/FUL

The works requiring planning permission are the VRB, car park, paths, play area, reroofing of store, holiday lets and the additional parking area alongside the main house. The caretaker’s flat will not require planning permission given its occupancy will be incidental to that of the main house.

Policy Principle

All the uses are tourism related. Structure Plan Policy E21 generally supports tourism development and this particular scheme has the potential to provide a very significant benefit to the local economy and enhance the attractiveness of what is already an important tourist attraction. This proposal could make it one of the most significant historic attractions in the country. The site is centrally located and close to the main road network. The applicant’s supporting material demonstrates that options to use existing buildings and develop on other sites have been explored and ruled out for a range of reasons. In particular, the use of the stables building has been investigated but matters of flood risk and its poor location in terms of visitor routes, in addition to costs, have ruled it out as an integral part of the development. In principle, it is considered that a greenfield site for the VRB is considered the most appropriate solution and the applicant’s approach to the siting has been applied with careful consideration for the significance of the building and its setting.

The proposal to site a free-standing VRB must not be viewed in isolation of the significant range of repair works and general refurbishment associated with the main house itself. Though the Finalised Local Plan Amendment identifies the site as falling within the proposed designation of the Countryside Around Towns policy, the site for the VRB and car park has been designed to

10 minimise impacts on the rural setting while significantly improving the visitor experience and, therefore, it is not considered this prospective policy is prejudiced. The holiday lets to be formed within the building will be interlinked with the principal attraction and their viability is not a matter for this authority.

Visual and landscape impact including design, layout and materials

Car Park

The car park will extend into an undeveloped field and, while outwith the sensitive part of the Designed Landscape, and out of sight of the house itself, it will involve a considerable development in the currently undeveloped buffer between the designated area and the main road network, The car park will largely be set into the existing woodland, not directly visible from the house nor seen in the same context. Woodland retention to the north, west and along the road to the south should provide strong visual containment. There will be limited visibility from the bypass to the east due to intervening topography and also because of the proposal to plant a substantial area of additional woodland. The woodland proposal is not fully specified on the plan, however, and a condition is required to obtain further detail. In addition, the original proposal included no details of impacts on remaining trees. The revised plan now submitted includes more detail of risks to remaining trees, and includes the retention of more trees, but the level of information regarding the risk to the trees and the detail of woodland to be retained is still rather unclear. A condition is necessary to secure a comprehensive submission clarifying exactly what trees are to remain, the risk to those trees and where any replacement planting then may be necessary.

The site is generally level, though no levels are provided and further information is required in this regard. The original scheme was considered ‘over-engineered’ and, as a result the revised plan includes retention of more trees and a more relaxed, less regular layout. In landscape terms this is a great deal better for such a rural location. Details of lighting are required and a more comprehensive planting scheme is also required, including the extent of hedging alongside the public road. Planting choices will need considered carefully to ensure they respect the setting of the Designed Landscape. Planting on the opposite side of the road would be welcome but the applicant’s agent has advised no funding is available for this and this matter can be considered more desirable than necessary.

In terms of materials, the roads will have some form of macadam surface, and the spaces themselves surfaced with reinforced grass. This seems appropriate too though, again, more detail is required, including that of the gravel finish proposed for the pathways.

Visitor Reception Building (VRB)

The VRB is proposed within the woodland forming the north-eastern edge to the Designed Landscape. It would involve the removal of several trees. The loss of a large oak tree which may be historically associated with Sir Walter Scott’s own planting scheme is regrettable but, ultimately, its loss is considered acceptable given the implications its retention would have on the siting and layout of the building which is already heavily constrained by the sensitivity of the site itself and a nearby gas pipeline. Some information is provided on the risk to the trees that remain but this remains lacking in detail, particularly as paths are proposed between the trees on sloping ground. The level of removal needs to be absolutely clear and more clarity is required by way of planning condition.

11 The site is below the public road to the south and, if the trees are retained as proposed, it will be well screened from wider views – any view from the A7 will be from considerable distance and very fleeting. From the house’s south side and adjoining walled gardens it will be visible, though trees will filter views. It will be cut into the site. The siting is logical, staying away as it does from the principal views into and out of the house itself and on a less sensitive woodland edge. It is considered, however, that a detailed planting plan should explore the possibility of more planting to minimise its exposure. The small outbuilding proposed on the south side has been removed and replaced with a store and deck which will have limited visual impact, albeit more detail is required of it.

The design approach to the building is consistent with its siting i.e. aiming to minimise its impact and focus the attention of the visitor on Abbotsford House itself. The design is contemporary, angular and ordered, and a complete departure from the more audacious architecture of the main house. The ‘floating’ roof helps soften the angular lines of the main structure and everything about the building is designed to improve the visitor’s experience of Abbotsford itself. It is considered that this approach is respectful and strikes a fair balance between providing a building which is aesthetically pleasing in its own right, but which does not detract from the architectural statement of the principal attraction. The building’s footprint is relatively modest and, on two levels, cut into the slope, its height will be similar to a two storey dwellinghouse. The applicant’s agents have responded to the comments made by the Architecture and Design Scotland panel by adding more glazing to the elevations, removing glazing from the terrace and, as noted above, removing the dry stone walling. To some extent, the changes have simplified the building to a degree that it could arguably lack distinction, and the changes have given it a more horizontal emphasis, perhaps even a little utilitarian. It does, however, ultimately retain the integrity of the original design philosophy in that it will act as an understated, dignified foil for the main house. It is considered this would be a much more sympathetic addition to Abbotsford in that it will provide an observational building which is architecturally detached from the historic complex, rather than one which attempts to artificially become part of it.

In terms of materials, a sedum roof is proposed with untreated Oak cladding to the main walls and grey aluminium framed curtain walling. A dry-stone wall feature has been removed in response to the Architecture and Design Scotland’s comments on the original proposal and, though this department did not consider this feature objectionable, there is merit in simplifying the palette of materials. The edge of the roof is to be finished in dark grey coloured zinc, rather than aluminium as originally proposed. The combination of materials should allow the building’s impact to be minimised. Two paths will cut across the field between the site and the walled gardens, the southerly path linking into the existing approach to the house and from where possibly the best view of it is available. No references to retaining walls are given so, provided any exposed areas of ground are suitably planted, their impact will be minimal.

Play area

A children’s play area is proposed below the VRB and alongside the existing trees and walled garden, both of which will screen it from the house, albeit it will be visible when approaching the house from the VRB along the path. More information is required on the pathway, surfacing and equipment to ensure the facility will be appropriate to the setting.

Re-roofing of stores and provision of driveway/parking area

The tarmac driveway and parking proposed alongside the Hope-Scott wing will have a limited visual impact on the setting of the main house. Re-roofing the stores would appear to involve

12 replacement of an existing corrugated material, including removal of part of the building, which is all agreeable given their position and scale. A condition is imposed to require details of the material. No other works to the house itself require Planning Permission.

Archaeology

There may likely be archaeological interest as identified by our Archaeology Officer and this interest is sufficient to justify further exploration, required by planning condition

Road and pedestrian safety

The site provides linkage onto the Borders Abbey Way which is a right of way which should otherwise remain unobstructed. The link is welcome and further justifies the choice of siting of the VRB. The route is however poorly surfaced and a link from the car park along the public road to tie up with existing pathways on the A6091 would be desirable. The applicant’s agent have advised that there is no funding available for this and it is accepted that this proposal could be categorised as being desirable rather than essential. The revised site layout does include the start of the path which can be continued later should funding be available.

The DTS advised, in response to the original proposal, that he was content with the access position and visibility splays (more information is also required on the latter). He did consider the bend in the road too awkward for buses and had concerns regarding the level of dimensional and constructional information. The revised plan has not tackled these and, indeed, suggests more alteration will be required because the road network seems to be too narrow to adequately cater for cars. The applicant’s agents have been advised of this and their response is awaited. In the meantime, a condition is imposed to require a revised parking layout, albeit this department’s objective will be to limit any changes from that now proposed to the minimum necessary.

Services

The application submission states that water supply would be from the mains and the supporting material refers to boosting hot and cold water services to meet the demands of the holiday lets. There seems to be no fundamental difficulty anticipated with respect to water supply to the lets, though confirmation of water supply for the VRB is required. Similarly, the holiday lets will use the existing septic tank, for which there is an existing licence, if there is spare capacity. A new septic tank for the VRB is proposed though more detail is required to ensure this is achievable in a manner which does not affect trees.

The application refers to a sub-base for the car park and roads which will be specified to allow water attenuation and penetration to the ground, with trapped gullies in the macadam areas draining to the same no-fines sub-base. SEPA seem content that the parking spaces will be porous but require the macadam finishes to drain to swales or filter trenches. A condition is required to ensure a scheme is submitted and agreed, and which maintains greenfield run-off levels. The latter specification would seem to satisfy any concerns regarding flood risk.

Energy Efficiency

The application submission refers to various measures to maximise the energy efficiency of the building, including a ground source heat pump, underfloor heating, high efficiency lighting and high insulation. However, none are specified in detail on the drawings. Architecture and Design

13 Scotland questioned the effectiveness of the proposals and the level to which the matter has been explored. The applicant’s agents do, however, consider they have fully explored the potential for other approaches, including biomass and improved daylighting, and have considered a heating strategy for the house and VRB. A BREEAM target was not in the applicant’s brief albeit a ‘very good’ rating is achievable and further work could achieve an 'excellent' rating. From this department’s perspective, the measures referred to suggest the design of the building can support measures to improve its energy efficiency and a BREEAM rating is not a specific policy requirement. That said, a condition is recommended which requires more detailed information on final proposals and which demonstrates that measures will be employed to minimise CO2 emissions.

Ecology

There are no natural heritage designations though Scottish Natural Heritage have suggested that bats may be using the buildings and grounds and suggest surveys will be needed before works commence. They have advised that their interest lies mainly in a portion of the main house and also mature trees and that a comprehensive survey required by condition will be appropriate. The applicant’s agents have advised that this is in hand.

Gas Pipeline

The development straddles the buffer zone of a high pressure gas pipeline though the Health and Safety Executive have not objected. The applicant’s agents are aware of the gas pipeline and any works within the operator’s buffer will require separate discussion between them and the applicants.

Conclusion

It is considered that the proposed development has been designed with a great deal of consideration for its setting and that the contemporary design of the VRB is the right approach for this site. A range of details are, however, required to firm up the proposals, particularly a final layout for the car park which satisfies the roads authority, and further detail of tree retention and planting. The proposed development is considered compliant with development plan policies, particularly with regard to the development’s impact on the setting of the Category A Listed Building and Designed Landscape, subject to satisfying the schedule of conditions.

10/00721/LBC

Policy Principle

Listed Building Consent is sought for internal and external alterations to the house associated with improvements to public access, office and storage accommodation for Abbotsford Trust and the provision of holiday lets, plus a caretaker’s flat. External alterations are largely limited to repairs and need not be considered further. External works requiring consent are limited to the replacement of the outbuilding roof, an access ramp and window alteration both within the courtyard of the Hope-Scott wing. The principle is not a concern, provided the works do not undermine the special architectural and historic character of the building

The building is Category A Listed and, as noted earlier in this report, its significance ultimately relates to its association with Sir Walter Scott and its place in architectural history as a 19th Century Baronial Revival building which was designed to reflect that of an authentic Scottish

14 castle. Historic Scotland also refer to the interior including possibly the best preserved suite of late Georgian interiors in Scotland.

Impact of proposed alterations

In terms of methodology to the internal works, this has found support from both Historic Scotland and our Heritage and Design officer, since a ‘light touch’ has generally been applied, particularly in the most sensitive main Scott block. Comments from the AHSS regarding visitor circulation and access are acknowledged, however, the overall approach is considered to have found the right balance between improving access for the public and minimising impacts on the fabric of the house.

The proposals are somewhat vague in many respects (understandably so, given the complex nature of the building’s interior) and general statements such as ‘fire suppression systems’ and ‘upgrading doors to meet current requirements’ have not been backed up by details. In this case, however, the detail of all the alterations will be absolutely critical to the success of the proposed works in terms of whether they are sympathetic to the character of the building. The applicant’s agents have advised that the fire suppression systems will likely include sensitively positioned sprinkler systems and upgrading of the doors could involve smoke seals, modern door locks and the application of an intumescent card, albeit the Building Standards Authority and Fire Master apparently recognise that not all standard requirements will be able to be met.

In these, and other regards, it is clear that much more detail is required, albeit this application can be considered acceptable in terms of the principle of the approach to the alterations. The external alterations, including re-roofing of the outbuilding stores and works within the courtyard are also in need of further detail before a firm conclusion can be reached, though the principle of the alterations is ultimately supported by both Historic Scotland and our Heritage and Design Officer. The application will, if committee members are minded to grant consent, require referral to Historic Scotland before a consent can be issued.

Conclusion

The proposed alterations to this Category A Listed Building are considered not likely to detract from the special architectural and historic interest of the building but further details are required of a range of matters, as specified in the schedule of conditions, to ensure that the extent and specification of the alterations are indeed sympathetic.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

10/00720/FUL

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

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five 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 and to accord with the related Listed Building Consent

2. A sample of all materials to be used on all exterior surfaces of the Visitor Reception

15 Building hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before development commences, including roof and wall materials and external colours/finishes Reason: The materials to be used require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

3. The holiday letting accommodation shall be restricted to genuine holidaymakers for individual periods not exceeding 4 weeks in total within any consecutive period of 13 weeks. A register of holidaymakers shall be kept and made available for inspection by the Planning Authority at all reasonable times. Reason: In order to comply with development plan polices relating to the provision of residential accommodation

4. Before development commences, a tree protection plan, which identifies the Root Protection Areas (in accordance with BS5837) of all trees within fifteen metres of any part of the new-build development (Visitor Reception Building, car park and all paths and hard-surfaces), shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority. The plan shall identify those trees proposed for removal and those proposed to be retained. It shall specify measures designed to safeguard the trees proposed for retention during the construction works. Once approved, the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the protection plan and only those trees and planting agreed for removal shall be so removed. Reason: Trees and planting within the site are important features which will help integrate the development with its context, and further information is required by way of clarification of the trees to be removed and the risks to those proposed to be retained.

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 Planning Authority, and shall include:

i. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas. This shall, in particular, include full specifications for the woodland planting alongside the car park and new planting alongside the Visitor Reception Building (including species appropriate to the Designed Landscape)

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

iii. programme for completion and subsequent maintenance of all planting, including the woodland alongside the car park 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 until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining an Archaeological Strip, Map and Sampling strategy. This will be formulated by a contracted archaeologist and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The developer shall allow the archaeologist(s) to conduct a programme of monitored top-soil stripping, planning and sampling prior to development. This will include the below ground excavation 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

16 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.

7. Further information shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with the Roads Authority, before the development commences, including; dimensional information on roads, paths and car parking spaces; a revised road entrance alignment and internal road dimensions; constructional and surface treatment (including samples where required) of all roads, paths, car parking areas; external lighting; full visibility splay and car park ground levels. Once approved, the car park, access roads and paths and visibility splay shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the Visitor Reception Building becomes operational Reason: Further information is required to ensure that the car park and all hard surfaces are both appropriate in terms of road safety and visual impact and that the works are carried out before the visitor reception building comes into operation

8. Further information shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before the development commences, including full elevational information on the bin store and deck and its level relative to the path link; and, means of enclosure and equipment proposed for the children’s play area Reason: Further information is required to ensure these elements are visually appropriate to their setting

9. Prior to the commencement of any works, a scheme detailing one level of sustainable drainage (SUDS) surface water treatment shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA, and all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. The scheme shall be developed in accordance with the technical guidance contained in The SUDS manual (C697) and shall be designed to ensure that surface-water run-off from the site does not exceed greenfield run-off

Reason: To ensure adequate protection of the water environment from surface water run-off.

10. The means of water supply and foul drainage for the Visitor Reception Building shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before development commences, and contain information that demonstrates the risk of any services to trees Reason: To ensure the development can be adequately serviced in a manner which safeguard trees

11. A survey of bats within the application site, of a scope to be agreed with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage, shall be carried out during the activity season prior to works commencing and shall include mitigation measures, where necessary. The survey and mitigation measures shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to development commencing and, once approved, the development shall proceed only in accordance with any approved mitigation measures Reason: To minimise risk to habitats of a European Protected Species

17 12. A sample of the roofing material proposed for the stores shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before this part of the development commences. The height and profile of the replaced roof shall match that of the existing roof unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority Reason: To ensure this element of the development is appropriate to the setting of the Listed Building

13. The Visitor Reception Building 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 ensure the development minimises any environmental impact

Information for the applicant

1. The Borders Abbey Way should not be obstructed during or subsequent to the development works at any time. The route is a Core Path protected in a similar way to a Public Right of Way and liaison with the Council's access team is recommended

10/00721/LBC

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

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 16 of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997

2. Details of, and the proposed locations of, all sprinkler systems, detection systems heads and alterations to lighting controls shall be agreed on site with the Planning Authority in consultation with Historic Scotland before work on these installations commences. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

3. Details of all alterations to joinery, in particular the upgrading of fire doors, shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Historic Scotland, before work commences. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

4. Full details of the proposed lift installation, including details of plans at each floor level shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Historic Scotland, before works commence with the installation. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

5. Details of the proposed new access ramp in the service court and associated alterations to a window to form a door, shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Historic Scotland, before work commences.

18 Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

6. Detailed proposals for alterations to F17 (bathroom) shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Historic Scotland before work commences Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

7. An internal and external decoration schedule shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Historic Scotland, before work commences. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

8. No external ventilation systems shall be installed in connection with any of the internal alterations without the approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Historic Scotland Reason: To safeguard the special architectural and historic character of this Category A Listed Building

9. A sample of the roofing material proposed for the stores shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before this part of the development commences. The height and profile of the replaced roof shall match that of the existing roof unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority Reason: To ensure this element of the development is appropriate to the character and setting of the Listed Building

Information for the applicant

1. It is recommended that a copy of the approved Building Warrant drawings be submitted to the Planning Authority and Historic Scotland for information before works commence, to ensure that any additional requirements are considered in the light of the Listed Building Consent and that works do not commence until confirmation is given that the approved drawings do not suggest any conflict with the scope of the Listed Building Consent. Any works carried out which are not compliant with the Listed Building Consent could constitute an offence under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997

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 Carlos Clarke Principal Planning Officer

19 20 Item No. 9(e) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00703/AMC OFFICER: Dorothy Amyes WARD NAME: Galashiels and District PROPOSAL: Erection of dwellinghouse SITE: Land south of Borthwick Hall Lodge APPLICANT: Dr Peter Campbell AGENT: Border Architects

SITE AND APPLICATION DESCRIPTION:

The site is located alongside the north drive to Borthwick Hall, south-west of a number of existing properties including Heriot Parish Church, and north-east of a neighbouring dwellinghouse.

Borthwick Hall is C(S) listed and occupies a conspicuous position in the valley when approaching Heriot from the east along the B709 and it makes an important contribution to the landscape. The Borthwick Hall estate is identified in the Supplementary Planning Guidance (draft) on Designed Landscapes as being of regional, high significance.

This is an application for approval of matters specified in conditions. The principle of a house on this site has already been established. The conditions are given in full in the planning history of the site.

The site of covers an area of approximately 0.33 hectares (0.82 acres) and it was probably once a vegetable/fruit garden for the main house.

It is proposed to construct a large detached dwellinghouse with a proposed floor area of house 475sqm (not including the understorey). The house which is located in a central location within the site is a distinctive, modern design, to be constructed of insulated concrete formwork to provide a continuous concrete envelope on the exterior with internal hollow-core concrete floors and internal block work walls.

The dwellinghouse has an almost cube shaped form but the elevations are stepped and there is a large terrace at first floor level on the south elevation. The second floor level does not cover the whole of the footprint, rather it gives the appearance of a number of towers, with the maximum height at the eaves of just over 10m. The window pattern varies on each elevation, on the west elevation the emphasis of the windows is vertical, while on the south elevation the emphasis is more horizontal.

The roofscape is characterised by reverse sloping roofs which it is proposed will be finished in grey single ply membrane. The walls in smooth render with a grey coloured base and an off white upper façade. The windows will be aluminium clad timber finished in grey externally.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 The proposed dwellinghouse has been designed using energy efficient materials and to maximise solar gain. Due to the potential for flooding on the site, the understorey is not intended as living space but as an area that can flood. The living levels are at first and second floor and there are two accesses to the site, the higher, northern route providing an escape route to high ground. Both the living levels and the higher access are located above 1 in 200 year flood risk level.

Four parking spaces have been provided. Garage parking is also provided in the understorey and at first floor level. The house will be served by a private water supply, surface water drainage will be via a soakaway and there will be a new non- mains system installed for the foul drainage which has already been approved by SEPA.

Stone, timber and rendered block will be used on the boundary of the property. A planting scheme has been submitted with the application. Included within the planting scheme is Lawson Cypress, named after nurseryman and seedsman, Sir Charles Lawson, the original owner of Borthwick Hall.

A Design Statement has also been submitted and this is available to view on the Pubic Access website.

PLANNING HISTORY:

An application for the erection of a dwellinghouse was granted in June 2004 (03/01001/OUT).

In 2007 an application for the renewal of the previous consent (07/00728/OUT) was refused on the grounds that the application failed to comply with Policy G6 of the Finalised Local Plan 2005 in that no financial contribution towards the reinstatement of the Waverley Line, as required by the policy, was forthcoming. The subsequent appeal was sustained and subject to 5 conditions, two of which relate to flood mitigation methods. These conditions are given in full below

Conditions:

1. Before any development commences written approval shall be obtained from the planning authority for the details of the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings including the precise finished floor levels with reference to a fixed datum point, the means of access thereto, and the landscaping of the site including additional planting on the south and west boundaries and all other means of enclosure, hereinafter called the "reserved matters..

2. Plans and particulars of all reserved matters shall be submitted for the consideration of the planning authority within 3 years hereof, within 6 months of the date on which an earlier application for approval of reserved matters is refused, or within 6 months from the date on which an appeal against refusal is dismissed, whichever is the latest. That is, provided that only one such application shall be made after the 3 year period referred to has expired. No work shall commence prior to written approval of all reserved matters.

3. The development shall commence within 5 years hereof or within two years from the date of approval by the planning authority of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

4. Before any work commences there shall be submitted for the prior approval of the

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 planning authority (a) details of a compensatory flood water storage area, which shall be in place before any other work commences on site, and (b) details of all surface water drainage from the development.

5. Despite the. terms of Classes 1 - 5 and Class 7 of Schedule 1 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 no buildings other than the development hereby approved shall be erected within the site without the express prior approval of the planning authority.

An application for the erection of a small shed to accommodate WC and electric meters (09/01309/FUL) was approved in November 2009.

REPRESENTATIONS SUMMARY Representations have been received from 10 different households. The objections to the proposals are summarised as follows: x Detrimental impact on the landscape x Impact on Borthwick Hall x Inappropriate size and design in this location x Visible from surrounding properties x Additional screening required x Question need for two accesses x Does not comply with Local Plan policy in terms of design x Risk of flooding x Loss of privacy x Potential for commercial activity x Boundary walls x Tree protection x Disturbance during construction

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

POLICY N17 - Listed Buildings POLICY N20 - Design POLICY H5 - New Housing in the Countryside - Building Groups POLICY I11 - Parking Provision in New Development

Scottish Borders Local Plan adopted 2008

Policy G1 – Quality Standards For New Development Policy G4 - Flooding Policy BE1 – Listed Buildings Policy NE4 – Trees, Woodlands And Hedgerows Policy D2 – Housing In The Countryside Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment 2009 H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity D2 – Housing in the Countryside

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Supplementary Planning Guidance

New Housing in the Borders Countryside approved December 2008 Placemaking and Design Designed Landscapes (draft) Landscape and Development

National Policy and Guidance

SPP 1 - Scottish Planning Policy PAN 72: Housing in the Countryside. February 2005. NPPG 18: Planning and the Historic Environment.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Technical Services (Roads) No objections

Environmental Health Water Supply The applicant’s proposals with regard to the water supply meet all our requirements.

Flood Protection Initial response Having reviewed the information provided and taken into account SEPA‘s outline planning consent conditions, no objection to the proposed development provided the applicant adheres to the following conditions:

x The finished floor level is stated as being 2.1m above lowest ground level could clarification of this be given with reference to meters above ordinance datum (mAOD).

x Before the proposal for alternative flood storage are accepted, site and location plans showing original ground levels to mAOD, design drawings for the proposed compensatory storage are required and details of how the storage feature is to be maintained and details of measures put in place to ensure that the storage feature remains in place should land ownership change hands. It is noted that it is proposed to allow the lower ground level of the development to flood for other reasons, taking this into account , it is recommended that water resilient materials be used in the construction of the lower ground level.

x Further details on the LPG Tank and package treatment plant are also required. Details should show the design structure and anchorage details that will insure that both remain in place during a 1:200 year flood event.

x The information provided shows that raised access roads are to be constructed. The plans show that the new raised access roads tie into the existing carriageways to the North and West of the site. During a

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 1:200 year flood event these carriageways may also flood, therefore as a requirement further information is requested that shows levels to mAOD of the new raised access roads and existing carriageways in relation to flood levels experienced during a 1:200 year flood event.

x The proposals also show the new access roads tying into the existing carriageways to the north and west of the site. It is recommended that the access/egress points to the property are outwith the 1:200 year flood envelope.

x The proposed development site is also located in close proximity to a bridge which crosses the Heriot Water downstream of the development. The applicant should be made aware that bridges can provide a flood risk should the watercourse beneath them become blocked resulting in the water backing up and causing flooding upstream.

x 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.

Second response

Staff from the council’s flood protection team were provided with additional information by the applicant and confirm that the issues raised above have now been addressed, in particular the issue of compensatory storage.

The response to this is as follows:

With regard to the compensatory storage it is anticipated that the construction of the house associated driveways and landscaping will displace a volume of water during a 1 in 200 year return period of 1554 cubic metres. The applicant proposes to construct a compensatory storage area, which will have an estimated storage of 2166 cubic metres of water. This should adequately compensate for the building, driveways and landscaped areas proposed as part of the planning application.

They are satisfied that the compensatory storage area will provide enough storage capacity for the displaced volume of water during a 1 in 200 year flood return period.

However, it is recommended that a condition is included as part of the planning consent, whereby details of how the compensatory storage area is maintained, and kept in its as-built form as per the design, should the land change ownership at anytime in the future.

Statutory Consultees

SEPA

No objection

We have no objection to the proposed development on flood risk grounds. Notwithstanding this, we would expect Scottish Borders Council to undertake their responsibilities as the Flood Prevention Authority.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 In our previous response of 19 February 2009 in relation to outline application 07/00728/OUT, we highlighted concerns over proposals to counteract any potential loss of floodplain storage by allowing flood water to enter the ground floor area of the building. In addition, we advised that proposals to allow the garage/store area to flood could set a precedent for future developments. However, due to the complex planning history and engineering issues at this site, we recommended that the council decide on the most suitable method of providing compensatory storage.

On review of the latest submission, we assume that the Council have accepted the proposal to use the ground floor area of the building as a flood storage area. It is recommended that contact is made with the councils flood prevention officer to confirm this. The council should also ensure that if the access roads or any other part of the functional floodplain are raised (this includes any land below 255.7mAOD as described in Dr John Riddell’s Flood Risk Assessment dated 23 October 2003 and 5 November 2004), then compensatory storage should also be provided to counteract the net loss of floodplain storage. No information has been provided in the recent drawings to determine whether the new access road will be raised.

The proposed living areas of the new dwelling will be 2.1m above local ground levels. In our response dated the 30 May 2007 in relation to outline application 07/00728/OUT, we recommended that a condition was attached to the outline planning application that finished floor levels shall be raised a minimum of 1.6m above existing ground levels. Therefore we are of the opinion that the proposed habitable area of the new development will be free from the risk of flooding.

We have no objection to this development however we would recommend that the council ensure that there is no landraising on the functional floodplain and that the flood prevention officer is satisfied with the principle of the proposal to let the ground floor of the dwelling flood naturally. It is recommended that a suitable condition/agreement is put in place to ensure that the functionality of the ground floor flood storage area is maintained in perpetuity.

Heriot Community Council:

Response awaited.

PLANNING ISSUES:

The main planning issues are whether the proposed siting, design, external appearance and landscaping are acceptable and whether the issues relating to potential flooding have been adequately addressed.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Design

The design and layout of the new dwellinghouse uses materials, orientation and insulation to ensure that it is as energy efficient as possible and this is to be welcomed. This is a large site and the proposed house can be adequately accommodated within the site.

In the SPG on Landscape and Design it is noted that it is especially important for any development to fit with its surroundings. This does not rule out innovative design but does require that the existing features on the site or local area are given due recognition. The proposed development is of a distinctive design which takes little

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 from other properties in the area. This, however, does not mean that it is inappropriate in this location. It is clear and honest in its aspiration and does not attempt to mimic historic styles or pastiche. The design focuses on crisp features on each of the elevations and it is considered that further consideration is required of the details of junction between the walls and the roof and the down pipes on the western elevation. These issues can be addressed through suitably worded conditions should the committee be minded to approve the application.

The landscape in the Heriot area can be described as having an Upland character with rolling hills covered in grass, heather and trees, both broadleaved and conifer plantations with a flat valley floor and with the main settlement along the sides of the minor road from the A7 through the hills to Innerleithen. The existing buildings, including those within the grounds of Borthwick Hall, are of a variety of designs and ages. In the description of Borthwick Hall contained in the draft Designed Landscapes SPG, it notes the following:

‘Good lodge, converted mill and church as well as Hall, but some modern housing and ill-considered functional buildings. Derelict wall on S of road with beech/hawthorn hedge on N. Parts in state of change with built intrusions; some loss of integrity and cohesion; shows ‘urban fringe’ influence close to Edinburgh, but retains strong presence in landscape due to relative seclusion and larger plantations.’

There does not appear to be an easily recognisable, positive defining architectural character of the area. However, where there are larger houses in this type of landscape, they are usually set back from the road and can be glimpsed, but rarely clearly seen, through the existing tree cover, whether it is broadleaved woodland or extensive forestry planting. It is considered that this type of landscape is able to absorb very different forms and scales of development.

The proposed new house is away from the public road within the recognisable extent of the Borthwick Hall estate, is set against a backdrop of trees and glimpsed rather than clearly seen from any of the visual receptor in the area. It would not be clearly visible from the public road and is unlikely to affect the landscape character or the established settlement pattern of the area. Neither will it significantly detract from the sense of place.

The nearest residential properties to the site are the Lodge to the east and Choicelea to the west. These are approximately 40m and 70m respectively from the proposed house and are there are sufficient trees along both boundaries providing screening between the existing and new property. Given the distances between these properties there are no issues relating to loss of privacy, over shadowing or loss of sunlight. The new dwelling will generate additional light but again this will be partially shaded by existing tree cover. The site is closer to the B709 than the majority of houses within the Borthwick estate and the new development will not result in any loss of amenity through a significant increase in traffic, once the development has been completed. Given the distance from neighbouring properties, it is not considered necessary to restrict the hours when construction is taking place. If there is any excessive noise generated by the development, this matter can be assessed by Environmental Health.

Although there are no rights of way through the site, there is a core path close by which is protected in a similar way to a right of way and it is considered that it is appropriate to put a condition on the consent, if the committee are minded to approve

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 the application, to ensure that the path remains open and free from obstruction before, during and after any construction works.

As noted above there is an existing tree belt along the eastern boundary of the site containing a variety of species, including Scots pine, Sycamore, Sequoia, Yew and Cedar. To the west the plot boundary has a mature Oak. There is evidence of new and replacement tree planting on the site, trees species appear to do well here possible due to a slightly sheltered location. To the north of the existing access road there is an extensive belt of trees running along the B709 from the bridge eastwards. The new house will not be clearly visible from the public road, although it may be glimpsed during the winter months when the leaves are off the trees. It will have no impact on the view of Borthwick Hall from the B709 to the east.

It is considered that tree retention is important on this site and the existing and future screening will provide both a visual backdrop and retained screening to the plot. Additional planting is proposed along the southern boundary of the site and this is considered to be acceptable.

Should the committee be minded to approve the application, it is recommended that that conditions are placed on the consent regarding additional underplanting along the eastern tree belt for long term continuity of tree cover and additional screening; conditions would also require the protection of existing trees and a maintenance schedule for the new planting for a minimum of 3 years to ensure successful establishment.

A key visual receptor is Borthwick Hall which is located over 200m from the proposed new house. The Hall is in a slightly elevated position but views of the new house will be broken by the existing mature parkland trees and the new planting. The effect of this screening will increase as the new planting matures. The applicant has provided photographs of the site from the Hall in both summer and spring. These can be viewed on Public Access. It is considered that provided the tree screening is maintained the proposed new house will not have a significant impact on the setting and appearance of the listed building.

The proposal is for a large family dwellinghouse. The possibility that there may be a commercial use at some point in the future is not relevant to this assessment. If, in the future, a commercial use is proposed this may require a further planning application.

Flood Prevention

There are two issues relating to flood prevention in this location which it is accepted is liable to flooding. Firstly, that the new dwellinghouse should be constructed so as to allow for safe egress/access for residents of the house during times of flooding and, secondly, that adequate steps have been proposed that will ensure that the new building does not result in any increase in flooding which could affect neighbouring properties.

The main cause of the flooding in the area is as a result of the Heriot Water, which runs in a south west/north easterly direction between the access road and the B709, backing up during period of very heavy rain or snow melt. The issue of flooding was considered in detail at the outline application stage and again as part of the assessment of this application.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 The house has been designed with an understorey which can be flooded and first floor living area which is above the 1 in 200 year predicted flood level. Two accesses are to be provided. A lower one. which will mainly be used by service vehicles, and a higher one from the first floor to the existing main driveway to Borthwick Hall. This will allow for the safe passage of vehicles and pedestrians in the event of a flood. It is suggested that flood resistant materials should be used at the lower level and the applicant can be advised of this through an informative, if the committee are minded to approve this application.

Flood mitigation measures, in addition to the design of the understorey, are proposed and have been the subject of lengthy discussions with the council’s Flood Prevention Engineers. Compensatory storage is to be provided on land owned by the applicant but outwith the application site. The condition placed on the outline consent by the Reporter could not be addressed until the final design and most significantly, the footprint was known as this dictates the amount of compensatory storage required. It is anticipated that the construction of the house, associated driveways and landscaping will displace a volume of water during a 1 in 200 year return period of 1554 cubic metres. The applicant proposes to construct a compensatory storage area, which will have an estimated storage of 2166 cubic metres of water. This is considered to be acceptable. However, it is important to ensure that this is maintained in perpetuity and that once the house and ground work have been completed there have been no changes to the amount of water which will be displaced. These matters can be addressed through suitably worded conditions.

Conclusion

In conclusion it is considered that subject to conditions, the scale, design and materials are acceptable and comply with the local plan policies G1 and BE1 as the proposed dwellinghouse can be adequately accommodated on the site and it will not result in any loss or character to the surrounding area or the setting of the nearby listed building. The issues relating to the flooding has been adequately addressed.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES:

I recommend that the application to erect a dwellinghouse is approved, subject to the following conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two 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 and specifications approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3. Sample panels of the external wall finish to be prepared on site for prior approval by the Planning Authority.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Reason: The materials to be used require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

4. Further details of the junction between the roof and the walls and the downpipes shall be submitted to and approved by the planning authority prior to any development taking place on the site

Reason: The details require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

5. The finished floor levels of the first floor shall be raised a minimum of 1.6m above existing ground levels.

Reason: To ensure that the main part of the dwellinghouse (excluding the understorey) is free from flooding.

6. No additional landraising on the functional flood plain, other than that required for the dwellinghouse and the access, shall take place without the prior approval of the planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that the functional flood plain is not affected by development.

7. The understorey of the dwellinghouse shall be allowed to flood at all times and no changes shall take place to the design of the understorey without the prior consent of the planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate flood mitigation in place at all times

8. The flood compensatory storage area, as shown plan ‘proposed compensatory storage plan and cross section’, shall be maintained at all times and shall remain as per the design in perpetuity.

Reason:To ensure that the functional flood plain is not affected by the development

9. Prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouse, the applicant shall submit details of the final levels of the compensatory storage area to the local planning authority for approval.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate compensatory storage

10. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, the trees to be retained on the site shall be protected by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high, placed at a minimum radius of one metre beyond the crown spread of each tree, and the fencing 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;

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 (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 on the development site, the loss of which would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area.

11. All tree planting, as shown in the approved details shall be carried out prior to or in the first planting season following the occupation of the building and shall be maintained thereafter and replaced as may be necessary for a period of three years from the date of completion of the planting.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed landscaping is carried out as approved.

12. No trees within the application site shall be felled, lopped, lifted or disturbed in any way without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The existing tree(s) represent an important visual feature which the Local Planning Authority considered should be substantially maintained.

13. The core path which runs along the existing northern access to the site shall remain open and free from obstruction before, during and after any construction works

Reason: to ensure that access along the core path is maintained at all times

14. Details of all proposed means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before work on the site is commenced.

Reason: To enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

Informative

1. Tree Planting The applicant is advised that additional underplanting is required along the northern boundary to ensure that the screening maintained 2. Flood Risk 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.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Approved by

Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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 Dorothy Amyes Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 Item No. 9(f) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00915/OUT

OFFICER: Andrew Evans WARD NAME: Hawick and Denholm PROPOSAL: Erection of two dwellinghouses for use as holiday accommodation SITE: Land South West Of Harwood Mill Farmhouse, Bonchester Bridge APPLICANT: A Lubbock AGENT: Edwin Thompson & Co (Galashiels)

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located to the east of the minor road to Harwood. The site is the located in the edge of an agricultural field, formerly grazed but now unused. Mature hedgerow runs along the road side boundary of the site, punctuated with some mature hedgerow trees (ash and lime). The site slopes away from the road with the lower land to the east. There is a minor unnamed burn to the south east of the application site. This burn is a tributary of the Rule Water.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This application seeks consent in principle for the erection of 2 dwelling houses to be used as holiday accommodation. The application was submitted in 2009 as an application for outline planning permission. Under transitional arrangements following reforms to the planning system in August 2009 the application will be determined as an application for Planning Permission in Principle. Consent is sought in principle for the erection of 2 dwellings for use as holiday accommodation.

PLANNING HISTORY

None on this site.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

6 letters of objection have been received from neighbouring households (counting the solicitors letters on behalf of one of the neighbours as a single objection from that household). The letters are available in full on the Council “Public Access” website for members to consider in full in advance of the Committee Meeting. A summary of the planning issues raised is as follows:

x It is contended that the applicant does not own the land between his fence line and the road, which is required to gain access form the road and to insert a passing place. The objector purchased the freehold of Harwood Estate from the applicant in 2002, which included all the land up to his fence line along the Harwood Road. The applicant did not Planning and Building Standards Committee maintain a right of way over this land at the point where he is attempting to gain access. An alternative access could be formed from the applicants own access track to Harwood Mill. x The siting of these proposed properties is inconsistent with the policy of “Group Housing” and the preference to use “Brownfield” sites as opposed to “Greenfield” sites. x The agent’s letter states that ownership is not a planning matter, however any conditions attached to a planning approval that cannot be carried out due to non-ownership of land are (a planning matter). x A former 4 ft gate at the proposed access point has been replaced with a 12 foot gate. This was done without the permission of the owner. The owner has not given consent for the verge to be covered in tarmac. x Representations have been made to the Keeper of the Land Register. The applicant still maintains claim of ownership of the land needed for the access, but has sought to have the neighbouring land owners certificate (Mr Feakins) amended so as to exercise the area of roadway and verges in question. The area he seeks to excise is not the access area for the application, but it does illustrate ownership of the solum of the road and verge without doubt. It follows logically that if the applicant is sufficiently confident that he owns the verge and hedge to the fence line why then is he making representations to the Land Register to have our client’s Land Certificate Amended? x On the land registry title plans, the inner edge of the red boundary line is the fence line around Mr Lubbock’s field, showing that the verge and hedge are included in the Harwood Estate (Objectors) title. x The proposals will decrease the water supply pressure from the already sub standard supply. x Harwood Road is a narrow single track road with no passing places, used by all the vehicles from the estate plus service vehicles. Additional traffic would cause dangerous situations. x The new buildings will probably not match the rest of the estate. x It is a crime that mature hedgerows would be removed. This would also have a detrimental impact on wildlife.

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant has submitted a modest Business Plan. It states the following:

x Two detached lodges to be constructed out of timber logs under slate roofs on a roadside site overlooking agricultural land and towards the Harwood Burn. x Lodges to be fitted out and equipped to an above average standard. x Visitors to have access to the rural surround at Harwood Mill with the possibility of short term stabling being available at the old steading. x Lettings to be for holiday use only – one week, two weeks and short break to be offered. x The lodges to be managed by Mr and Mrs Lubbock and to provide supplementary income to their existing business at Harwood Mill. x Initial funding to be provided from capital resources – no borrowing necessary. x Establishment of holiday lets in this location will have a positive spin-off to the local economy – the pub at Bonchester Bridge and generally the Hawick and Jedburgh retail and tourist industry. x Initial lettings to be generated through use of VisitScotland accommodation guide, development of own website and enrolment with specialist agencies promoting Scotland and the Scottish Borders – for example, Ecosse Unique. x Repeat and referral business to be generated through promotional literature.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001-2018 Policy N8 - River Tweed System Policy N20 - Design Policy I1 - Transportation and Development Policy I11 - Parking Provision in New Development Policy I14 - Surface Water

Scottish Borders Local Plan (Adopted 2008) Policy G1 - Quality Standards for New Development Policy H2 - Protection of Residential Amenity Policy BE6 - Protection of Open Space Policy NE4 - Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy Inf 4 - Parking Provision and Standards Policy Inf 5 - Waste Water Treatment Standards Policy Inf 6 - Sustainable Urban Drainage

Finalised Local Plan Amendment 2009 Policy H2 Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: SPG Trees and Development SPG Landscape and Development Developer Contributions – April 2009 Guidance on Householder Developments (Privacy & Sunlight) – July 2006. Supplementary Planning Guidance on Placemaking and Design

Scottish Planning Policy

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Environmental Health: Provide detailed comments regarding water supply, and drainage. These can be viewed in full on the public access website. In summary, a condition should be attached to the planning permission requiring the applicant to provide confirmation from Scottish Water that a connection from the public water main is available and that the proposals will be able to be adequately serviced by said public water main. Alternatively, if it is intended that a private water supply is to be used, information will be required to be supplied for consideration relating to proposed source of the supply; average volume of water provided by the proposed supply, and any treatment that is intended to be carried out in relation to the proposed supply. Where there are any existing users of the proposed supply, the applicant is likely to be required to provide a report from an independent, competent person advising how the proposed development will impact on the existing users. It is essential that all drainage provided for the proposals will be able to cope with the demand that will be placed upon it and, most importantly, it is to the satisfaction and approval of the Building Control Department of Scottish Borders Council

Director of Technical Services (Roads): 23rd July 2009: Whilst I have no objections to the principle of holiday homes at this location, the access would be my main concern. I would require a service lay-by to my specification to be provided at the access off the public road and the access would also have to be to my satisfaction. This would require the following details to be addressed: x A maximum gradient of 1 in 15 from the edge of the existing carriageway for a minimum distance of 6m into the site. There after, a maximum gradient of 1 in 8 would be required.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 x Parking and turning for a minimum of two vehicles would be required within the curtilage of each property. The maximum gradient of this area must be not greater than 1 in 15. x The initial 6m of the access would have to be constructed to my specification shown below. Visibility of 2.4m x 120m must be provided in either direction at the access off the public road. This may involve the removal of existing trees and hedging and a detailed plan should be provided showing these splays and the areas they enclose. x Given the levels on site, steps would have to be taken to deal adequately with the surface water from the existing public road to ensure it does not adversely effect the development. This is the developer’s responsibility. From the plan submitted, it is unclear whether the applicant has control of the road side planting and this should be clarified prior to any condition being considered. Access Spec. 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.

25th November 2009: My previous comments still apply to this application in that I have no objections in principle to the proposal provided my access requirements can be met by the applicant. It would appear from the submitted drawings that even with a reduced “x” distance of 2m at the junction with the public road, hedging still has to be removed and replanted on an alternative line and there may be an ownership issue with this hedge. To avoid this possible conflict, the applicant may wish to consider utilising their existing access to serve these new properties as well as the existing farmhouse. If agreement can be met with regards to the hedging, I would require that the original visibility of 2.4m x 120m be provided. If the hedging has to be realigned, it should be on such a line as to allow growth of the hedge and still not interfere with the visibility splay i.e. the hedge should be planted on a line 3m x 125m from the access.

Statutory Consultees

Community Council: No reply.

Other Consultees:

Visit Scotland: (July 2009): Tourism is a key sector which is a major contributor to the economy of the Scottish Borders. The national strategy, Tourism Framework for Change identifies a 50% growth ambition (in real terms) by 2015 and any development which would add to this growth would be of benefit to the local area.

The industry strategy for growth has been built around a number of key areas, of which capital investment is crucial. The proposal has the potential to improve prospects to the Scottish Borders.

Traditionally visitors to a rural area choose self-catering over other forms of accommodation. The annual average occupancy rates for self-catering in the Scottish Borders have continued to rise over the last 3 years and currently stand at 57% with the winter and spring seasons being lowest at between 26% and 39%. Currently self-catering accommodation which offers good value for money and a "package" of activities/facilities within easy access is not as adversely affected by the economic situation as other forms of accommodation. In the current economic climate we are seeing increases in the take up of self catering accommodation although this is booked at the very last minute.

The Framework for Change also focuses on the need for quality products and services, working in collaboration and innovation. These elements are supported by feedback from customer surveys and should be integral to the proposed development

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 The Scottish Borders is predominantly a leisure tourism destination and this development could add to the breadth of offering and contribute to the Borders becoming a sustainable year round destination. Visitors to the area come not only to enjoy the scenery but also to undertake activities such as walking, cycling, fishing and touring. It would be beneficial also for this development to engage collaboratively with others to provide this overall experience.

Sustainability is a key theme in the Tourism Framework for Change and the local Area Tourism Partnership Plan and concern among tourists regarding the impact a holiday has on the environment has risen with visitor expectations and choices changing.

To become Europe's most sustainable destination we need to ensure that tourism growth doesn't result in the degradation of the very environment that is one of our unique selling points.

Environmental sustainability is being addressed through the VisitScotland Green Tourism Business Scheme. The long-term benefits, we believe, are profound. As well as encouraging continued tourism growth, sustainable tourism will ensure that Scotland's key tourism assets, our natural heritage, built heritage and our communities, will survive and thrive.

The Scottish Borders Tourism Action Plan 2009-2012 states that in order to build competitive advantage real efforts have to be made in areas such as differentiation of appeal and building star "performers" It is anticipated that this development would meet or exceed these criteria.

Much has been achieved through the marketing of the area as "Scotland's leading Short Break Destination" resulting in a high percentage of repeat visits and prolonging the season. This should continue to be built upon in any new development.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

Whether the proposed development complies with the adopted planning polices of the council, and if so, what conditions would be appropriate to regulate the development. Consideration should be given as to the achievability of the access arrangements, and if the application is otherwise acceptable, consideration should be given to the form of any wording of planning condition pertaining to the provision of the access and visibility splays.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Policy Principle

In assessing the outline application for development on the site, the principle of development must firstly be considered. The site is not in a location considered to be part of a building group for housing purposes. Consent is however sought for the erection of the dwellings for use as holiday accomodation. Policy D1 (Business, Tourism and Leisure Development in the Countryside) of the adopted local plan states that proposals for Business, Tourism and Leisure Development will be approved provided that one of three quilifying critreia are met, and then 5 subsequent criteria. In the case of this application, the proposals are considered to meet the qualifying criteria requiring the development to be used directly for tourism, in accordance with the Scottish Borders Tourism Strategy.

The Tourism Strategy has since been superseded by the Scottish Borders Tourism Action Plan. The October 2008 Action Plan Update is the current version of this plan. This Document Identifies a specific focus on driving Bed and Breakfast and Self Catering quality ahead of the Scottish Competition. Visit Scotland has confirmed that in the current economic climate they have seen increases in the take up of self catering accommodation although this is booked at the very last minute.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 The proposed development of 2 self catering holiday homes is considered to comply with the Scottish Borders Tourism Action Plan.

After meeting one of the qualifying criteria in policy D1, 5 subsequent criteria must be met. These require that:

In all cases: 4. the development must respect the amenity and character of the surrounding area, 5. the development must have no significant adverse impact on nearby uses, particularly housing, 6. where a new building is proposed, the developer will be required to provide evidence that no appropriate existing building or brownfield site is available, and where conversion of an existing building is proposed, evidence that the building is capable of conversion without substantial demolition and rebuilding, 7. the expansion or intensification of uses will be approved, in principle, where the use and scale of development are appropriate to the rural character of the area, 8. the development must take account of accessibility considerations in accordance with Policy Inf11.

The proposed development is considered to be in compliance with policy D1.

In order to comply with the provisions of the adopted planning policies on Housing in the Countryside, it is considered that any approval forthcoming of this application should be subject to restriction on occupancy and use by means of both planning conditions and Section 75 legal agreement.

The proposals are also required to be considered against the terms of policy NE4 – Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows. This requires development schemes to retain the woodland resource (including hedgerows) wherever possible, and to provide replacement planting where removal has to take place. The impacts on the hedgerow and trees are discussed below.

Landscape Impacts

The site is the edge of field, formerly grazed but now unused. Mature hedgerow runs along the road side with some mature hedgerow trees (ash and lime).

In principle, the proposal should not cause landscape related impacts but there are risks that development could result in the loss or damage to the adjoining hedgerow and hedgerow trees and this would have an adverse impact particularly on the character of the road in of what is presently an unspoilt rural location. The possible requirements for access and sightlines could have lead to significant hedgerow loss and it is considered that this could be an unacceptably high price to pay in environmental terms as it would result in a development that does not fit in with its surroundings.

There are design options that could minimise these possible impacts. During the processing of the application, revised plans were submitted in which the proposed access point was moved to a site of a partial existing gap in the hedge to the South which appears to have better visibility. There should also be minimum offsets for ground disturbance from the existing hedgerow (min 3m from its centreline) and from existing trees (as per Trees and Development SPG) that should ensure impacts on the vegetation structure are minimal. Members should consider whether the feasibility of the layout has been demonstrated, even at this outline stage, to show that the development can be carried out in an acceptable way.

Two amended drawings indicating alternative means of accessing the sites were submitted during the processing of the application. These are drawing no DL 1017 dated August 2009 indicating an access to the north of the proposed lodges and the removal of 4m of existing hedge and DL

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 1010/02 dated September 2009 indicating an access to the south of the proposed lodges and the removal of 6m of existing hedge but a shorter access road.

On the basis that hedge removal is no more than stated and that the hedge is re-planted / replaced behind the line of visibility as stated, the council was content that either option would be acceptable.

A latest revised plan, GL 1017/PL/02 of August 2010, reduces somewhat the extent of the application boundary. It re-orientates the plots, in an attempt to create a courtyard. This attempt is welcomed but conditions are recommended to require a more linked scheme to be brought forward at AMC stage, which results in a single building and thus reduces the impact of the scheme on its setting and so appears less suburban in form.

Vehicular Access and Parking

The Council’s adopted planning policies require satisfactory access and parking to serve a site. Policy I11 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and Inf4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that proposals should provide for car and cycle parking in accordance with the Council’s adopted standards, taking into account safety and environmental considerations.

The Director of Technical Services detailed comments can be viewed in his online consultation reply.

There would be no road safety objections, provided that satisfactory access can visibility arrangements can be achieved. To achieve satisfactory access and visibility, planning conditions are proposed. These are discussed in more detail below.

Achievability of Visibility Splay and Ownership of Hedge

Members will note the lengthy correspondence from the owner of adjoining land and his legal representatives. The ownership of the hedge bounding the application site is claimed by this objector.

It is not the role of the planning authority to arbitrate in relation to ownership. Whilst these matters may determine whether or not the site can ultimately be developed, they do not constitute material planning considerations, unless they affect the acceptability of the scheme on planning grounds. For example, the authority should be mindful of the need for suitable access to be provided to serve the proposed development. Clearly, in addition to securing planning permission for the site, the developers will have to satisfy themselves that there are no legal impediments to the development of the site.

The planning authority has had sight of the applicant and objectors title deeds. There is uncertainty as to the correct position of the boundary line between the two deeds. This uncertainty and dispute over the extent of ownership has to be accounted for when drafting planning conditions pertaining to formation of the access, lay-by and visibility splays.

Use of Suspensive Planning Condition

In this specific case, consideration should be given on the wording of any planning condition covering provision of an access to the site. The disputed land ownership would indicate that a suspensive planning condition would be appropriate in the case of this application. Planning Circular 4 of 1998 provides planning authorities with advice on the use of planning conditions.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 There are specific case law examples and planning circular guidance on use of suspensive planning conditions (i.e. conditions that require an action to be undertaken in advance of the development taking place). In the circumstances of this planning application, the use of suspensive planning condition is considered to be both appropriate and necessary.

Conclusion

The development is considered compliant with development plan policies, principally Policy D1 of the Adopted Local Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives, and subject to the satisfactory conclusion of a legal agreement to secure the use of the premises as holiday accommodation, and prevent any residential use taking place:

Planning Conditions:

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.

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.

4. Prior to the commencement of any other part of the development, a service lay-by and the new access from the public road are to be completed to a standard agreed in writing by the planning authority, and in accordance with a scaled plan (at a scale of 1:500) which has first submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority. The submitted details are to include provision of: a. A maximum gradient of 1 in 15 from the edge of the existing carriageway for a minimum distance of 6m into the site. There after, a maximum gradient of 1 in 8.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 b. Parking and turning for a minimum of two vehicles within the curtilage of each property. The maximum gradient of this area must be not greater than 1 in 15. c. The initial 6m of the access to be constructed to the specification of the planning authority (attached). d. Visibility of 2.4m x 120m must be provided in either direction at the access off the public road. This may involve the removal of existing trees and hedging and the submitted detailed plan should show these splays and the areas they enclose. e. Measures to deal adequately with the surface water from the existing public road to ensure it does not adversely effect the development.

Reason: To ensure that the site has satisfactory access arrangements, and in the interests of road safety on the minor road serving Harwood.

5. The subsequent application for the approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by the following details: a. a site layout plan at a scale of 1:500 showing the position of all buildings, roads, footpaths, parking areas, walls and fences and landscaping; b. the plans are to demonstrate a single building to contain the two permitted units of accommodation c. plans and elevations of each property showing their dimensions and type and colour of external materials; d. a landscaping plan at a scale of 1:200 showing the location, species and ground spread of existing and proposed trees, shrubs and hedges; e. details of the phasing of development; f. details of existing and finished ground levels, and finished floor levels, in relation to a fixed datum, preferably ordnance datum. g. Minimum offsets for ground disturbance from the existing hedgerow (min 3m from its centreline) and from existing trees (as per Trees and Development SPG).

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development.

6. The means of water supply and of both surface water and foul drainage to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced.

7. The development hereby approved shall be constructed of either natural stone or timber on the exterior of the building and natural slate on the roof. All external materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to works commencing on site.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

8. No trees or hedgerow within the application site shall be felled, lopped, lifted or disturbed in any way without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The existing tree(s) represent an important visual feature which the Local Planning Authority considered should be substantially maintained.

9. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, the hedge to be retained on the site shall be protected by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high placed at a minimum distance of 2.0 metres from the edge of the hedge, and the fencing shall be removed only when the development has been completed. During the period of construction of the

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 development the existing soil levels around the boles of the hedges so retained shall not be altered.

Reason: In the interests of preserving the hedges which contribute to the visual amenity of the area.

10. The finished floor levels of the building 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 maintain effective control over the development.

11. The occupation of the building shall be restricted to genuine holidaymakers for individual periods not exceeding 4 weeks in total within any consecutive period of 13 weeks. A register of holidaymakers shall be kept and made available for inspection by an authorised officer of the Council at all reasonable times.

Reason: A permanent residential site in this location would conflict with the established planning policy for this rural area.

Applicant Informatives

For the information of the applicant:

1. The ownership of the hedge along the boundary of the application site has been disputed by a neighbouring landowner. Please note that this planning consent does not convey any right to access or alter neighbouring land, fencing, hedging or trees. You are advised to seek independent legal advice on this matter in advance of any development being carried out.

2. This consent conveys planning permission in principle only. Development cannot commence on site until such time as detailed approval has been secured.

3. With regards to condition 4, the required Access Specification is: 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.

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 Andrew Evans Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Item No. 9(g) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00772/FUL

OFFICER: Carlos Clarke WARD NAME: Leaderdale and Melrose PROPOSAL: Change of use and extension to form changing rooms SITE: Storage Building, Land East of Police Station APPLICANT: Melrose Football Club AGENT: None

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located in the north-western corner of Gibson Park, and comprises a stone-built former fire station building with a half-hipped slate roof sited on flat ground flanked by several trees. The site is within the Conservation Area. Its nearest neighbours are within a terrace to the west, including the police station, garages and two dwellinghouses at its southerly end.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The application seeks consent to convert the building from its more recent storage use to a changing rooms for the local football club, and to extend it on its southerly end. The extension would be flat-roofed, with timber walls.

PLANNING HISTORY

No relevant history

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

None

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant has stated that Melrose Football Club has almost 200 children registered and 30 qualified coaches. There is an urgent need for a changing facility which will benefit not just the club but the community, and would be made available to Melrose Rugby Club and the festival when required.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2009

N10 National Scenic Areas Planning and Building Standards Committee N11 Areas of Great Landscape Value N18 Development affecting Conservation Areas N20 Design I11 Parking Provision in New Development I14 Surface Water I15 Flood Risk Areas C4 Sports Facilities C6 Open Space

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

G1 Quality Standards for New Development G4 Flooding G7 Infill Development BE4 Conservation Areas BE6 Protection of Open Space NE4 Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows EP1 National Scenic Areas EP2 Areas of Great Landscape Value H2 Protection of Residential Amenity Inf4 Parking Standards Inf 5 Waste Water Treatment Standards Inf 6 Sustainable Urban Drainage

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

SPG Trees and Development 2008 SPG Placemaking and Design 2010 SPG Guidance on Householder Developments 2006

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): No objections

Director of Technical Services (Flood Prevention Officer): The site is at risk in a 1 in 200 year event. Notwithstanding this it’s a small scale development that is unlikely to have a significant effect on storage capacity of the flood plain or affect local flooding problems. Recommends water resilient materials and construction methods, refers to availability of flood protection products and refers to the Council’s Emergency Planning team who may be able to offer discounts. Recommends an action plan to secure safe evacuation and that applicant arranges to receive flood alerts. Notes that the Council offers a free flood warning service.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Landscape): In principle has no objections. The root protection area is close, however with fencing erected to the actual crown spread of the tree safe and long term retention is achievable. The fencing may be chestnut paling erected on fixed stakes with wood cross members, equally heras type fencing to the same distance is acceptable. Ideally this should all be demonstrated on plan, however would be available to attend on site to ensure the Chestnuts are protected

Statutory Consultees

Melrose Community Council: No comments

Other Consultees: None

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The key planning issues are whether or not the proposed use is appropriate in this particular location and whether the proposed extension would protect or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, or adversely affect trees or neighbouring amenity

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Policy Principle

The site is within the town, in a highly accessible location and the proposed use is linked to that of the park. The proposed use is therefore considered appropriate. The proposed extension would result in the loss of open space to a very minor degree, but this is in any case off-set by the benefits to be derived from accessible changing rooms.

Scale, Design, Materials

The proposal involves retention of the existing building, in particular its existing doors and window on the northern elevation. The proposed extension avoids the more sensitive northern and eastern elevations. The extension would be modest in scale. Its flat-roof form could have jarred with the traditional form of the existing building but this is overcome by a recessed link which allows it to be visually detached from the main building and avoids its rafter ends. The use of timber is appropriate though all external materials will require to be considered further by way of submission of samples.

What detracted from the understated design of the extension in the original submission was a railed disabled access ramp on the eastern elevation. During the processing of the application, however, the design of the ramp has been adjusted and now no longer requires railings and the resulting effect will be much less obtrusive on this elevation of the building.

Trees

The application states that no trees will be removed, though the extension is close to the surrounding trees which add to the amenity of the park. The Tree Officer appears to be content that, provided protective fencing is erected to follow their crown spread, no adverse effects should occur. It was understood, however, that a particular specification for the foundations may have been required, and further clarification is being sought from the Tree Officer. Members will be updated of any response. In the meantime, a condition is recommended to secure appropriate measures reflecting his advice.

Neighbours

The proposed use and extension should not adversely affect neighbouring properties by virtue of its relationship to existing uses in the park, and the position and small scale of the extension.

Services

Water and drainage services are proposed to/from the mains and, provided connections are achieved, this is agreeable.

Flooding

The site is potentially at risk of flooding, but the use is not sensitive and the extension is minor. An ‘informative’ note to reflect the Flood Prevention Officer’s advice is recommended.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 Parking

No off-street parking is proposed but the Director of Technical Services is content and the provision of changing facilities in such a highly accessible location, which will reduce the need for trips to use other facilities, suggests no dedicated parking is necessary.

Conclusion

Subject to compliance with the schedule of conditions, the proposed development should constitute an appropriate use in this location, and the extension should not detract from the character of appearance of the Conservation Area or adversely affect neighbouring amenity. Particular care will be required to safeguard adjoining trees.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES:

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

2. A sample of all materials to be used on all exterior surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before development commences. This shall include the roof, wall and window and door framing, and shall include external colours. Reason: The materials to be used require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which protects the character and appearance of the Conservation Area

3. No trees shall be lopped, felled or otherwise disturbed to facilitate the development. No development shall commence until the applicant has submitted a tree protection plan for the approval of the Planning Authority which identifies full details of protective measures proposed to safeguard adjacent trees from damage during construction of the extension, as guided by BS5837. Once approved, development shall be carried out in accordance with the protective measures Reason : To ensure no risk to adjacent trees which contribute to the amenity of the area and character and appearance of the Conservation Area

4. The means of water supply, surface water and foul drainage shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before the development commences Reason: Further information is required to ensure the development can be adequately serviced.

Information for the applicant

1. The property may be at risk of flooding and therefore it is recommended that water resilient materials be used, that an evacuation plan be devised and that the property be connected to a flood warning service. Further advice can be obtained from the Council’s emergency planning service 01835 825056

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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 Carlos Clarke Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 Item No. 9(h) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00783/FUL

OFFICER: Carlos Clarke WARD NAME: Galashiels and District PROPOSAL: Erection of replacement student accommodation and associated parking, ancillary works and landscaping SITE: Heriot Watt University Halls of Residence, Netherknowe, Nether Road, Galashiels APPLICANT: Heriot Watt University AGENT: Dundas & Wilson

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site comprises the existing halls of residence of the Galashiels campus of Heriot Watt University, sited nearby the university campus itself, on the south side of Tweed Road. The existing campus accommodates 218 students and 49 car parking spaces, with 15 alongside a gym building located in the south-eastern part of the site. The site does not include around one third of the overall area of land owned by the university located to the west of the application site and including a terrace of single-storey residences.

The site is raised above Tweed Road to the north-east from which it obtains vehicular access leading to a private road on its north side. It comprises a number of separate buildings up to three storeys in height set beyond planting on the north-east side. The site rises from east to west, with the gym building built into the rising ground, though the principal buildings are set on generally level ground within the centre of the overall campus. To the north it bounds Kingsknowes Village which includes elderly persons' residential flats in a series of terraces, including a two-storey terrace comprising numbers 9-20 which have their principal southerly elevations directly facing into the site, beyond fencing and planting. To the south east is a cluster of dwellinghouses including the nearest property which is a Category Cs Listed Lodge. The site is bounded with dense tree cover on its southern boundary, beyond which on higher ground is the Kingsknowes roundabout linking the A7 and A6091. A pedestrian access onto the A7 is available via a footpath from the western extremity of the university’s property.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Full planning consent is sought for the replacement of the existing student accommodation and gym with four separate buildings designed to provide for 279 students. A 'gateway’ building would be provided on the north side, alongside the existing access road, providing a pended access to the site in its centre. Three ‘pavilion’ buildings would be sited in the south-easterly part of the site. Aside from ‘Pavilion 1’, which would be sited largely on the footprint of the existing gym, all remaining buildings would be built alongside the existing buildings which would then be demolished once their replacements are completed.

The proposal originally included 50 car parking spaces (since increased to 61 spaces), and a landscape plan which includes retention of a number of trees at the north-eastern side, the trees on the southern boundary, as well as new screen planting to the north and east and a series of regularly framed gardens, lawns and meadows. Cycle parking is provided in various positions within the site.

The ‘gateway’ building would be a five-storey structure, split as the ground rises to the west so comprising four floors on its western half. The pavilion buildings would include a 3 and 4 storey ‘Pavilion 1’ to the east, and 4 and 5 storey Pavilion 2 and 3 closer to the centre of the site. External materials would include aluminium roofing; white render; aluminium faced windows; eternit, aluminium, ceramlite and timber cladding elements; and, curtain walling.

PLANNING HISTORY

There is no relevant planning history. An application submitted in 2005 to redevelop the entire site for general residential use and student accommodation, including that part of the site outwith the current application site to the west, was never determined.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

A petition signed by occupiers of all twelve flatted properties to the north (9-20 Kingsknowes Village) has been submitted in which the following principal issues are raised:

1 Object to the five storey block parallel and only 30 metres from their retirement flats 2 Its height would tower over their homes, looking straight in and rendering their privacy non-existent 3 An aged and often infirm community would suffer enormously from the severe lack of daylight that would be obscured and the risk of accidents would increase by virtue of the lack of natural light and increased cost of lighting 4 Do not begrudge the students’ social life, but you can appreciate the noise levels at night which can be quite disturbing and would increase significantly 5 No wish to hinder the development but there are many other areas in the grounds where the block of flats could be housed without impeding on living conditions

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The applicant submitted a series of supporting documents with the original application and which can be reviewed in full on ‘Public Access’:

1 Pre-application consultation report 2 Design and Access Statement 3 Planning Statement 4 Ecology Report 5 Energy and Sustainability Review

During the processing of the application, a Bat and Birds Survey has been submitted and an addendum report in which a response is provided to various matters raised by this department. A Geo-Environmental Assessment report has also been submitted and considered by the Council’s Environmental Health Service.

2 Where material to the application, matters raised in the above documents are considered in the assessment section of this report.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2009

N5 Local Biodiversity Action N6 Environmental Impact N7 Protection of Nature Conservation Interest N17 Listed Buildings N20 Design I5 Cycling 17 Walking I11 Parking Provision in New Development I14 Surface Water I18 Contaminated Land C2 Education and Health Services C4 Sports Facilities H9 Affordable and Special Needs Housing

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008

G1 Quality Standards for New Development G2 Contaminated Land G5 Developer Contributions G6 Developer Contributions related to Railway reinstatement BE1 Listed Buildings NE3 Local Biodiversity NE4 Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows H1 Affordable Housing H2 Protection of Residential Amenity H3 Land Use Allocations Inf 3 Road Adoption Standards Inf4 Parking Standards Inf 5 Waste Water Treatment Standards Inf 6 Sustainable Urban Drainage Inf 11 Developments that generate Travel Demand

Finalised Local Plan Amendment 2009

H2 Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

SPP 2010 SPG Affordable Housing 2007 SPG Biodiversity 2005 SPG Developer Contributions 2010 SPG Landscaping and Development 2008

3 SPG Trees and Development 2008 SPG Placemaking and Design 2010 SPG Guidance on Householder Developments 2006 SPG Renewable Energy 2007

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

The following paragraphs comprise summaries of consultation responses. Full responses are available on ‘Public Access’.

Scottish Borders Council Consultees:

Director of Technical Services (Roads): Two particular important points have not been addressed. The first relates to the parking provision, both in total numbers and their spread. At present, 50 spaces are shown, despite a request for 70 to avoid cars being parked and causing congestion on the new and existing public road network. This was derived from a number of on site survey counts that clearly showed there was already a deficit of spaces for the existing campus and by increasing the number of students by approximately 75, extra spaces would definitely be required. While it is appreciated you can apply the ‘by the book’ criteria, this particular site is an exception to the rule and extra spaces must be provided. Furthermore the layout and spread of parking does not relate very well with a large proportion of the proposed accommodation units within the site and feel further discussion is required.

The second issue relates to pedestrian footway/path upgrading that is required between the site and the recently improved car park. Upgrading of the existing network is still required. This is not onerous and a site meeting to discuss and agree a small scheme needs to be undertaken as quickly as possible. At present, objects.

Has been consulted on the revised plan showing 11 further spaces and his comments are awaited.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Ecology): Mostly satisfied with the ecology report. Notes SNH and Scottish Badgers replies. Is largely content with the mitigation measures for badgers in the report. They should include measures to cover trenches or include a means of escape, safe storage of oil and capping of exposed pipe systems. No breeding birds survey carried out. The buildings have the potential for breeding birds and mitigation proposals should be submitted. In accordance with the ecology report, further activity surveys for bats are required prior to determination of the application carried out in May-September. Notes that further bat activity and birds survey will be submitted in two weeks (at the time of writing). Recommends: an activity survey for bats before determination; no works during bird breeding season unless authorised: enhancement measures to be included in a Landscape Habitat Management Plan.

Since the above comments were submitted, the Ecology Officer has since commented on the more recently submitted Bat and Birds Survey. He advises he is satisfied with the findings of the survey report, recommends that a condition require submission of the European Protected Species Licence that is required; no works within the bird breeding season without the permission of the Planning Authority; and opportunities be taken to provide enhancements for bats, birds and badgers in the form of a LHMP (as above), and opportunities be taken to include swift boxes and bricks.

4 Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health): It is unclear what the common rooms, multi-purpose rooms are to be used for. If they are to be used for entertainment, a condition should be imposed to require any entertainment noise to be inaudible in adjacent properties.

The site previously housed a gravel pit and is potentially contaminative. Recommends a survey requiring a site mitigation and risk assessment, including any necessary remediation strategy and verification plan. Has since raised a number of issues with the applicant regarding the more recently submitted survey report.

Director of Planning and Economic Development (Landscape): The layout offers the potential for an attractive campus set against the backdrop of the existing tree belt. The majority of the existing landscape including trees is being retained and substantial tree planting proposed. A detailed tree survey to BS5837 of all trees should be undertaken and submitted, including Root Protection Areas, and where no development should occur and where protective fencing should be erected. The survey should identify those trees to be retained and proposed for removal. Any cut and fill areas adjacent trees must address any alteration to the water table and drainage which might have an impact and if necessary, alterations made to minimise the impact.

The area of greatest concern is the northern building (and to a lesser extent the eastern building). While the linear building is being located framing the site, both these boundaries are shared with existing residential properties and the scale and form of the building while appropriate elsewhere has the potential to dominate adjacent properties. The zones for screen mix planting are not wide enough to allow a meaningful planting scheme to be created, one that offers an acceptable level of screening but doesn’t become overbearing and overshadowing properties in time. Consideration should be given to moving the gateway block away from the northern boundary to avoid unnecessary overlooking and overshadowing.

The landscape masterplan gives a clear indication of the design concept which, with the exception of the proposals relating to the northern and eastern boundaries, provides a satisfactory landscape setting for the new residential blocks. The planting information would not, however, allow the planting scheme to be implemented. A planting plan with a plant schedule detailing species, numbers, sizes and type together with a programme and longer term maintenance should be a condition of approval. The concept behind the layout is well thought out and the landscape proposals are, with the exception of those to the north and east, going to provide an attractive environment for students and the wider public, but cannot fully support the application in its present form.

Statutory Consultees

Scottish Environment Protection Agency: Initially objected unless a planning condition was imposed requiring a sustainable urban drainage scheme, and recommended that comments from Scottish Water, Roads and Flood Prevention Authorities be sought on the SUDs strategy in terms of water quantity/flooding issues. Later withdrew this objection after advice from the agent that the surface water will discharge to an existing sewer which is fully adopted by Scottish Water.

Note that foul drainage will go to the existing sewer and have no comment. In accordance with SPP, space for collection, segregation, storage and possibly treatment of waste should be allocated and consultation undertaken to determine space requirements. Have no comments on

5 flooding as no request on the issue has been made.

Scottish Natural Heritage: Are content with the report on badgers. One sett was found with six entrances, two of which were collapsed and four blocked. There were no recent signs of use and no tracks, possibly indicating an abandoned sett. While the sett is showing no signs of use, should there be a substantial lapse of time between the survey and the commencement of works, a further survey should be carried out. In terms of bats, note this was an initial scoping survey which identified the potential for roost sites and no specialist surveys were carried out. No direct field signs were found but potential cracks and crevices were noted. Evidence suggests possibly of summer roost sites. Not clear if the survey included the tops of buildings. Strongly recommend that dusk-til-dawn surveys are carried out around any buildings where work might impact on roost sites to ascertain the presence of maternity roosts. It is also possible the cracks and cervices will roost sites for hibernating bats. This will require a further survey where alterations may have adverse impacts. For bats and badgers, if they are found to be present, a comprehensive species protection plan should be submitted, especially important for bats as it is likely to be difficult to prove they are absent. The species plan should include guidance on avoiding damage or injury during work should consent and licences be granted.

Note: SNH have been consulted on the more recently submitted Bat and Birds survey and their comments are awaited.

Community Council: No reply

Scottish Water: No reply

Other Consultees:

Scottish Badgers: Having read the Ecology report, have no observations

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The key planning issues are whether the development is appropriate in terms of its visual impact and relationship to the existing townscape and landscape setting and features; whether the development would significantly impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of privacy and light loss, overshadowing and general loss of amenity and outlook and, if so, whether the benefits to be derived from the development would override those impacts; whether the development provides sufficient car parking within a layout which minimises potential congestion on the surrounding road network and; whether sufficient account has been taken of ecological interests.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Policy Principle

The site is allocated for redevelopment in the adopted Local Plan and Finalised Local Plan Amendment. This allocation can allow for a single use and, therefore, student accommodation is appropriate in this case, particularly since it would replace the existing accommodation. This site is also centrally located within the region, in a sustainable location in terms of its proximity to the university campus itself and connectivity to the main public transport network and, therefore, the development of the site is considered to comply with Structure Plan Policy C2.

6 The development would result in the loss of the gym. Policy C4 discourages the loss of such facilities. However, the applicants advise that discussions are in hand with a view to securing a replacement facility within the town, in consultation with Borders Sport and Leisure Trust and Borders College, for students and the public, though they cannot be more specific at this time. Given that such a facility would clearly be in the applicants’ interests to provide, and that it is not strictly a ‘community’ facility, it is not considered that further assurances are necessary.

The proposal involves an increase in student numbers to be accommodated on the site and, though the principle is not a concern and, indeed, is to be supported, the key questions are whether the development can be carried out in a manner which respects the context, neighbouring amenity and is supported by roads and service infrastructure.

Landscape and townscape setting

The site is high relative to Tweed Road from which it is most exposed to the east and, though the current development is also tall, it is generally successful because it has a strong landscape framework to filter direct views from outside the site. This development has been designed to do the same, despite the fact that it involves development around the existing buildings (with the exception of the gym). It safeguards trees to the south, maintaining screening from the wider area and will be set well down below them so being well screened from the Aclass road network. It would generally be cut into existing levels, with Pavilion 1 on the site of the gym, and Pavilions 2 and 3 on a higher level. The ‘gateway’ building would be cut into, but also work with, existing contours and there are no references to any retaining walls being required around the development. Existing trees and planting within the site are generally retained and, importantly, this includes the trees on the sloping ground to the east. However, no detailed information has been provided on the risk to the trees that remain, and stepped paths for example are very close to several. The level of tree removal is also not entirely consistent amongst the submitted plans. However, a planning condition to secure these details can be imposed.

The design statement clearly outlines the approach to the layout, principally a range of pavilion buildings linked by path networks with, to the north, a more substantial building providing the entrance to the site and set along the entrance road with car parking hidden from view behind it, alongside a range of formal gardens. The southern edge will provide a more ‘natural’ landscaped area. The largely open south-westerly portion then provides the opportunity for future expansion within the same layout arrangement. The overall design approach is carefully considered and negotiates the difficulty of working around the existing buildings very well, providing a well connected, legible campus layout that works well with the existing contours. In townscape terms, however, there is undoubtedly an argument for saying that, were it not for the need to retaining the existing buildings, the existing footprint of buildings within the centre of the site would provide the most appropriate opportunity for developing this site. Both Pavilion 1 and the ‘gateway’ building and indeed the remaining two pavilion buildings to a lesser degree, risk considerable exposure and their juxtaposition with existing buildings could be jarring. In addition to retaining existing planting, new planting is proposed on the eastern and northern boundaries and this will help enclose the site and provide visual separation between what are substantial buildings and the existing, relatively low level townscape. The net effect should be a development of institutional character set within its own enclosed grounds. Without planting to the boundaries, however, the proximity of Pavilion 1 and the ‘gateway’ building to neighbouring buildings would result in a very difficult visual relationship between two very different townscapes. With the planting, however, the effect should be comfortable when viewed from the surrounding area and the effect on the setting of the Category Cs Listed Lodge to the south-east should not be significantly adverse. The larger these trees are when first planted the better, and

7 a detailed landscape scheme will be expected to take this into account. The submitted landscape scheme and landscape masterplan (which contain some inconsistencies between them) need developed further to secure a high level of quality landscaping around and within the development.

Scale, design and materials

All four buildings are substantial in scale, when placed in the context of nearby suburban housing, and all have a strongly geometric form which has the potential to jar considerably with more traditional buildings. However, visual reference has to be made beyond the nearby houses towards the university campus itself and surrounding buildings including the sports stand and industrial/commercial buildings. This development will, from Tweed Road and beyond, be seen in this wider context. With the planting referred to above, and with the scale of the pavilion buildings broken by their T-plan layout, and the ‘gateway’ building’s apparent scale reduced by stepping/staggering the elevations, it is not considered that they will sit uncomfortably in this context. Probably the least appealing elevation, the strongly regimented rear elevation of the pavilion building, is either the least exposed or will have sufficient planting to filter views. Varied fenestration also helps all four buildings in terms of massing, as does a different approach to the ground floor entrances, and the entrance to the ‘gateway’ building is likely to assist a great deal in ‘humanising’ its scale so close to the entrance road. The long straight roof line of this building should not be visually read in its full elevation form.

Materials are generally agreeable in this context, albeit colours and surface finishes need explored more fully with the benefit of samples.

Neighbouring amenity

No communal entertainment facilities are proposed, properties will be managed and supervised on a 24 hour basis and students will be subject to usual disciplinary codes and procedures. On this basis, it is not considered that the increased number of students, nor the closer proximity of the development to boundaries, should be sufficient cause for concern, or would require particular controls on noise levels.

The Council’s guidance on householder development is most relevant to householder developments but its general principles as regards privacy, light and overshadowing are applicable to any development. They can, however, only be used as a guide and the significance of any effects relies on individual interpretation and judgement. The following matters are relevant to considering direct effects on neighbouring amenity. These are considered against Pavilion 1 and the ‘gateway’ building, since the other two buildings should not have any direct effects.

Privacy

Our SPG applies a general “18 metre rule” between principal rooms, though this will need to be reduced depending on angles between windows, and increased depending on height variations (generally, a variation of one metre in height requires a separation distance of an additional two metres). In terms of Pavilion 1, the orientation of the windows, positioning of the building and, in particular, the use of angled window bays on the easterly elevation, suggests that this building will not signficantly affect neighbouring properties in terms of privacy.

The ‘gateway’ building would, however, likely result in loss of privacy to all its facing neighbours

8 to the north. Due to a combination of existing screening and angles, this would likely be most apparent for properties 13-20 on the terrace mainly as a result of 3rd and 4th floor overlooking, but also from the second floor upwards on the central lounge projection. Depending on the types of planting currently between them (i.e. seasonal changes to screening potential), the development may also affect further property to the west in these regards.

Screening on this boundary and within the site will be able to mitigate any impacts in these regards, though their effectiveness will depend on the species choice, density and positioning, as will their height when first planted. The applicants have already changed the entrance design to reduce the effect of overlooking and have further offered to fit obscure glazing to the windows within it (the lounge windows) and this will be a further benefit. A condition requiring details of the planting, and requiring semi-mature specimens where possible, is also recommended.

Daylight

Our SPG suggests that, within a 45 degree ‘plane of view’ or ‘line of sight’ from the middle of the cill of a window, light will be obstructed if a 25 degree line taken from the centre of that window would be obstructed by the height of the proposed building. Again, this guide cannot be applied rigidly, as whether a room would have enough access to daylight is a matter of interpretation.

There will likely be an encroachment onto the nearby Lodge’s access to daylight via its south- westerly windows, however, the effect could be categorised as being moderate, and account must be made of its unaffected windows to the remaining elevations.

In terms of the ‘gateway’ building, any effects will vary between properties to the north. Properties to the west of the facing terrace should not be affected. While properties at the eastern end of the terrace (nos 9-12) may experience obstruction to light, the effect will be minor and will further reduced in significance by the open aspect still largely available to these properties. Further into the terrace, the potential for the building to affect light seems to materialise only for those properties more directly facing the entrance projection in the centre, which is a relatively small element of the building. The effect will only relate to ground floor properties. The windows affected relate to living rooms with no other source of light, and are deep set openings.

Sunlight/Overshadowing

In the absence of applying detailed information on the relative elevation of the sun at different times of the day and year to this development site, the potential for overshadowing to occur can only ever be estimated. In any case, making a judgement on the resulting information is prone to a great deal of interpretation since there is the potential for a range of impacts to occur at different times of the day and at different times of the year. The “25 degree line” approach taken with respect to daylight is a useful rule of thumb for estimating the potential for effects on annual average levels of sunlight. However, the orientation of the window, position of the proposed building, and the length of time over which the effect occurs also have to be considered as does the potential for windows to be already overshadowed by existing buildings and planting.

In this case, Pavilion 1 is likely to affect the south-westerly facing windows of the adjacent Lodge in the later part of the day, representing a relatively small proportion of the availability of daily sun to the property as a whole.

The ‘gateway’ building has the potential to affect the ground floor facing windows of the terrace

9 to the north only, with upper floors, and properties further west, likely to be not significantly affected. The effects to these windows will vary between buildings, with those at the eastern end not likely to experience any effect (on average) until the afternoon and those further west likely to experience overshadowing earlier but across windows that are likely overshadowed for part of the day by the existing projecting stairwells and trees.

General amenity/outlook

Obstruction to, or loss of, view is not a material planning consideration unless it relates to a view of particular public significance, which is not the case here. However, the relationship of a development to existing buildings in terms of its potential to be overbearing or dominant when viewed from neighbouring properties is a material planning consideration.

In this case, Pavilion 1 will have a substantial presence when viewed from the neighbouring Lodge, but its impact must be considered in relative terms given that it will directly replace an existing building. The proposal would be tapered further away and the Lodge will also retain its outlook on its remaining elevations. The effect will be negative given the scale of the building and the position of its facing elevation, but its significance will be mitigated by these factors, as well as the planting proposed on the boundary.

In terms of the ‘gateway’ building, this would directly face the south-facing, front elevation of the terrace opposite, within which all windows lead to habitable rooms (all living rooms in the case of nos 13-20). These relate to flats occupied by elderly persons who will benefit from the largely open aspect in front of them, with the existing student buildings set well into the site. This amenity is arguably ‘borrowed’. It nonetheless exists and needs to be accounted for. The proposed development wouldhave a significant effect on the outlook from these properties to the extent that it would be considerably dominant when viewed from them. Any screen planting used on the boundaries would likely add to the feeling of visual enclosure. It is recognised that the applicants could plant along this boundary at any time, albeit this in itself is not a concern, but the combination of planting with the scale and proximity of the building is. The applicants have, prior to submitting the application, undertaken steps to reduce the effect of this building, including moving it further west, changing the entrance design and providing the planting proposals. They have also recently offered to reduce the ground levels further (this can be explored via planning condition, and a condition could also require pegging out on site to further explore any opportunity to move the building further from the north, even if only marginally further). However, properly overcoming the impact of this development would require that the building be moved away from this boundary, at least so that its principal elevation is not directly facing the terrace. Given their operational/financial constraints (explained below), the applicants cannot reduce any further the potential for this development to affect neighbouring amenity. Ultimately, it is this impact on general amenity/outlook that is of most concern. The terraced properties to the north willexperience a significantly high level of visual intrusion as a result of the proposed building by virtue of its scale, position and proximity to their facing, habitable room windows.

Operational constraints and economic considerations

The applicants have been clear that this development site has particular operational constraints in that there is a need to keep the existing accommodation blocks until their replacements are provided. This need is effectively down to the very tight financial arrangements which the applicants have advised is in place for this development. Demolishing the existing buildings, in whole or in a phased format, and building on or near the same footprints would not seem to be

10 an option, albeit the applicants appear to have explored various options related to the position of the 'gateway' building, including moving it further south (but the resulting need to relocate the existing heating plant has costs and uncertain risks that apparently cannot be absorbed). The applicants have made every effort to account for this department’s concerns regarding the impact of this development but have not been able to agree the most critical aspect – to move the building further away from neighbours – because it is not possible to do so as a result of the above constraints. The land to the west is owned by the applicants but they have been direct enough to state that it is to be sold on the open market to help finance the cost of this development.

Other factors to be considered are the economic and social benefits to be derived from such a major investment in higher educational facilities in the town, particularly during the current economic climate. The applicants have stated this would be the single largest investment ever made in their Galashiels campus. It would seem quite realistic to consider that, if the development is not judged favourably as it currently stands, such major investment (which clearly has its benefits not just to Heriot Watt, but spin-offs for the wider economy of the town) will not happen. This is clearly a very significant material consideration which must be weighed against the effects of the development on nearby properties.

Access and parking

The existing access road will be retained and upgraded to adoptable standards. The original plan included proposals for 50 car parking spaces. The site has good links to the main road network and bus stops, is in close proximity to the university itself, a high number of cycle spaces are proposed and good pedestrian links are provided within it. However, the Director of Technical Services' concerns regarding the number of parking spaces, and the distribution of them, have resulted in a proposed increase in number of 11 additional spaces. The applicants have not changed the distribution of parking areas, and consider that the current arrangement of two parking areas will benefit from security (the large car park is next to the main gateway building); will reduce the potential for students to use their car on short trips; and will respect the landscape setting proposed for the development as a whole. The DTS’s comments on the revised parking allocation and applicants’ response are awaited. Members will be updated at the committee meeting of any response received. The applicants are also content to accept a condition requiring some improvements to off-site pedestrian links to the nearby bus stop and university campus parking area. A condition will be required to ensure that phasing of parking and cycle spaces, as well as road improvements and pathways, are tied to the occupancy of the buildings.

Services and contributions

Mains connections for water, foul and surface water drainage are proposed and, following SEPA’s consideration of the latter proposal to connect to the mains, a condition need only secure that connections are granted by Scottish Water.

As the development is for students, no contributions are required to the Waverley line or affordable housing, though a condition is necessary to ensure they are occupied for such purposes.

The need for dedicated waste collection, segregation and storage facilities, as noted by SEPA will (depending on the categorisation of the units in the Building Standards) require dedicated bin storage areas. The matter is not likely to have any great bearing on the layout of the site or

11 its planning merits, given the level of accommodation already on site, and an informative note is added. Any changes to the layout that may result will, however, require further consideration should they arise.

Contaminated Land

It is understood that the site has previously been a gravel pit and potentially contaminative. At the time of writing, the Environmental Health service has considered a report on the matter though agreement has yet to be reached. A standardised condition is applied, though it is clear the applicants are already seeking to address any concerns.

Energy efficiency

The applicants propose to achieve improved U values, maximise use of natural ventilation, and strive to achieve greater air tightness performance and use condensing boilers to achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions, according to their supporting report. A standard condition is imposed, as guided by our SPG, to achieve confirmation on final proposed reductions in this regard (though the 15% target quoted by our SPG is no longer quoted by Scottish Planning Policy and will shortly be superseded by new Building Standards).

Ecology

There are no natural heritage designations. A survey of badger activity has discovered a disused set in the south-east corner with no signs of recent use and both SNH and our ecology officer are content. The sett is not directly affected by the development so any lapse of time between the survey and work starting can be noted in an advisory note and any rechecking survey can inform the need or otherwise for a licence and mitigation measures.

A bat survey submitted during the processing of the application has found evidence of a bat roost within the existing development, albeit one habited by a ubiquitous species and so its loss is not considered to affect its Favourable Conservation Status. Our ecology officer is satisfied with its findings, and recommends that a copy of the Scottish Government Licence that is required be provided before work starts. SNH have been consulted on the survey and their response is currently awaited.

A survey also suggests no evidence of nesting birds, though trees will provide suitable nesting areas. A recommendation by our ecology officer that no work starts during the bird breeding season, unless with written permission (and evidence of no risk to breeding birds) is addressed by way of a planning condition. Opportunities to enhance the local habitat network seem capable of being addressed by suitable planting within the landscape plan, in this particular development case.

Conclusion

This development has the potential to significantly affect the amenity of neighbouring properties located directly to the north of the proposed ‘gateway’ building as a result of significant visual intrusion and harm to general outlook. Harm to privacy can potentially be overcome by planting, and loss of light and overshadowing may be considered to be relatively insignificant. The density of planting required along the boundary to help to screen the development to reduce privacy intrusion will likely add to the feeling of dominance and enclosure within these residential properties. Because these properties are occupied as elderly persons’ flats, the

12 effect of the loss of outlook and overbearing nature of the development will increase the harm that would result.

However, such matters have to be balanced with the economic and social benefits of the development, which would involve a major investment in higher education in Galashiels. A particular constraint is the need to retain the existing accommodation blocks until the new development is available. This particular factor has severely limited the extent to which the applicants have been able to accommodate concerns regarding neighbouring amenity albeit they have, in as far as they have been able to, been very responsive to the concerns that have been raised. It is considered that, while the impact will be potentially significantly harmful, the considerable benefits to be derived from the improved university infrastructure, in addition to the mitigation measures proposed (planting, obscure glazing, lowered ground level), suggest to this department that the balance should be struck in favour of the development

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

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

2. Before development commences, a tree and planting protection plan, which identifies the Root Protection Areas (in accordance with BS5837) of all trees and planting within fifteen metres of any part of the development, shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority. The plan shall identify those trees and planting proposed for removal and those proposed to be retained. It shall specify measures designed to safeguard the trees and planting proposed for retention during the construction works. Once approved, the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the protection plan and only those trees and planting agreed for removal shall be so removed. Reason: Trees and planting within the site are important features which will help integrate the development with its context, and further information is required by way of clarification of the trees and planting to be removed and the risks to those proposed to be retained.

3. A sample of all materials to be used on all exterior surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before development commences. This shall include all roofing, wall render, windows and doors and external cladding materials, and include external colours. Reason: The materials to be used require further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting

4. The means of water supply, foul and surface water drainage shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before the development commences Reason: Further information is required to ensure the development can be adequately serviced.

5. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of soft

13 landscaping works, which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall include:

i. location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas, based on the landscaping scheme and masterplan submitted with the application. This shall, in particular, include screen planting on the northern and eastern boundaries and planting designed to enhance local wildlife habitats

ii. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density and, in particular, the planting on the northern and western boundaries shall be expected to be of the maximum size capable of being planted.

iii. 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, to reduce effects on neighbouring amenity and to improve local wildlife habitat networks

6. Prior to development commencing on the ‘gateway’ building, a revised floor level(s) shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority and, once approved, the development shall be carried out only in accordance with the revised level(s) Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on neighbouring amenity

7. Prior to development commencing on the ‘gateway’ building, the building’s footprint shall be pegged out on site in accordance with the approved plans for the on-site inspection of the Planning Authority. Unless evidence is produced that operational or technical constraints would prevent the building from being positioned any further south, the building shall be repositioned further south in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Authority to be confirmed during the on-site inspection. Development may then commence only with the written consent of the Planning Authority Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on neighbouring amenity

8. Drawing 3655 G (PL) 100 B shall relate to parking layout/numbers only. Reason: To ensure the development is carried out consistently in accordance with the approved drawings while providing for the additional parking spaces proposed in the revised drawing

9. Prior to development commencing, specifications for upgrading the roadway within the site; pathways, parking areas and cycle spaces; and, for off-site improvements to the public road/pathway network, and a phasing programme for the same, shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority. Once approved, the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved specifications and approved plans (including Drawing 3655 G(PL) 100 B for parking areas) and phasing scheme Reason: To ensure the development is serviced in a manner which provides adequate car, pedestrian and cycle facilities and safeguards road safety

10. No development shall commence until evidence has been submitted to the Planning Authority that a European Protected Species licence has been granted by the Scottish Government for the disturbance/removal of the bat roost(s) within the site. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of the Licence

14 Reason: To account for the effect of the development on a European Protected Species.

11. No development shall be carried out on site during the bird breeding season (March – August) unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard potential bird breeding habitats

12. All lounge windows in the central entrance projection on the northern elevation of the ‘gateway’ building shall be fitted with obscure glazing to a specification first agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. The building shall not be occupied until the obscure glazing is fitted in accordance with the specification and, once fitted, it shall not be removed or altered without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on neighbouring amenity

13. Details of all proposed means of enclosure, walls, fences and gates shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before work on the site is commenced. Reason: To enable the proper effective assimilation of the development into its wider surroundings.

14. Details of a survey and investigation of the ground conditions of the site, sufficient to identify the nature and extent of any contamination, together with a schedule of the methods by which it is proposed to neutralise, seal or remove the contamination substances, including any necessary validation and monitoring measures, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before development commences. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved remediation, validation and monitoring measures, where required. Reason: To ensure that the site is made safe before works commence.

15. No residential unit within the development shall be used as a person’s sole or main residence except where that person is registered as a full-time student throughout the period of their occupancy. Reason: To comply with development plan policies related to the provision of developer contributions.

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. Reason: To ensure the development minimises any environmental impact

Information for the applicant

1. Provision for waste collection, segregation, storage and possibly treatment should be discussed with the Council’s waste recycling team 2. A rechecking survey for badgers, should there be significant time lapse between the issuing of planning consent and works commencing on site, is recommended

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

15 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 Carlos Clarke Principal Planning Officer

16 17 Item No. 9(i) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13th SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00801/FUL & 10/00800/LBC

OFFICER: J Hiscox WARD: Mid Berwickshire PROPOSAL: Installation of 3 no. CCTV cameras, laying of hard surface and erection of gates SITE: 6 Murray Street, Duns APPLICANT: Richard Finnie AGENT: Aitken Turnbull (Duns)

SITE DESCRIPTION:

The site is situated within the town of Duns, close to the town centre and within the historic core of the settlement. Murray Street leads in a south-easterly direction from the main Market Square and is a pedestrianised/shared surface street leading towards the south-east part of the town. It is a much used thoroughfare and includes several shops/services, dwellings and other compatible town centre uses.

6 Murray Street is a Category C(S) Listed Building with no frontage onto Murray Street itself. It adjoins 8 and 10 Murray Street to the rear and fronts onto a short lane servicing the rear of properties on Murray Street and Market Square, although this lane also serves as the principal access to more than one household.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:

The report relates jointly to applications for Listed Building Consent and planning permission. There are three components to the development.

The first is a proposal to retain an area of paved surfacing installed close to the rear entrance door to the applicant’s dwelling, which serves as a hardstanding/parking area.

The second is a proposal to retain three CCTV cameras installed on the applicant’s property and operating for the purposes of private security.

The third is a proposal to erect a pair of metal gates to enclose an area of ground belonging to the applicant and used as a yard area for vehicles, although it is understood that this area is partially used as a domestic space and partially for the parking of vehicles used for the applicant’s business (building work).

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 It should be noted that the first and second of these developments have been the subject of negotiations with the Planning Enforcement Service, leading to the application to retain them. The third proposal has not taken place.

PLANNING HISTORY:

09/01642/LBC & 09/001643/FUL – Erection of a boundary wall. Approved and implemented. This wall forms part of the enclosure to the area where, at the opposite end, the metal gates are proposed.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY:

A total of 8 letters of objection have been submitted in relation to this proposal. A summary of the issues of relevance raised would be as follows:

x inappropriate visual impact of hardsurfaced area, in relation to conservation setting x hardsurfaced area should not be used as a parking space, as it restricts passing in the narrow lane of vehicles used by occupiers of properties sharing the lane x hardsurfacing has occurred on land outwith the ownership of the applicant x concern that one camera (2) may adversely effect privacy of nearby occupier x concern relating to privacy of users of the lane, which serves as an access to Camilla Cottage, a private residence x one CCTV camera erected on property not owned by applicant x lack of information relating to the areas of vision of the CCTV cameras x CCTV cameras unlikely to have fixed fields of vision and may adjust by panning, tilting and zooming x CCTV cameras adversely affecting privacy of householders within private garden areas x CCTV cameras prejudicing security at times of delivery to shop

APPLICANTS’ SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

The applicant has submitted various letters in response to the issues raised in objection to the applications. These may be viewed in full on public access, but perhaps most relevant to the concerns of the objectors is the assertion that the CCTV cameras are utilised not to observe the private activities of nearby residents or users of the lane, but to preserve security in the area of vision.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees:

Director of Planning and Economic Development – Archaeologist: No archaeological implications.

Director of Planning and Economic Development – Heritage and Design Officer: No objections.

Director of Planning and Technical Services: - No objections.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Statutory Consultees:

Duns Community Council: Objects to the application on the following grounds:

x overprovision of CCTV cameras in this area x potential privacy issues for neighbours x objects to erection of gates if these cause access problems

Other Consultees

None received.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018:

Policy N17 – Listed Buildings Policy N18 – Development Affecting Conservation Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan: September 2008:

Policy G1 – Quality Standards in New Development Policy NE1 – Listed Buildings Policy BE4 – Conservation Areas Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

None to list.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

x impact of the development on the conservation setting x impact of the development on residential amenity

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Impact on conservation setting:

The general locality within which the works are proposed are situated in a narrow, no-through lane. The lane is not closed to the public and is utilised to reach the principal residential access to at least three properties and the service entrance to at least one shop.

However, as is reflected in the consultation response of the Council’s conservation specialist, the impact on the conservation setting is minimised due to the generally limited relationship and intervisibility with the principal realm of the public, which includes Murray Street but does not include this lane.

The area of hardsurfacing is similar to the surface used in the enhancement of Murray Street and does not prejudice the setting of the listed building adjacent to which it is erected, or the wider conservation setting. The CCTV cameras are small, relatively unobtrusive and sited appropriately. The proposed gates are similar to two precedents immediately adjacent.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 For these reasons, the proposals would accord with development plan policy relating to protection of the conservation area.

Impact on amenity and privacy:

The hardsurfacing of the area adjacent to the applicant’s dwelling is unlikely to create any adverse effect that did not already exist. If the applicant was legally entitled to utilise the area for parking prior to the hardsurfacing the situation has not changed since its undertaking. The narrowness of the lane is a matter of fact but this has not altered as a result of the works taking place.

The installation of the gates would not prejudice amenity or privacy – this would have minimal effect on the surrounding locality and would not prejudice any rights of access.

The fields of vision of the CCTV cameras have been observed by the planning department. The cameras are understood to have a fixed range that can only be adjusted manually (i.e. not remotely) once set up. At the time of the case officer site visit the fields were inspected and considered not to prejudice the private amenity of any party by any significant amount. This is adequate to give comfort that in planning terms, at least, the CCTV cameras would be acceptable. The cameras observe a private yard area, the lane and immediate area outside the applicant’s property. None of the fields of vision have been selected to observe the private internal or external areas of land of any party other than that of the applicant. The lane is monitored by the cameras, and with this area generally seen by, and available for use by the public there is no reason why the CCTV would monitor anything other than the areas already visible to the public.

However, the user of the CCTV must accord by a code of conduct operated by a separate body, the Information Commissioners’ Office, an independent body established by the UK Government to address matters such as data protection and the upholding of information rights in the public interest. If allegations were to be made that the images recorded were inappropriate this would be reported to that office and not become primarily a planning matter.

CONCLUSION:

The proposals have given rise to a significant amount of interest from the public and community, leading to a number of objections. The primary concern within the objections is clearly that of the potential for the CCTV cameras to adversely affect private amenity, although other concerns are listed.

However, the evidence available to the planning department, and the information contained within the applications demonstrates that none of the three components of the development would prejudice private amenity or the conservation setting close by. Notwithstanding the potentially separate issue of land or property ownership (which is a civil or legal matter to be addressed between private parties), the hardstanding and CCTV devices have been sited reasonably and the gates would be compatible with their immediate setting.

For these reasons, it is recommended that both planning permission and Listed Building Consent be granted.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS:

I recommend that the applications are approved subject to the following conditions:

10/00801/FUL:

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

2 The three CCTV cameras shall not be directed so that their fields of vision would extend beyond the lane or would include any private property not within the applicant’s control. Reason: to ensure that the private amenity of adjoining occupiers and users of property remains unprejudiced.

3 Within one month of their installation, the new gates shall be painted in a colour that shall first have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter so retained unless further written consent is given by the planning authority for a colour change. Reason: to ensure that the gates are compatible with the local conservation setting.

Informatives:

1 The applicant is advised that the Information Commissioner’s Office, or any body engaged to supersede that body by the UK Government, is the monitoring body in cases where the appropriateness of images recorded by CCTV may be considered. It is incumbent upon the applicant or any successor in title to the subject property to ensure that all requirements of any legislation, regulations or codes of conduct operated by that body are complied with.

10/00800/LBC:

2 Within one month of their installation, the new gates shall be painted in a colour that shall first have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter so retained unless further written consent is given by the planning authority for a colour change. Reason: to ensure that the gates are compatible with the local conservation setting.

Informative:

1 The developer’s attention is drawn to the separate, but related planning permission ref. 10/00801/FUL, which contains conditions relating to matters

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 over and above those referred to in this decision notice. It is incumbent upon the developer to ensure that the requirements of any such conditions have been met.

Approved by Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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 6 Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Item No. 9(j) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION AND CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBERS: 10/00989/CON & 10/00990/FUL OFFICER: Craig Miller WARD: Tweeddale West PROPOSAL: Erection of two dwellinghouses with integral garages SITE: Workshop, Gibson Place, Peebles APPLICANT: Border Homes & Properties Ltd AGENT: Sinclair Hay Sutherland Partnership

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located and accessed from the end of Gibson Place in the Old Town part of Peebles Conservation Area. Graham Street runs down the western edge of the site which contains four single storey workshops and sheds. These buildings are of brick, tin and timber construction and are currently used as workshops. An informal pedestrian access runs from Graham Street through the site into Gibson Place. All surrounding buildings are residential, consisting of 1¾ and 2 storey dwellinghouses in semi-detached and terraced form. The houses immediately adjoining the site in Gibson Place currently park in their driveways against walls which separate them from the site.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposal involves an application for Conservation Area Consent to demolish the buildings on the site. Overhead lines will be diverted and Gibson Place will be extended through the site to join up with Graham Street, a 6m radius on the northern corner and a shorter radius on the southern corner. The road will match the 5.5m width and pavements will be extended from Gibson Place, involving removal of the roadside walls.

Two detached dwellinghouses will be positioned on the cleared site, one on each side of the extended Gibson Place. The houses will be 1¾ storey design with Welsh Slate roofs, rendered walls, artificial stone features/quoins, white painted timber windows and doors with fanlights and canopies. Each house will have two storey projections towards the road containing single garages on the ground floor with bedrooms above.

The houses will be slightly set back from the building line in Gibson Place to accommodate parking for two cars per plot. This will also involve the removal of two walls to allow for the continuation of footpaths. The side gardens facing onto Graham Street will be fenced with 2m high screen fencing.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 PLANNING HISTORY

Previous applications for full planning permission and Conservation Area Consent were refused on this site in December 2009 when the proposal was for three dwellinghouses – one north of Gibson Place and a pair of semi-detached houses to the south. The main reason for refusal stated:

“The proposal would be contrary to Policies N18 and N20 of the Scottish Borders Structure Plan and G1, G7, BE4 and H2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in that the proposal represents inappropriate siting, design and overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of the amenity and character of surrounding residential properties and Peebles Conservation Area.”

The associated Conservation Area Consent was also refused for the reason that no satisfactory plans had been submitted for redevelopment, rather than the buildings being necessarily worthy of retention.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2018

Policy N18 – Development affecting Conservation Areas Policy N19 – Demolition of Buildings in Conservation Areas Policy N20 – Design Policy H5 – Brownfield Development Policy H9 – Affordable and Special Needs Housing

Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 (Local Plan Amendment 2010)

Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development Policy G2 – Contaminated Land Policy G5 – Developer Contributions Policy G7 – Infill Development Policy BE2 – Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments Policy BE4 – Conservation Areas Policy ED5 – Town Centres Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy Inf4 – Parking Provisions and Standards

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

“Householder Guidance” SPG “Placemaking and Design” SPG

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

10/00990/FUL

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services: Both Graham Street and Gibson Place are presently cul-de-sacs with no turning provision resulting in lengthy reversing manoeuvres. This proposal links the streets and resolves the issue, also being in line

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 with current Government guidance on linkage. No objections subject to Roads Construction Consent for the new link.

Environmental Health: The land is potentially contaminative as a former Smithy. Permission should only be granted on the basis of site investigation and risk assessment, agreed by the Council. Any remediation should then be required by planning condition.

Director of Education and Lifelong Learning: Developer contributions of £8,383 and £1,181 per dwelling are required for Kingsland Primary School and Peebles High School. Explanations are given relating to the capacity justification for both contributions. Contributions should be paid upon receipt of detailed planning permission but can be phased to an agreed schedule.

Statutory Consultees

Peebles and District Community Council: No objections but concerned at the proposed road linkage and note the residents objections and the resultant loss of privacy. There could also be road safety issues for children. Prefer no vehicular through route and the continuation of the pedestrian through route.

Other Consultees

Peebles Civic Society: No objections.

10/00989/CON

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Ecology Officer: As a precaution, advisable that any demolition only carried out outwith the breeding birds season (March – August).

Council Archaeologist: The comments made on the previous application still apply. The buildings are an important class of buildings in the social and economic history of Peebles and should be recorded prior to demolition. The site also is likely to form part of the backlands of the Old Town and there should, therefore, be conditions attached to record the building and agree an archaeological programme and watching brief. This could be done by the applicant with the submission of appropriate detailed information.

Statutory Consultees

Other Consultees

Peebles Civic Society: No objections but a condition of consent should ensure the existing blacksmith’s workshop is fully photographed by Historic Scotland or RCAHMS. It is one of the last remaining ones in the Borders and retains many original features.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

There have been five objections to the planning application and one general comment on the following grounds:

x The linking of the two roads is not necessary as it will create a rat run. x Parking is restricted, congested and will be detrimentally affected by the new through road. x Graham Street is too narrow for passing traffic. x Increased risk of accidents. x Both streets have bad exits. x There is a boundary wall in the ownership of a neighbour which requires separate legal permission which has not yet been given.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The main determining issues with these applications are whether the loss of the existing buildings are acceptable in relation to the impacts on the Conservation Area and whether suitable replacement plans have now been submitted which comply with Development Plan Policies on new development within Conservation Areas. Particular attention should be paid to the design and siting of the replacement buildings, their relationship with the buildings and street scene and the traffic/road safety issues resulting from the proposed link between Graham Street and Gibson Place.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Planning policy

The site lies within the settlement boundary of Peebles and within the designated Conservation Area. It consequently represents a suitable infill opportunity under Policy G7, provided the buildings that are being removed do not enhance the amenity of the Conservation Area and that the new buildings are a suitable replacement in terms of siting and design.

There are four single storey sheds on site at present which possess some interest in terms of the industrial past of the site and the nature of trade. There is some reflection of this in the response from the Archaeologist. Nevertheless, the dilapidated state of the brick and tin buildings is not in any doubt and there is no expectation that the buildings should remain nor that they are capable of being converted.

Policies N19 and BE4 allow for buildings to be demolished in such circumstances where the existing buildings are doing little to enhance the character of the Conservation Area – as is the case here. However, both policies are not complied with if there are no associated acceptable proposals for the redevelopment of the site. The previously submitted application for three dwellinghouses on the site did not convince the Department in this respect and the application was refused through delegated powers, principally on grounds of overdevelopment which also impacted on the siting and design.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 Rather than applying for a review of the decision, the applicant discussed the reasons for refusal with the Department and adjusted the application to two single detached dwellinghouses. Various other adjustments have been made including:

x The reduction in set-back on the south side of Gibson Place. x The reduction in height from 2½ to 1½ storey on the south side. x The consequent removal of flat roofed main portions of the roof and dormers. x Reduction in amount of artificial stone. x Plainer window designs. x House plan narrowed on south side.

Overall and as discussed below, the proposals have now been adjusted and reduced to an extent that the Department considers the proposals represent a suitable development of an infill site within the Conservation Area and in compliance with Policies N18, N19, G7 and BE4. Any approval would need to be subject to notification of the Conservation Area Consent application to Historic Scotland and to conditions ensuring that the buildings are recorded before demolition and that no demolition occurs until contracts have been let for the replacement development.

Design

Development Plan Policies N20 and G1 are supplemented by the recent “Design and Placemaking” SPG. The development is not replacing any buildings of intrinsic architectural merit although there is historic interest in their industrial past. Nevertheless, any replacements will need to respect the surrounding buildings which are generally whinstone 1¾ or two storey terraced and semi-detached dwellinghouses. There are the occasional more modern developments in the surrounding streets and some render, together with a variety of window replacements.

The original designs were considered inappropriate, especially as the semi-detached dwellinghouse introduced a more alien form to the immediate street scene, raising the eaves and especially ridge lines above the nearest properties in Gibson Place to which it most closely related. Together with the flat bay dormers, flat section of roof and depth of house, it was not considered that the original design represented an appropriate replacement within the Conservation Area.

The new proposals have been reduced and amended as referred to above and have resulted in eaves and ridge lines almost identical to the adjoining houses in Gibson Place. The windows have also been simplified to one third/two third pattern and proposed in white painted timber. The houses will also be provided with welsh slate roofs, black rainwater goods, rendered walls and artificial stone quoins, window and door surrounds. The south facing projection elevation of the house to the north will also be clad with artificial stone. The front door and garage doors are moulded timber with fanlights and astragals and a small canopy.

Whilst the dwellinghouses do contain a two storey projection towards the road with set-backs to accommodate the garages, this indented form still allows a focal point and visual termination of the Gibson Place and Graham Street junction, whilst allowing the new road to curve around each corner. The two storey projections improve the relationship with the building line and retain some sense of enclosure.

Nevertheless, there are still elements of the design that require further consideration as the external walling and surround materials would not blend well with the natural

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 stone surroundings. Reliance on render and artificial stone are not appropriate unless the render is an appropriately coloured wet dash and natural stone features are proposed. Nor do the windows quite demonstrate the verticality or symmetrical paired pattern of the houses in Gibson Place, with stone mullions being required for the paired windows and the upper floor front bedroom windows paired together. The eaves would also be improved if more ornate on the dormer and projection gables.

However, it is considered that the overall siting and design of the houses is acceptable subject to adjustment, through conditions, of the elements referred to above.

Residential Amenity

The proposals would also need to comply with Policies G7, H2 and the “Privacy and Sunlight” SPG in terms of impacts on neighbouring residential amenity. Although there have been no objections submitted in this respect, the previous scheme with its increased plan depth may have caused some daylight problems to the adjoining dwellinghouse on the south side of Gibson Place. However, the reductions have now resolved this issue and the amount of projection beyond the rear of the houses in Gibson Place will not exceed the daylighting angles included in the SPG.

There is likely to be greater impact on the dwellinghouses on Graham Street which face the site. The agent has submitted a cross section which demonstrates that the worst affected habitable room windows on the ground floor in Graham Street will still be able to receive the required amount of daylight by reason of the ridge line of the new dwellinghouse and its sloping roof being with 0.29% of the 25q maximum rule contained in the SPG.

The only other issue relates to the proximity of the dining room windows facing the ground floor windows in Graham Street. This distance varies from just under 10 to 12 metres. Normally, the window to window minimum is 18 metres but in this particular case, the windows are separated by a public street and are of a distance apart similar to the windows of the existing houses in Graham Street. Given the denser surroundings and existing situation, there is no justification for requiring alterations to the windows or screen fencing.

Access and parking

The proposals should comply with Policy G7 in relation to adequate access and parking. The approach taken with the development is to connect up Gibson Place with Graham Street and this has led to the objections received from the local residents. There is concern over through traffic, impact on existing parking, the narrowness of the streets and the junctions with other roads.

Whilst there would have been an alternative approach that the developer could also have taken without the vehicular link, the proposals have the backing of the Director of Technical Services who believes that there are more advantages to road safety than disadvantages. He cites the difficult existing reversing manoeuvres down both streets as there are no turning facilities, resulting in dangerous reversing onto other streets. He also quotes the guidance from the latest Government publication on “Designing Streets” which fully encourages such linkages.

There is no doubt that the proposal will have some impact on existing parking, pushing the cars that park at the end of Gibson Place at present onto the street. However, both that street and Graham Street are still wide enough to allow parked

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 cars to remain on street whilst allowing a single line of traffic past. Furthermore, it is not a persuasive argument that any traffic would specifically seek to negotiate Gibson Place then Graham Street as a quicker and more direct alternative than Young Street and St Andrews Road.

One of the residents in Gibson Place adjoining the site has claimed ownership of the wall which abuts the site and is proposed to be removed to allow the pavement to be linked with that in Gibson Place. The applicant claims the wall is in his ownership. This remains a private civil matter to be debated between the parties although, as the footpaths will need to be linked up on both sides before the dwellinghouses are occupied (and controlled by condition), a resolution is to be advised between the parties before the development is carried out. The granting of planning permission does not bestow any additional rights of ownership on the applicant if those rights do not exist at present.

On balance and as the Director of Technical Services supports the proposals, it is accepted that the proposed linkage of Gibson Place and Graham Street has traffic movement and road safety advantages which outweigh the disadvantages and that, consequently, the proposals would comply with the relevant part of Policy G7.

Contamination

As the site has had previous smithy and other workshop uses, the Environmental Health Officer has requested a condition to be imposed requiring a desk and site investigation plus a remedial strategy if required. Although the Engineers have subsequently submitted the desk assessment which has been considered, the Environmental Health Officer still requires the original condition to be imposed.

Natural Heritage

The Ecology Officer considers that there may be the possibility of breeding birds within the buildings to be demolished. As a precaution, he advises that demolition should be carried out outwith the breeding bird season (March – August). This can be attached as an Applicant Informative.

Developer Contributions

In line with Local Plan Policy G5, the development requires to make contributions to both affordable housing and Education. These figures amount to £5,750 for the former and £19,128 for the latter (including Peebles High School and Kingsland Primary School).

The Council’s Development Negotiator has met with the applicant, his solicitor and architect. They contend that the contribution liability could not feasibly be factored into the development appraisal for this proposed development. They argued that the development costs attributable to this site and resulting from two previously unsuccessful planning submissions have significantly increased costs and reduced margins.

However, they also contended that mitigating against a potential reduced ability to settle contributions, was the benefit to the local area in terms of developing a derelict former smiddy in addition to providing an enhanced traffic flow solution in an area of recognised traffic management challenges. The latter point, they argue, has been supported and endorsed by Technical Services. Consequently, an “open book” analysis has been progressed.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Although, at the time of writing, this process has yet to be completely concluded, evidence has to date been supplied that would indicate full liability settlement would not be feasible. The opportunities to absorb development costs on a small scale development are significantly reduced relative to a larger scale equivalent. It would appear at this juncture that even the sympathetic phasing of contribution liability will not sufficiently assist with project viability.

Once the final supporting evidence has been supplied, and a specific margin identified that can reasonably be accommodated for contribution settlement, the Development Negotiator will assess the appropriate level of contribution for the development.

Members are therefore invited to consider whether the perceived benefits of accepting a reduced contribution settlement to facilitate this development would outweigh a deficit in terms of contribution liability. If this principle is agreed, the exact level of contribution will be determined by the Development Negotiator.

CONCLUSION

The proposal complies with Development Plan Policies and Supplementary Planning Guidance on the demolition of buildings within the Conservation Area and replacement with suitably sited and designed infill development, subject to appropriate conditions and notification to Historic Scotland. This would also provide benefits to the immediate road network in the area. Developer Contributions will also be met by Legal Agreement, the level still to be agreed after presentation of a further report on the issue to Committee.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES:

10/00989/CON

1. The application is recommended for approval subject to the following conditions and to notification to Historic Scotland:

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out within three years of the date of this consent. Reason: To comply with the provision of Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997.

3. The works of demolition hereby permitted shall not be begun until documentary evidence is produced to show that contracts have been entered into by the developer to ensure that building work is commenced within a period of 6 months following commencement of demolition. Reason: To prevent premature demolition in the interests of the character of the Conservation Area.

4. No demolition should take place until an Historic Building Survey is submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, including architectural sketches of the buildings and photos showing internal and external external elevations and any historic features that may survive. Reason: The buildings are of archaeological interest.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 Informatives

It is advised that no demolitions should take place during the breeding bird season (March – August) unless with the written permission of the Planning Authority.

10/00990/FUL

1. The application is recommended for approval subject to the following conditions and to a Legal Agreement (at a level to be agreed) in respect of affordable housing and education :

2. 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.

3. Further details of the external materials to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before the development is commenced, including natural stone instead of artificial stone and wet dash render of a colour to be agreed. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity and character of this part of Peebles Conservation Area.

4. Further details of the eaves boards, windows, window positions and surrounds to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity and character of this part of Peebles Conservation Area.

5. The proposed link road and pavement extensions to be submitted for Roads Construction Consent before the development is commenced. Once approved, the works then to be completed as per the approved plans before the first dwellinghouse is occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

6. 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

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 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.

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: The site is potentially contaminated.

Approved by

Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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 Craig Miller Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Item No. 9(k) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00884/PPP

OFFICER: Mr C Miller WARD: Tweeddale West PROPOSAL: Erection of dwellinghouse and garage SITE: Land West of Spinney House, Lyne Station, Peebles APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs M E Jackson AGENT: None

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located to the south-western edge of Lyne Station which lies to the west of Peebles off the A72. The site would be accessed via two public roads from the A72, the latter leading under a former railway bridge before reaching the site and serving four other houses adjoining the site. This road eventually terminates at the River Tweed and water pumping station.

The site comprises of the corner of an open field and measures 0.3HA. It is separated from the three modern houses opposite by two dry stone dykes and the public road, together with some trees within the garden of Spinney House. It borders on Lyne Haugh to the north-east and is separated by the roadside dyke, an outbuilding and frontage garden area. To the north lies the old railway line and further residential properties, together with some tree cover which thickens towards the west of the site. The boundary to the field is currently open. A field gate connects the site currently with the public road.

The site is located within the Upper Tweeddale National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The application has been submitted for planning permission in principle to erect a dwellinghouse and garage. The applicant has subsequently submitted a letter and sketch plans to indicate the type of house and position it would occupy together with detached garage, set to the west from the area overlooked by the Old Station House. It is stated that the house would be approximately 170 square metres plus garage, single or 1½ storey and designed in keeping with the other houses in the group. A typical elevation sketch plan has also been provided showing a bungalow with steep hipped roof.

The applicants’ letter and plans are available to view on Public Access and also define an area for planting as a “defensible” boundary of the site to the west. The letter also sets out the background to the site inquiry and how the applicant feels it complies with the Council’s Policies and Guidance on Housing in the Countryside.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 The site owner has also written a letter in response to the objections lodged and this is also available on Public Access.

PLANNING HISTORY None.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES:

Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-2011

Principal S2 - Development Strategy Policy N7 - Protection of Nature Conservation Interest Policy N10 – National Scenic Areas Policy N11 – Areas of Great Landscape Value Policy H7 – Housing in the Countryside: Building Groups Policy H8 – Housing in the Countryside: Isolated Housing Policy I11 – Parking Provision in New Development Policy I15 – Flood Risk Areas

Scottish Borders Local Plan : Adopted 2008 (Amendment 2010)

Policy G4 – Flooding Policy G5 – Developer Contributions Policy EP1 – National Scenic Areas Policy EP2 – Areas of Great Landscape Value Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy Inf 4 – Parking Provisions and Standards Policy Inf 11 – Developments that Generate Travel Demand Policy D2 – Housing in the Countryside

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

New Housing in the Borders Countryside SPG Developer Contributions SPG Privacy and Sunlight Guide SPG

CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services: Although the road serving the site is single track with no passing places and poor forward visibility, the number of properties currently served are few and vehicle speeds will be low. One additional house will not compromise the capacity or safety of the road although a road widening on the bend after the railway bridge will assist. This should be controlled by condition together with the requirement for two parking spaces, a garage space and turning within the site. The access should also be formed with an integral service lay-by.

Flood Protection Officer: Initially requested AOD levels and a topographical survey as the north-eastern corner of the site was shown to be at risk of flooding on the SEPA 1 in 200 year flood risk maps. Considered that the levels should include two specific sections. Subsequently visited the site and felt that the site and area were sufficiently above the levels of the Tweed and Lyne not to be at risk of flooding.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 Director of Education and Lifelong Learning: Developer contributions of £8,383 and £1,181are required for Kingsland Primary School and Peebles High School. Explanations are given relating to the capacity justification for both contributions. Contributions should be paid upon receipt of detailed planning permission but can be phased to an agreed schedule.

Statutory Consultees

SEPA: States that there may be a medium to high risk of flooding to the site and observes the confluence of the Lyne Water and Meldon Burn, the Lyne Water and the River Tweed and two bridges. High flows were recorded at the gauging station in the vicinity in 1994. Consequently, advice should be obtained from the Council’s Flood Protection Officer over this issue.

SNH: If there are any badgers present near the site as indicated by the Community Council, then they would be protected by law and mitigation would be necessary to avoid requiring disturbance or a licence. The only likely area would be the woodland to the north of the site beside Lyne Station and Lyne Station House – but this would require confirmation from the owners or a survey, if proved necessary. In the absence of knowledge of whether there are setts in close proximity and lack of information on the footprint of the development, no further advice can be given until further information is sought.

Manor Stobo and Lyne Community Council: Supports the views of residents of surrounding houses and object on the grounds of landscape impact in an NSA and AGLV, encroachment into open farmland outwith the group, waste disposal in or near a flood plain, inadequate road capacity, light pollution, “back-door” development previously rejected, premature preparation of services and potential disturbance to badgers in the woodland adjoining the site.

Other Consultees

None

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

There have been objections submitted regarding the development from ten separate properties. These objections can be viewed in full on the Council’s Public Access web site and the grounds include the following:

x An application for planning permission in principle is inappropriate in an NSA and AGLV as it does not allow for proper assessment of the impacts. A detailed application should be sought instead. This advice is also given in the SPG. x The proposals are against the Development Plan Policies and SPG on housing in the countryside and development within protected landscape areas. x The site is separated from the remainder of the building group at Lyne Station by roads, other properties and tree belts and breaks into a previously undeveloped field, thus conflicting with Development Plan Policies and the SPG. x There has been no justification put forward for the development under Development Plan Policies on isolated housing in the countryside. x Concerns over the precedent of further development within or to the south- west of the site without defensible boundaries.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 x It is believed that the three houses opposite the site were seen as the last allowable properties to be built at Lyne Station. x The development will have an adverse impact on the landscape of the NSA and AGLV. x There is a risk of the requirement for street lighting which will cause adverse impacts. x Questions over who the developer of the land is and why they were not the applicants. x There may be a Section 75 Agreement which restricts the development of further housing on the land. x The access road may need to be upgraded to adoptable standards which will adversely impact on the rural character of Lyne Station. x The road and bridge are already used beyond their capacity and cannot safely accommodate the additional traffic caused by the proposal. x Concerns expressed over water supply and drainage provision.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES:

The man determining issues with this application are whether the proposal complies with the Development Plan Policies and Supplementary Planning Guidance on Housing in the Countryside, with specific reference to impact on designated landscapes, addition to building groups, protection of residential amenity and adequacy of road access.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION:

Planning policy

The application is for a dwellinghouse and garage in the countryside outwith any defined settlement in the Local Plan and must, therefore, be assessed against the relevant Development Plan Policies and Supplementary Planning Guidance on housing in the countryside. In particular, Structure Plan Policies H7, H8 and Local Plan Policy D2, together with the sections on siting and building group additions.

There is no doubt that Lyne Station qualifies as a cluster or group of dwellings surpassing the minimum threshold required for its definition as a building group. There is also no issue with regard to proportionate scale of addition as the current baseline assessment under Policy D2 and the Housing in the Countryside SPG allows up to 100% addition of the number of houses in the group at the time of Local Plan adoption. Even taking into account the more restrictive scale of addition rule of a maximum of two or 30%, proposed in the Amendment Local Plan Policy D2, the addition of a single house to the group would not exceed the threshold. The house constructed to the west of Lyne Station, referred to in some representations, was not justified, nor is considered, to be part of the building group.

The determining issue with the application is not whether Lyne Station is a building group but whether the chosen site is “..well related to an existing group” (Policy D2). Additional guidance in the SPG expands on what is considered to be the “sense of place” or natural boundary of a building group, within which additional development would, in principle, be allowed. It is noted that a number of the representations believe the site to be outwith this natural boundary, quoting the divisions caused by the road, drystone dykes and the woodland along the railway line to the north. They also quote the fact that the SPG states “Sites should not normally break into previously undeveloped fields…”.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 The concerns expressed about the suitability of this site are noted in terms of its location within the sense of place and whether it lies beyond unbreachable building group boundaries. However, there are a number of reasons why it is considered that the principle of a dwellinghouse could be accepted in this particular instance, as follows:

x The SPG goes on to draw a distinction between natural and man-made boundaries, giving greater importance to the defensibility of natural boundaries. Apart from small areas of woodland to the north-western edge of the site and across the road in the garden of Spinney House, the other boundaries are all man-made and are not considered to be visually unbreachable – stone dykes, a narrow tarmac road, post and wire fencing etc. x The site is fully intervisible and close to other houses in the group, including the older houses at Lyne Haugh and the Old Station House. x The site is contained at the same topographical levels as the immediate houses in the group. x The suggested development area and immediate garden boundary do not extend any further south (apart from the proposed woodland boundary) than the modern development across the track to the east. x The site occupies a clustered, “infill” position resulting in a rounding off of the group in this part of Lyne Station. x The site would not be visible from longer distances and would be less noticeable from the A72 than the development at “Watersmeet”. x The applicant is aware of, and in agreement with, the need to safeguard the field from further unsuitable housing expansion away from the natural boundaries of the group. Whilst a Section 75 Agreement has been explored unsuccessfully with the landowner, a planting belt is agreed down the open western edge of the site and a condition would be accepted to ensure only one house within the generously sized plot. x There is no evidence that the site has had any legal restrictions placed on it for further housing development.

For the aforementioned reasons and subject to appropriate conditions, it is considered that the site is an appropriate addition to the building group at Lyne Station and is, thus, in compliance with the relevant parts of Development Plan Policies H6, D2 and the SPG.

Access and parking

Policy D2 requires any suitable sites within a building group to be reached by safe access. There has been much local representation about the capacity of the minor road leading to the site, including references to additional farm and tourist traffic as well as walkers. However, the Director of Technical Services confirms that the road is already on the list of adopted highways and that the only additional work required is an enlarging of the bend before the railway bridge to improve passing opportunities (achievable within road verge) and a service lay-by at the site access – which will also provide an additional passing place opportunity.

Provided these requirements are imposed as planning conditions and given the support of the Director of Technical Services, it is not considered that there is sufficient reason to oppose an application based upon insufficient road capacity. The road clearly supports other dwellinghouses as well as access to the pumping station and the River Tweed. With that and its narrow twisting nature, vehicle speeds are

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 considered to be slow and the additional traffic generated by one dwellinghouse is not considered to cause additional road safety problems.

Landscape and visual impacts

The settlement of Lyne Station is located within attractive countryside and landscape recognised through the designation as a National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value. Representations from local residents recognise the quality of the landscape and interpret the proposal as having detrimental impacts on those interests. There is also representation to suggest that, in the absence of further details on siting and design, a favourable decision cannot be made.

It is accepted that the SPG encourages full planning applications in such landscape designations but does not compel them when a Planning Permission in Principle is submitted. Had the site been in a more prominent position with greater potential effects on the landscape and detrimental impacts on the reasons for the designation in the first instance, then more details may have been justifiable. As it stands, however, it is considered that the location of the site will have no wider implications on the quality of the landscape than the remainder of the houses at Lyne Station, representing a compact, “infill” of the current clustered form. Suitable house siting, design, and boundary planting will mitigate these potential impacts further, assisted by the general information submitted by the applicant in answer to the concerns.

Residential amenity

Policy H2 of the Local Plan requires new development to respect the amenity of adjoining dwellinghouses. In this particular instance, there is some conflict between the need to protect the amenity of the house immediately across the former railway line to the north and the need for the development to be as compact and within the boundaries of the group as possible. A house siting to the eastern corner would be more appropriate for the compact nature of the group but would cause obstruction to the main elevation of the Old Station House.

The applicant has recognised this and shown a suggested house and garage position which would not extend any further east than the ownership boundary of the Old Station House – if drawn southwards. Effectively, this is enclosing a triangle of land within which there would be no building, benefiting the other immediately adjoining houses at Lyne Haugh and Spinney House. It is considered, subject to detail, house height and window positions, that this would be a logical restriction to place upon any consent notice which should adequately address the impacts on residential amenity – that there be no building within a triangular area as defined on the approved plan. This should also allow the potential impacts on privacy, daylight and sunlight to be respected and complied with upon submission of the detailed application. Given the position of the site, the nature of the surrounding houses and the potential impacts on them, a condition restricting the house to a single or 1½ storey design would also be appropriate. This is acceptable to the applicant.

Flooding

The issues of flood risk were initially raised by SEPA and the Council’s Flood Protection Officer, there being concern at the two river confluences and bridges in the locality and the fact that part of the site appeared to fall within the SEPA 1 in 200 year flood risk map. However, the Flood Protection Officer visited the site and observed the elevation of the site above the two nearby rivers, concluding that there

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 was not a problem. Surface water flooding sources would still have to be considered and this would be attached as an Applicant Informative.

Developer Contributions

The site lies within the catchment areas of Kingsland Primary School and Peebles High School. Contributions would be required for both these schools which will need to be secured, or a programme for payment agreed, through Legal Agreement before any planning consent can be issued.

Natural Heritage

The Community Council referred to the possibility of badgers in the woodland adjoining the site and both SNH and the Council’s Ecology Officer have been considering the possibility. Their advice is to contact Scottish Badgers who can then provide information which will allow the Department to decide whether a survey or precautionary measures are needed – either being potentially imposed as a suspensive condition. Members will be updated on the issue at the Committee meeting.

CONCLUSION

The proposal complies with Development Plan Policies and Supplementary Planning Guidance on housing in the countryside, representing an appropriate addition to an existing building group with impacts on the landscape, surrounding residential properties and the road system able to be satisfactorily addressed through the imposition of appropriate conditions.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES:

I recommend the application is approved subject to a legal agreement addressing contribution towards Kingsland Primary School and Peebles High School, and the following conditions:

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.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 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.

4. A vehicle turning area and two parking spaces (excluding any garage) to be provided within the site. Reason: In the interests of road safety

5. The means of water supply and of both surface water and foul drainage to be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority. If a private water supply is to be used, no development to be commenced until a report by a qualified person has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority, demonstrating the provision of water to the development in terms of the quantity, quality and impacts on other supplies in the vicinity. Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately serviced.

6. The roofs of the dwellinghouse and garage to be clad in natural slate. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity and character of the area.

7. The number of dwellinghouses within the site to be permitted to a maximum of one. Reason: Any additional development would conflict with the Council’s Policies on housing in the countryside and protection of residential amenity.

8. The dwellinghouse to be no higher than a 1 or 1 ½ storey design. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity and character of the area and protect residential amenity.

9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992 (or amendments or re- enactment or re-enactment thereof) no part of the proposed dwellinghouse or any extension or other outbuilding shall be carried out within the area marked in green on the approved plan without the prior written consent of the Council, to whom a planning application must be made. Reason: The Planning Authority considers that any development within the highlighted area could cause detriment to the amenities of adjoining properties, and for this reason would wish to control any built development.

10. The access to the site should include a service lay-by designed to the Council’s specification and completed before the dwellinghouse is occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety,

11. Before the development is commenced, proposals to be submitted and agreed with the Planning Authority for a road widening of the public road on the south side of the former railway bridge and, once agreed, completed before the dwellinghouse is occupied. Reason : In the interests of road safety. 12. 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):

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 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 – this includes the roadside dry stone wall.

iii. location and design, including materials, of walls, fences and gates

iv. soft and hard landscaping works, including proposals for a ten metre deep woodland planting belt within and on the western side of the plot.

v. existing and proposed services such as cables, pipelines, sub- stations

vi. other artefacts and structures such as street furniture, play equipment vii. A programme for completion and subsequent maintenance.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development.

Informatives

1. The Council Flood Prevention Officer advises the need for the applicant to take into account the potential for flooding arising from other sources such as road drainage, overland surface water runoff and surcharged culverts.

Approved by

Name Designation Signature Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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 Craig Miller Principal Planning Officer

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

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 10/00908/FUL

OFFICER: Julie Hayward WARD: Selkirkshire PROPOSAL: Erection of dwellinghouse and detached double garage SITE: Part of Field No 1799 North of Chesterdene Eildon APPLICANT: Dr John Chalmers and Dr Shelagh Neil AGENT: John R Harris and Partners

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is situated on the northern edge of Eildon and is a field grazed by sheep. There is a post and wire fence and hedges on the boundaries. There is a public minor road to the south with residential properties on the opposite side and to the east. There are fields to the north and west. The site slopes down from the public road to the northern corner. The site is within the National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This is a full application to erect a detached dwellinghouse on the site. This would be sited parallel to the public road and would be one-and-a-half storey. The proposal, as submitted, is for two pitched roof dormers on the south roof slope facing the road, balconies on the side elevations and a central wing on the north elevation incorporating a hall and glazed landing. The dwellinghouse would have white wet dash rendered walls, horizontal stained timber cladding, hardwood double glazed windows and a natural slate roof.

The proposal also includes a detached garage incorporating a car port. This would be sited to the north east of the dwellinghouse and would be one-and-a-half storey in height with a hobbies room/store at first floor level. The garage would be constructed of white wet dash rendered walls and horizontal stained timber cladding with a natural slate roof. Access to the plot would be taken from the public road to the south.

Foul drainage would be via a septic tank discharging to reed beds and a closed soakaway system.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 PLANNING HISTORY

01/01239/OUT: Erection of dwellinghouse and garage. Refused on 12th November 2001 for the following reason:

“The proposal would be contrary to Policy 7 of the Ettrick and Lauderdale Local Plan, and the Council's New Housing in the Borders Countryside Policy and Guidance Note in that the site is outwith any recognised settlement or building group, and the need for the house has not been adequately substantiated.”

05/01251/FUL: Erection of dwellinghouse. Refused on 15th August 2005 for the following reason:

“The proposal is contrary to policies H5 and H6 of the Approved Structure Plan, policies 7 and 8 of the Ettrick and Lauderdale Local Plan 1995 and the Housing in the Borders Countryside Policy and Guidance Note in that the site lies outwith any settlement or building group and the need for the house has not been adequately substantiated.”

The subsequent appeal was dismissed on 14th December 2005 on siting and design grounds.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

Five objections have been received. These are available for Members to view on the Public Access System. The following planning issues have been raised:

x The installation of waste water/sewage and run-off water could affect the environment and residential properties.

x The site is prone to flooding and is regularly saturated by rainfall, run-off from a boggy wooded area and nearby spring. The water drains into a bog, a registered SSSI nature site, an adjacent vegetable plot before streaming off to a flood pond. When the ground becomes saturated the bog overflows across the footpath and fields and forms a large pool next to the junction with the A68 and the main access to Eildon. Septic tank run- off and rainwater from dwellings adjacent to the site already drain down to this area.

x The proposal would speed up the rate of flooding. Erosion across the fragile footpath already exists.

x All water from the septic tank out flow, rain water and domestic run-off will follow the downward slope of the ground and impact on the footpath and surrounding fields.

x The site of the proposed reed bed is adjacent to the four foot banking draining down to the lower footpath. The location of the reed bed will increase pressure and erosion on the banking and footpath

x The house would be “squarish” in shape and the balconies are an alien feature, both referred to in the Reporter’s decision into an appeal on this site in 2005.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 x This is a kit house and not designed to fit into a particular area.

x The design is incongruent with the more traditional properties within the village, particularly the two balconies and timber cladding.

x The walls would be white and would stand out.

x Concern is expressed that the colour of the timber cladding and window frames would not fit in with the landscape and neighbourhood.

x The north end of Eildon has managed to retain its character and the proposed house and garage are out of keeping with the existing houses

x The proposal is contrary to policies G1, D2 and BE6 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008.

x The Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 designates a site to the west of Eildon for 5 units with no further areas for longer term development. The village has had its full share of new housing.

x The garage and car port are detached from the house on ground raised to the same level as the house which means the roof would be the same height as the roof of the house.

x The garage design opens the possibility of a second dwellinghouse.

x In the previous application for this site the Council took the view that the road to the south and track to the east form the natural edge to the housing group; the track and road sufficiently detached this site from the building group and so the site was an undeveloped field. After the 2005 application was refused the owner successfully got the site included in the settlement boundary.

x The site was fenced off around 2000 and has never been used as a paddock.

x Eildon has had considerable new housing development recently all in a haphazard way; a nearby field has outline planning permission for a further five properties. The village is in danger of loosing its identity.

x The narrow twisting single track road will be under increased pressure from additional traffic and is already difficult to negotiate.

x There are brown field sites available rather than this green field site resulting in the loss of agricultural land.

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

x The site itself is not affected by flooding in the same adverse way as other parts of the field.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 x The proposal would create employment in the building industry

APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

None

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Consolidated Structure Plan 2001-2018

Policy N10: National Scenic Areas Policy N11: Area of Great Landscape Value Policy N20: Design Policy I11: Parking Provision in New Development Policy I14: Surface Water Policy I15: Flooding

Scottish Borders Local Plan: Adopted 2008

Policy G1: Quality Standards for New Development Policy G4: Flooding Policy G5: Developer Contributions Policy G6: Developer Contributions Related to Railway Reinstatement Policy G7: Infill Development Policy NE4: Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy EP1: National Scenic Area Policy EP2: Area of Great Landscape Value Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity Policy Inf4: Parking Standards Policy Inf6: Sustainable Urban Drainage

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment Finalised Plan 2009

Policy G7: Infill Development Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

x Supplementary Planning Guidance - Developer Contributions Updated April 2009

x Supplementary Planning Guidance – Placemaking and Design January 2010

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Roads): I have no objection to the application in principle. However the following points must be incorporated into the design:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 1. Parking and turning for 2 vehicles to be provided within the curtilage of the site, excluding any garages, and retained in perpetuity. 2. A service lay-by should be incorporated into the access as per detail DC-3. 3. Trimming back the hedge in both directions to maximise visibility.

Director of Education and Lifelong Learning: This proposed development is located within the catchment area for Newtown Primary School and Earlston High School. Both these schools are at or near capacity and therefore a contribution will be sought for each school. A contribution of £8,383 is sought for the Primary School and £3,851 for the High School, making a total contribution sought for education infrastructure of £12,234.

Statutory Consultees

Newtown and Eildon Community Council: Cannot support the application. Local residents are concerned about the drainage of rain water from the site, which will cause flooding of neighbouring properties. The reed bed sewerage system may result in contamination of neighbouring properties at times of flooding. The type and design of the house are not in keeping with the village.

Other Consultees:

None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

x Whether this is an appropriate infill site; x Whether the siting and design are acceptable; x Whether the proposal would have an adverse impact on the National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value; x Whether the site is prone to flooding or has drainage problems.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION

Planning Policy

Planning permission has been refused in 2001 and 2005 for the erection of a dwellinghouse on this site; the latter decision was upheld at appeal. When these applications were determined Eildon was not included in the Ettrick and Lauderdale Local Plan 1995 as a settlement or identified in the Ettrick and Lauderdale Village Plan 1996 and so did not have a development boundary but Eildon was considered to be a building group. The site is separated from the existing building group at Eildon by the public road to the south and a track to the east. It was considered that the proposed site was detached from the existing building group.

Eildon is now defined as a settlement in the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 with a development boundary. The site is within the development boundary and so this application must be assessed against policy G7. This allows residential development on windfall sites

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 within development boundaries provided that certain criteria are met. These criteria are addressed below.

Siting and Design

Policy N20 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 states that the Council will encourage a high quality layout, design and materials in all new developments, including redevelopments. Policy G1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 requires development to be compatible with and respects the character of the surrounding area, neighbouring uses and built form. Development should 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.

Although the site is an agricultural field, it is reasonably well related to properties in Eildon and the proposal would not conflict with the established land use of the area, which is predominantly residential. The site is considered to be large enough to accommodate a dwellinghouse, access, garage and parking whilst allowing adequate garden ground and so the proposal does not constitute and overdevelopment of the site.

The existing houses opposite the site front onto the public road and are parallel to it, with other properties having gable ends adjacent to the road but closely related to it. The proposed house would also front onto the road and be parallel to it, though it is set back further into the site than existing properties.

The design and materials of the proposed dwellinghouse, however, have been a concern. Eildon is characterised by an irregular cluster of houses with no formal structure and with a variety of house styles, ranging from traditional cottages to modern houses and a range of materials including traditional stone, render, concrete tiles and slate roofs.

The proposed house was to have a square footprint which would be out of keeping with the properties in Eildon, which are characterised by traditional proportions of long widths and narrow depth. The width of the gables results in a top heavy and visually dominant roof. Balcony features are not common in Eildon; only one other property has a first floor balcony. The proposed timber boarding on the gable ends would also be an alien feature as no other property in Eildon has timber cladding.

It was considered that the application as submitted could not be supported by this Department on design grounds. Amended drawings have now been submitted by the agent. The gable widths have been reduced and the wall height increased reducing the dominance of the roof. The timber cladding has been removed from the gables and restricted to the dormer windows, seen elsewhere in Eildon, and to the first floor of the wing to the rear. The length of the building has increased incorporating the balconies, reducing the dominance of these features. The proposed dwellinghouse would have astragal led timber windows of traditional proportions. It is now considered that the design and materials of the proposed dwellinghouse are now more in keeping with other properties in Eildon, many of which have very similar

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 characteristics. A condition is required to agree the colour of the render as white is not considered appropriate for this location.

Landscape and Visual Impacts

Policies N10 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and EP1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 seek to protect National Scenic Areas and proposals that adversely affect the landscape character of a National Scenic Area will not be permitted.

Policies N11 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 EP2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 seek to safeguard the landscape quality of Areas of Great Landscape Value and will have regard to the landscape impact of the proposed development.

Policy NE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that the Council supports the maintenance and management of trees, woodlands and hedgerows.

The site is situated in a prominent position of the northern edge of Eildon within the National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value. There is open agricultural land to the north, east and west but the when viewed from the north the house would be seen against a backdrop of other Eildon properties.

The amendments in the design and materials of the proposed dwellinghouse mean that it is more in keeping with other properties in Eildon. The one-and-a-half storey height would help to reduce its prominence in the landscape. Concern has been expressed regarding the prominence of the garage and car port but this would be situated to the north west of the house and would be on lower ground level and so would be lower in height than the proposed house. Appropriate landscape treatment on the northern boundary would further integrate the proposal into the landscape. It is considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the landscape or on the visual amenities of the National Scenic Area and Area of Great Landscape Value.

There are no significant trees within the site but the hedgerows on the boundaries should be retained, though require to be trimmed back within the visibility splay, and enhanced where necessary. This can be controlled by a planning condition.

Access and Parking

Policy I11 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policy Inf4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 require that the Council’s parking standards be met in all new developments.

An access would be formed from the public road and there is sufficient space within the site for car parking. The Director of Technical Services has no objections to the proposal provided that his requirements are met.

Residential Amenities

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 Policy H2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that development that is judged to have an adverse impact on the amenity of existing or proposed residential areas will not be permitted.

The proposed house would be 20m from the house opposite, which complies with the Council’s guidance on light and privacy. Other properties in the area are further away. It is considered that the proposal would not affect the light or privacy of occupants of neighbouring properties.

Surface Water and Flooding

Policy I14 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and Inf6 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 encourages SUDS schemes for surface water drainage as part of development proposals.

Policies I15 and I16 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policy G4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 refer to developments where there is an identified flood risk. They state that developments should not be allowed if they would either be at significant risk of flooding or would materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

Concern has been expressed by local residents regarding the surface water drainage in the field, that surface water run-off water could affect the environment and existing residential properties and that the site is prone to flooding.

The agent has advised that preliminary site investigations have been carried out by a Hydrologist and his recommendations are awaited. These will be reported verbally at the meeting. However, the site drainage could be the subject of a condition to regulate this aspect to ensure that the site is adequately drained in a way that does not affect existing properties, other land or the public road. There is no evidence that the flooding of the site results from anything other than the poor drainage within this and surrounding fields.

Developer Contributions

Policy G5 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that where a site is acceptable but cannot proceed due to deficiencies in infrastructure or due to environmental impacts the Council will require developers to make contributions towards the cost of addressing such deficiencies. Policy G6 states the Council will seek development contributions towards the costs of reinstating the Waverley Railway Line.

Should Members be minded to approve the application financial contributions are required towards Earlston High School, Newtown St Boswells Primary School and towards the Waverley Rail Project. These would be secured through a legal agreement.

CONCLUSION

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 It is considered that the proposal complies with the relevant development plan policies and supplementary planning guidance. The site is within the development boundary for Eildon and the amended design and materials would be in keeping with other properties in Eildon. The proposal would not harm the visual amenities of the National Scenic Area or Area of Great Landscape Value and would not harm the residential amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES

I recommend that the application be approved subject to an appropriate legal agreement addressing contributions towards educational facilities in the locality and the Waverley Line project and subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

2. 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 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.

3. The finish to the timber boarding to be to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

4. The roofing material to be natural slate. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

5. Details of all proposed means of enclosure around the site 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. 6. 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. schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/density

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 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. All existing hedgerows around the site, to be protected during construction and retained to the specification of the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

8. The vehicular access to the site to be completed to the specification of the Planning Authority before the dwellinghouse is occupied. This to include a service lay-by and the trimming back of the hedge in both directions to maximise visibility. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

9. Parking and turning for two vehicles, excluding garages, must be provided within the site before the dwellinghouse is occupied and retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

10. Details of the proposed surface water drainage to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority before the development is commenced. 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, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory arrangements are made for the disposal of surface and foul water.

Informative:

In respect of condition 8, any works within the public road boundary must be carried by a contractor on the council’s approved list (DC-8 attached). The specification for the access and lay-by is:

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.

The lay by to be formed as per the detail DC-3 (attached).

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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

Author(s) Name Designation

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 Julie Hayward Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 Item No. 9(m) SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL

PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE

13 SEPTEMBER 2010

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

ITEM: REFERENCE NUMBER: 1. 09/00629/FUL 2. 09/00702/LBC 3. 09/00703/CON

OFFICER: Julie Hayward WARD: Hawick and Denholm PROPOSAL: 1. Erection of twenty four flats 2. Demolition of un-used industrial buildings 3. Demolition of un-used industrial buildings SITE: Wilton Mill Commercial Road Hawick APPLICANT: 1. Beaune Properties Ltd 2. Mr Gavin Stevenson 3. Mr Gavin Stevenson AGENT: Aitken Turnbull

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is situated on the north west side of Commercial Road in Hawick. The premises of J & R Elliot and a dwellinghouse, no.30, are situated to the south west. There are residential properties on Princes Street to the north west, and the River Teviot is to the south east. The site is within the Conservation Area and a number of the buildings within the site are Listed Buildings. The existing trees to the rear of the site are covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The Conservation Area Consent application proposes to demolish two non-Listed Buildings within the site. One building was an industrial shed with a 327 square metre floor area which has already been demolished. The second is the former Council refuse depot and the building has a floor area of 875 square metres and is constructed of concrete walls and it has a corrugated metal roof.

The Listed Building Consent application proposes to demolish Listed Buildings within the site. The proposal is to demolish the Wilton Mill building, a three storey building situated in the south west corner of the site, a garage block adjacent to Commercial Road and the former lodge building, a single storey stone building adjacent to Commercial Road. The existing stone boundary wall to Commercial Road would be reduced in height to 800mm to allow for sight lines at the proposed new access. The buildings are category B Listed dating back to the nineteenth century. Part of the building in the south west corner of the site is currently

Planning and Building Standards Committee 1 supported by scaffolding and is considered to be in a dangerous condition. The Buildings have been included in the national “Buildings at Risk Register” maintained by the Scottish Civic trust since 1998. The taller Wilton Mills Clock Tower building would be retained.

The planning application seeks consent to erect a four-and-a-half storey building containing 24 flats on the site of the Wilton Mill building. This would be constructed of blockwork with a wet dash render finish, timber boarding and natural stone with a slate roof. The windows would be UPVC casement windows with a white finish.

An access would be formed from the A7 trunk road and the boundary wall lowered to create the visibility splay. Thirty parking spaces are proposed. The mill lade would be retained and a new perimeter wall erected around it.

PLANNING HISTORY

09/00433/LBC & 09/00434/FUL: Demolition of lean-to, internal alterations and replacement windows. Approved 28th August 2009

04/02362/LBC & 04/02363/FUL: Partial demolition, alterations and extension to form college building. Approved 17th March 2005.

02/01971/COU & 02/01975/LBC: Alterations to form retail and office premises. Approved 19th November 2003.

93/00768/FUL: Alterations to form function/conference hall. Refused 11th January 1994.

REPRESENTATION SUMMARY

One representation has been received from J & R Elliot 30 Commercial Road Hawick. This is available for Members to view on the Public Access System. The following planning issues have been raised:

x The wall that separates the driveway of no.30 from the car park to the front of the existing Wilton Mills building is owned by J & R Elliot and should be unaffected by the proposal;

x The drawing AT0654/PLAN/01D: Site Plan indicates that a section of wall from the building to be demolished is to remain to maintain the existing boundary. However, drawing AT0654/PLAN/04: Elevations shows the removal of the building with no boundary provision and car parking in the driveway of no.30;

x Full details of the boundary treatment between the properties are required.

x Given the proximity of the building to be demolished to no.30 J & R Elliot requests a method statement for the demolition to be forwarded to them for comment and approval.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 2 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The following documents have been submitted by the agent in support of the application and are available for Members to view on the Public Access System:

x Planning Statement x Building Fabric Repairs Outline Budget Cost 1 x Housing Development at Wilton Mills Cost Plan 1 x Condition Survey x Structural Appraisal Additional Survey Assessment x Tree Survey x Breeding Bird and Bat Survey

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018

Policy N17: Listed Buildings Policy N18: Development Affecting Conservation Areas Policy N20: Design Policy H5: Brownfield Development Policy H9: Affordable and Special Needs Housing Policy I11: Parking Provision in New Development Policy I14: Surface Water Policy I15: Flood Risk Areas Policy I16: Flood Appraisal Group Policy I18: Contaminated Land

Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008

Policy G1: Quality Standards for New Development Policy G2: Contaminated Land Policy G4: Flooding Policy G5: Developer Contributions Policy BE1: Listed Buildings Policy BE4: Conservation Area Policy NE3: Local Biodiversity Policy NE4: Trees, woodlands and Hedgerows Policy H1: Affordable Housing Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity. Policy H3: Land use Allocations Policy Inf4: Parking Standards Policy Inf6: Sustainable Urban Drainage

Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment Finalised Plan 2009

Policy G7: Infill Development

Planning and Building Standards Committee 3 Policy H2: Protection of Residential Amenity.

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

x Supplementary Planning Guidance: Commercial Road Hawick February 2009 x Supplementary Planning Guidance: Placemaking and Design January 2010 x Supplementary Planning Guidance - Developer Contributions Updated April 2009 x Supplementary Planning Guidance - Affordable Housing March 2007 x Scottish Borders Council’s Housing Needs Study and Affordable Housing Policy Report December 2006.

Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) July 2009 – Historic Scotland

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

09/00629/FUL:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Technical Services (Environmental Health): The above application appears to be proposing the redevelopment of land which was previously mill land. This land use is potentially contaminative and it is the responsibility of the developer to demonstrate that the land is suitable for the use they propose. It is recommended that planning permission should be granted on condition that development is not be permitted to start until a site investigation and risk assessment has been carried out, submitted and agreed upon by the Planning Authority. Any requirement arising from this assessment for a remediation strategy and verification plan would become a condition of the planning consent.

Director of Planning & Development (Development Negotiator): On the basis of the plans submitted, prevailing policy and the advice of the Housing Strategy Team, there is a requirement for the on-site provision of affordable units at a rate of 25%. Contributions will be required at a rate of £468 per market unit (i.e. net of the affordable housing units) for Drumlanrig Primary School.

Director of Technical Services (Flood Protection): In terms of information that this Council has concerning flood risk to this site, I would state that The Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland) known as the “second generation flood mapping” prepared by SEPA indicates that most of the site is at risk from a flood event with a return period of 1 in 200 years. That is the 0.5% annual risk of a flood occurring in any year.

Following several discussions with the developer I have agreed that the ground floor Finished Floor Level of the building should be raised to of 101.15m AOD in line with the predicted 1 in 200 year flood level and this is the level shown in the proposed application. No allowance has

Planning and Building Standards Committee 4 been made for freeboard but the Council have accepted this situation in a similar application in Hawick.

Director of Planning & Development (Archaeology): There are archaeological implications for this proposal. Wilton Mill has been at the heart of Hawick’s industrial history since it was founded in 1809. It was constructed alongside a pre-existing lade system and underwent at least three phases of construction before falling into disuse. The mill is an important symbol of Hawick’s weaving heritage and the prosperity that the textile industry brought to the town. The demolition of buildings at Wilton Mill will have a negative impact on the overall historic environment of Hawick, though I am gratified that the central block and clock tower will be retained within this development.

If the Council is minded to approve this application, there are several archaeological issues to be aware of. Prior to use as a mill, the site of Wilton Mill may have been at the heart of the medieval village of Wilton; and its proximity to Wilton Church and Churchyard helps to highlight this point. Whilst later construction may have obliterated evidence of medieval occupation, pockets of the pre-mill archaeology may survive in marginal areas of the site.

After the establishment of Wilton Mill in 1809, there followed a period of extensive construction to the mill lade system, wheel pits and structures that preceded the current arrangement. A fire in 1867 destroyed many of the original buildings, and the current structures mostly date to a period of reconstruction before 1900.

An archaeological survey of the mill lades conducted by GUARD in 2000 showed that extensive parts of the lade system survive beneath the site, and I welcome the efforts of the architects to incorporate some of these into the design for this proposal. However, the GUARD survey, which was limited to a few accessible sections of the lades, highlighted that the lade system would require further survey and analysis. A further survey of all elements of the lade system that will be impacted by this development is required prior to any ground disturbance associated with the development; including service connections.

There may be extensive survival of the original mill building foundations, their relationships to each other and to the lade system. This information would be critical in our understanding of the overall phasing and history of the mills. In order to assess the presence or absence of medieval and early modern structures, an archaeological evaluation must take place. The results of this evaluation will be assessed to determine if further archaeological investigation, analysis and reporting is necessary.

Director of Planning & Development (Landscape): This is an urban, town centre site and it needs to be considered in relation to its wider impacts on the townscape including the views from the A7 trunk road (Commercial Road) and from various viewpoints on the opposite bank of the River Teviot. A building with a ‘civic presence’ is required for such a site.

The main landscape effects of the development will come from the building facades and the external works elements, both hard and soft, in surrounding areas. There is currently insufficient detail on the drawing on these matters. I expect that hard surface using high quality materials such as ‘Tegula’ block paving or similar will be appropriate in many areas with stone boundary walls and or railings along the main street frontage. Planted areas should be fairly formal with tree and shrub planting used to soften the street frontage and provide

Planning and Building Standards Committee 5 additional enclosure. I would not anticipate large areas of grass unless such areas have a specified function.

The existing trees to the rear of the site are covered by a TPO and must be retained without damage. A tree survey is required to determine the required root protection areas and all construction works will need to be excluded. For an application in this important town centre site, I would expect a fully detailed planting plan as part of the application package and not as a reserved matter.

Re-consultation: TPO trees to the rear of the site are to be retained. I propose that a condition be imposed requiring the developer to keep all construction works away from the ‘Root Protection Areas’ of TPO trees and to ensure that any works in proximity to TPO trees are notified in advance to the Council.

The external works need to be further developed. It is essential to consider the function of the proposed external spaces so that they can be adequately delineated. Residential blocks such as this need to have clearly defined ‘defensible spaces’ around their curtilage. This deters casual vandalism/intrusion such as people walking up to ground floor windows. I propose that boundary walls be constructed to the rear of the flats and the Clock Tower Building to create enclosed courtyard style gardens that will be separated from the street and reserved for use by the residents/office staff and to enclose the car parking areas. This would be in keeping with the character of the original buildings and would also relate to the retained walls along the Commercial Road frontage. A fully detailed soft landscape plan should also be prepared.

Director of Planning & Development (Local Plans): Do not object in principle to the development for residential use on the above site. The site is included in the approved Development Framework for Commercial Road, Hawick and it is recognised within the document that the site can be redeveloped for residential use.

The framework highlights that the redevelopment of the site requires high attention to detail and design and that redevelopment must be to the satisfaction of Historic Scotland and Scottish Borders Council and also to enhance the town centre and the Conservation Area. Redevelopment of the site needs to consider the proximity to the town centre and the river.

The proposed development includes replacement of the existing grade B listed building. Redevelopment of the existing building, using existing features to enhance the design of the redevelopment, would be the preferred option. The Development Framework indicates tree planting is required to create a landscaped edge. Planting has been proposed in the application. We would like to see the creation of a tree-lined avenue and will require that the planting reflects this vision.

If the building was deemed to be beyond repair great care should be paid to the design of the new building to respect the urban character of the area and the previous use and heritage of the site. Any new development or conversion would need to respond to the existing built form, as well as the scale, massing and form, materials and colour, proportion and details of any buildings adjacent to the site as well as existing within the site.

Director of Technical Services: I have no objections to the development in principle, however the following conditions must be adhered to.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 6 1. The access into the site is from the trunk road and the comments of Transport Scotland should be sought regarding the details for this. 2. The internal roads shall require construction consent. The full extent of the works will be determined by the level of development proposed at the time of construction. The parking areas, excluding the 4 visitor bays for the flats, will not be included within the construction consent and shall not be adopted as public upon completion. 3. Details of the drainage should be submitted for approval as part of the planning stage. This is to ensure that we are satisfied with what drainage is proposed to be located within the prospective public road as we will not support excessive private drainage within the road. 4. The reinstatement of the footway associated with the proposed closure of existing accesses onto Commercial Road must be to the satisfaction of Transport Scotland. 5. A new bus stop shall be required on the north bound side of Commercial Road at a location to be agreed with this Council. 6. All parking bays must be a minimum of 2.5m x 5m in size. Where the bays are up against a boundary marker, e.g. wall, fence or hedge, the bay must be a minimum of 6m.

Director of Planning & Development (Heritage and Design): Wilton Mill, as a whole, is mill complex comprising a number of individual buildings which is enclosed by a boundary wall to Commercial Road and also including the remains of the earlier mill lade system. The complex was originally listed at category B in 1977 and this status was re-confirmed as a result of the 2007 comprehensive resurvey of Hawick Burgh undertaken by Historic Scotland and is expressed in an expanded list description. The SW block, which is built in part over the original lade and water wheel pit area, dates back to post 1867 when the bulk of the complex was rebuilt after a fire. The application also covers the reduction in height of the boundary wall and the entrance lodge to the complex – a previously approved scheme for Borders College, 04/02363/LBC also showed this alterations.

Scottish Borders Council owned parts of the mill, including the land and modern sheds to the rear as well as the clock tower building; these had previously been used as a depot by the then District Council. The Council disposed of its holdings in 2008 to the applicant as a means to facilitate the redevelopment of Commercial Road, which has been a longstanding desire and featured in the 1993 Roxburgh Local Plan as an area for action.

The proposed new building occupies a similar footprint to the current building and is a similar overall mass. I consider that generally the scale and form of the proposed building is appropriate in this setting and the provision of a boundary wall to the frontage, which should be built of salvaged stone from the main building helps to tie the new building to the surviving mill buildings and also crucially helps mask the fact that the ground floor level is considerably raised to comply with flood level issues.

The remains of the mill lade and wheel pits to the rear are architecturally and historically significant and detailed proposals for the retention and presentation of these features will be required, in particular of the glass bridge proposed.

Given the scale of the building to be demolished in order for this new development to proceed, I consider it would be appropriate to salvage sufficient stone from this demolition and re-use it

Planning and Building Standards Committee 7 on site, this would have the further advantage of blending in with the rest of the mill building, boundary walls etc.

Statutory Consultees

Transport Scotland: No objections subject to their conditions.

SEPA: Object to this planning application in principle on the grounds of flood risk. However, we believe there is scope to modify the layout of the development site. Should you be minded to grant planning permission contrary to the advice contained in this letter, we also object to this application unless the planning condition in section 2.1 is attached to any consent.

The site in question has a risk of flooding and it follows that to allow development to proceed may place property or persons at serious risk contrary to national planning policy and guidance, with particular regard to SPP7: Planning and Flooding.

This site is subject to the Supplementary Planning Guidance for Commercial Road, Hawick (February 2009) as part of the consultation for this we provided comments on flood risk and highlighted our preferred land use at this site would be commercial and industrial rather than residential. We recommend that the layout of the development site is revised with the proposed flats which are a sensitive land use located in the lowest risk area and the car parking and less sensitive land uses located in the higher risk areas.

We are concerned regarding the access and egress for the site as the site plan shows the only site access is directly from Commercial Road. The indicative flood map shows that this access and egress route would be cut-off during peak flows. The site plan shows that the proposed flats are to be built over a mill lade which is contrary to Planning Advice Note 69.

Re-consultation: Maintain our objection to the proposed development on the grounds that it may place buildings and persons at flood risk contrary to Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note (PAN) 69 ‘Planning and building standards advice on flooding’. We would consider withdrawing our objection if the following modifications were addressed by the applicant: consideration regarding the layout and use of the proposed buildings, clarification of the culverts and mill lades and the intention to remove/retain them, altering the operation of the ground floor areas of the proposed flats to a non-residential use, clarification that safe access/egress will be ensured and will not be flooded during peak events and confirmation that the mill lade will have adequate storage capacity to be used as a surface water feature during peak flows.

Scottish Water: No response.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 8 09/00702/LBC:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Planning & Development (Ecology): Adopting the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance for biodiversity the proposed development and type of structures involved conforms to the type of development requiring a bat survey and breeding bird survey. Mitigation may involve provision of alternative nest sites, protection of breeding habitats where appropriate and the design of the site should protect and enhance foraging habitat for breeding birds as appropriate. The site is adjacent (10m) to River Teviot (River Tweed SAC/SSSI). The habitat in adjacent area has a medium probability of supporting bat populations.

Director of Technical Services: Whilst I have no objections in principle to this proposal, the road adjacent to the demolition is a trunk road and outwith my jurisdiction. As such, the comments of Transport Scotland should be sought to ensure that all works associated with the demolition and removal of surplus material are carried out safely, with minimum risk to adjacent road users.

Director of Planning & Development (Heritage and Design): The condition of the SW Block has been of concern for some time, and Building Standards Enforcement has been involved directly since at least summer 2008.

The Buildings have been included in the national “Buildings at Risk Register” maintained by the Scottish Civic trust since 1998. The agent has submitted a Planning Statement as part of the application, which summarises various actions taken by the applicant as well as a range of drawings showing the current buildings. The application was submitted in 2009 and therefore the “test” that the application to demolish should be assessed against evidence provided by the applicant as spelt out in Historic Scotland’s SHEP.

In considering this application a degree of pragmatism must be adopted. The current condition and appearance of Wilton Mills is a serious blight to the town and this impact will be increased when the redevelopment works at the former Borders College site takes place unless action is delivered on the ground. Whilst the clock tower building has separate consent already, the planning process cannot guarantee the actual delivery of this element in isolation. Consent has previously been granted, but now lapsed.

There is no doubt that the condition of the SW is now poor and the building is continuing to deteriorate, the adjacent propping scaffold is on land owned by the neighbouring property and is there on sufferance at present. Whilst the two engineers reports have indicated that the building could be repaired, they have both expressed concern about the costs and hence the viability of this. I consider therefore that it is essential that a simple cost estimate is submitted by the applicant to show the comparative costs of a restoration/conversion scheme. I also consider that there are considerable benefits to the wider community in tackling Wilton Mill, which is a longstanding blight.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 9 Statutory Consultees

Historic Scotland: Reply awaited.

Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland: No Response. 09/00703/CON:

Scottish Borders Council Consultees

Director of Planning & Development (Heritage and Design): This specific proposal is for the demolition of two industrial buildings, probably dating back to c1950 and used by the town council and district council as a depot. These buildings do not contribute positively to the character or appearance of the conservation area and are largely hidden from view from any public place by the higher masonry buildings fronting onto Commercial Road and the associated boundary wall. I have no objection to this application.

Director of Technical Services: I have no objections to this application. The demolition contractor should provide a method statement to ensure their methods for removing the surplus material is satisfactory to the road manager. To this extent, the comments of Transport Scotland should be sought.

Statutory Consultees

Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland: No Response.

Other Consultees:

None

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

x Whether the buildings within the site can be demolished or are worthy of retention; x Whether the replacement building is acceptable in siting and design terms; x Whether the site can be satisfactorily accessed. x Flooding.

ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATIONS

09/00703/CON: Conservation Area Consent

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. Conservation Area consent for the demolition of an unlisted building within a Conservation Area will only be considered in the context of appropriate proposals for redevelopment and will only be permitted where: the building is incapable of reasonably beneficial use by virtue of its location, physical form or state of disrepair, and the structural condition of the building is such that it cannot be adapted to

Planning and Building Standards Committee 10 accommodate alterations or extensions without material loss to its character, and the proposal will preserve or enhance the Conservation area, either individually or as part of the townscape. Demolition will not be permitted to proceed until acceptable alternative treatment of the site has been approved and a contract for the replacement building or for an alternative means of treating the cleared site has been agreed.

The two buildings that are the subject of the Conservation Area Consent application date back to the 1950s and were Council depot buildings. One has already been demolished. These buildings have no individual architectural or historic merit and contribute little to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. In any event, they are largely hidden from view from any public place by the higher masonry buildings fronting onto Commercial Road and the associated boundary wall. There are no objections to the demolition of these two buildings.

The issues relating to birds, bats and the archaeology of the site can be controlled by planning conditions.

09/00702/LBC: Listed Building Consent Application

This is a Listed Building Consent application seeks to demolish Wilton Mill, a garage block adjacent to Commercial Road and the former lodge building. The buildings are category B Listed and date back to the nineteenth century. Part of the building in the south west corner of the site is currently supported by scaffolding and has been the subject of separate investigation by Building Standards Enforcement on account of the structural condition of the building, which is considered dangerous. The Buildings have been included in the national “Buildings at Risk Register” maintained by the Scottish Civic trust since 1998.

A Planning Statement has been submitted with the application. This outlines the structural condition of the mill building and considers the viability of converting the building into residential use versus its demolition and the erection of residential development on the site. It concludes that the mill building has fallen into a serious state of disrepair and needs significant restoration, stabilisation and some rebuilding to form a viable shell for adaption and reuse. Both residential and commercial uses have been considered and cannot be supported practically or economically.

Reports have been submitted outlining the costs of fabric repair works to the building and the cost of erecting 24 new residential units. Drawings have been prepared for the site showing the conversion of the building into flats and the demolition of the building and erection of a replacement flatted development. A total of 24 flats could be provided with a total construction cost of £3,121,121 compared to 11 flats achievable under the conversion option at a cost of £3,282,000. It concludes that the demolition of the building is the only viable option and will enable other key features, such as the Clock Tower, to be retained.

Policy BE1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that the Council will support development proposals that protect, maintain, and enhance active use and conservation of Listed Buildings. The demolition of a Listed Building will not be permitted unless there are overriding environmental, economic, social or practical reasons. It must be satisfactorily demonstrated that every effort has been made to continue the present use or to find a suitable new use.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 11 The Council’s Principal Officer (Heritage and Design) has carried out an assessment of the proposal in accordance with the criteria set out in the Scottish Historic Environment Policy 2008 (SHEP) using the information submitted by the agent, The SHEP recommends that proposals for demolition are considered against the following tests:

A The building is not of special interest:

No specific evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that the building is not of special interest.

The building is of special interest but is not unique; the fact that this building is set back from the road frontage and the clock tower building and the other buildings to the riverside diminish the contribution made by the application building to the streetscape. The applicants have also provided existing elevation and plan drawings as well as photographs, so a recording exercise has been undertaken. The wheel pit and lade system, which are of high significance, will be retained

B The building is incapable of repair:

A separate structural appraisal was commissioned by SBC PED Enforcement and a separate report was also prepared on behalf of the applicant. There is currently a support scaffold in place, erected by SBC Building Standards Enforcement to secure this south west gable wall of the building.

Neither of the structural engineers has stated that the building is not capable of repair, but they have raised the very real issue of viability.

C The demolition of the building is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community:

No specific evidence has been provided by the applicant as part of the formal application.

There are significant benefits in the delivery of a long term solution to Wilton Mills. The condition and appearance of the buildings have blighted Commercial Road for many years. The current condition of the main building continues to deteriorate (and has probably suffered from the long snowy winter). A positive conclusion is required, otherwise further Building Standards intervention may be needed, which is simply “dead” cost. The overall public benefit to the wider community could be met by the removal of the south west block in a controlled and considered manner, rather than as an “emergency” demolition as part of an integrated scheme which would safeguard the clock tower building and create a quality boundary treatment. The proposed replacement building will provide useful housing near to the town centre and improve the vitality of the area and in part replicate the massive scale of the existing building.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 12 D The repair of the building is not economically viable and that it has been marketed at a price reflecting its location and condition to potential restoring purchasers for a reasonable time:

The applicant has submitted a Cost Plan setting out the costs of a replacement building. The agent advises that the marketing of the former Blair & Patterson building was carried out by their Accountants, Deans, in 2005/06 on a confidential basis. This was because of the continuing business and the potential effect this would have. The applicant was the only party to show any interest and an offer was duly accepted in December at a level substantially below £20/sq ft. The applicant attempted to market this and the adjoining property initially on a refurbishment basis for office accommodation but received no interest. All the major house builders were approached in 2007 and 2008 and despite initial interest no occupier either on a refurbishment or cleared site basis has come forward.

Whilst no firm evidence of the building being formally marketed has been submitted, the exposure on the Buildings at Risk Register and lack of any active local interest direct to the Council suggests that there is little interest in acquisition by others.

It is considered that the condition of the mill building has been of concern for several years and the building is continuing to deteriorate. The current condition and appearance of Wilton Mills is a serious blight to the town and this impact will be increased when the redevelopment works at the former Borders College site is completed unless action is delivered on the ground. Whilst the two engineers reports have indicated that the building could be repaired, they have both expressed concern about the costs and hence the viability of this. There are considerable benefits to the wider community of the demolition of these buildings and the redevelopment of this site.

The garage and lodge buildings are smaller and of a lower significance, and are listed as a result of their relationship with the complex rather than their own individual merit; in the particular case of the garage building, the “interior” is a modern addition of little consequence while the removal of the lodge building would be necessary to enable the proper redevelopment of the site. Therefore, whilst in a more sound condition than the key mill building, an assessment of these structures against the SHEP tests would draw the same conclusions set out above. In any event, consent for the demolition of these buildings has been granted relatively recently in 2005.

The issues relating to birds, bats and the archaeology of the site can be controlled by planning conditions. The time limit for the Listed Building Consent is recommended to match that of the planning permission for the redevelopment of the site (three years).

09/00629/FUL: Planning Application

Planning Policy

Policy H5 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 states that brownfield sites for housing development will be supported where the site is no longer required for employment use and where it will enhance the form and quality of the urban environment. This site has been derelict for some time with the buildings falling into a state of disrepair and

Planning and Building Standards Committee 13 so the redevelopment of the site would contribute to the Council’s aims of revitalising this part of Hawick and would also improve the visual amenities of the Conservation Area.

The site is allocated in the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 for redevelopment and policy H3 states that development will be approved in principle for the land uses allocated on the Land Use Proposals tables and map; the site may be developed for housing, employment uses or retailing. Development should be in accordance with any planning briefs for the site.

Supplementary Planning Guidance for Commercial Road Hawick was adopted in February 2009. It states that the Wilton Mill site is most likely to be developed for residential use. The site requires high attention to detail and design to redevelop the existing listed buildings and to enhance the town centre and Conservation Area. Existing features can be reused as design features. Redevelopment of this site will also need to consider the proximity to the town centre, the river urban character of the area and previous use.

The proposal is to redevelop the site for residential purposes and so this complies in principle with policy H3 and the SPG for the site.

Layout, Design and Visual Impact

The proposed new building occupies a similar footprint to the current building and is a similar overall mass. It is considered that generally the scale and form of the proposed building is appropriate in this setting and the provision of a boundary wall to the frontage, which should be built of salvaged stone from the main building, helps to tie the new building to the surviving mill buildings and also crucially helps mask the fact that the ground floor level is considerably raised to comply with flood level issues.

The remains of the mill lade and wheel pits to the rear are architecturally and historically significant. These features are to be retained and detailed proposals for the retention and presentation of these features will be required, in particular of the glass bridge proposed. This can be controlled by a planning condition.

Given the scale of the building to be demolished in order for this new development to proceed, it would be appropriate to salvage sufficient stone from this demolition and re-use it on site; this would have the further advantage of blending in with the rest of the mill building and boundary walls.

It is essential to consider the function of the proposed external spaces so that they can be adequately delineated. Residential blocks such as this need to have clearly defined ‘defensible spaces’ around their curtilage. This deters casual vandalism and intrusion such as people walking up to ground floor windows. The layout could be enhanced by constructing

Planning and Building Standards Committee 14 boundary walls to the rear of the flats and the Clock Tower Building to create enclosed courtyard style gardens that will be separated from the street and reserved for use by the residents or office staff and to enclose the car parking areas. This would be in keeping with the character of the original buildings and would also relate to the retained walls along the Commercial Road frontage. A fully detailed soft landscape plan is also required. These issues would be controlled by planning conditions.

Ecology and Trees

Policy NE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that the Council supports the maintenance and management of trees and woodlands and developments that would cause the loss or damage to trees and woodlands would be refused.

The ground rises steeply along the north west boundary towards Princes Street and there is a belt of mature trees and shrubs along this boundary. The trees are covered by the Princes Street Tree Preservation Order SBC No 32. The trees must be retained without damage. A tree survey has been submitted by the agent. This demonstrated that the TPO trees to the rear of the site are to be retained. A condition is required that all construction works must be kept away from the ‘Root Protection Areas’ of TPO trees and to ensure that any works in proximity to TPO trees are notified in advance to the Council.

As this important town centre site a fully detailed planting plan is required together with details of hard landscaping, surfacing and boundary treatment. The SPG for Commercial Road requires tree planting to create a landscaped edge and the creation of a tree-lined avenue along the Commercial Road frontage. These details would be controlled by conditions.

Policy NE3 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states the Council will seek to safeguard the integrity of habitats within settlements, which are of importance for the maintenance and enhancement of local biodiversity.

A bat and breeding bird survey has been submitted as part of the planning application. This concludes that there are bats present in the mill building to be demolished and in the mill lade. Breeding birds were found in all the buildings and the lade. A licence would be required from the Scottish Government before the buildings can be demolished and mitigation measures are required to reduce the harm to bats through timing of work and pre-demolition work and to ensure the long term maintenance of roost sites within the replacement building and mill lade. The former refuse centre was found to have bats and birds and additional survey work was recommended.

The Council’s Ecology Officer has been consulted on the survey’s findings and his response will be reported verbally at the meeting. The impact on bats and breeding birds can be mitigated by conditions.

Opportunities exist to enhance the local habitat network for bats and breeding birds through planting of native thorn species rich extended hedgerows or small plots of semi-natural woodland. A pond or SUDS feature can also enhance the local habitat network for bats. This will be a requirement of the planting scheme.

Access and Parking

Planning and Building Standards Committee 15 Policy I11 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policy Inf4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 require that the Council’s parking standards be met in all new developments.

A new access is proposed onto the trunk road (Commercial Road) and a total of 30 parking spaces are proposed to serve the development.

Transport Scotland and the Director of Technical Services have no objections to the proposal provided that their conditions are complied with.

Flooding

Policies I15, I16 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policy G4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 refer to developments where there is an identified flood risk. They state that developments should not be allowed if they would either be at significant risk of flooding or would materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. Specific reference is also made to flooding in the “Commercial Road” SPG. This requests any development to be backed by a Flood Risk Assessment, although in allocating the site for commercial/residential development, there is an acknowledgement that some solutions for development should be able to be found. The SPG states that brownfield land is developable provided areas vulnerable to flood risk are intended to be protected by flood prevention schemes which are identified and programmed. In Hawick such a scheme is intended.

The Council’s Flood Protection Officer advises that The Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland) known as the “second generation flood mapping” prepared by SEPA indicates that most of the site is at risk from a flood event with a return period of 1 in 200 years. That is the 0.5% annual risk of a flood occurring in any year.

The Hawick Flood Study prepared by Halcrow in April 2006, for this Council, shows the proposed development area also to be within the 1 in 200 year inundation outline for the River Teviot and predicts that the flooding in the area would be about 101.15m AOD. Following several discussions with the developer he has agreed that the ground floor Finished Floor Level of the building should be raised to 101.15m AOD in line with the predicted 1 in 200 year flood level and this is the level shown in the proposed application. No allowance has been made for freeboard but the Council have accepted this situation in a similar application elsewhere in Hawick. As access and egress to the property could be affected by flood waters, should approval be given, the Flood Protection Officer recommends that the applicant arranges to receive local flood alerts and also prepares an action plan to ensure that safe evacuation from the building can be made in times of flood warnings. The Council’s Flood Protection Officer therefore has no objections to the proposal.

SEPA has objected to the application on flood risk grounds. The site in question has a risk of flooding and it follows that to allow development to proceed may place property or persons at serious risk contrary to national planning policy and guidance. SEPA is also concerned about the access and egress for the site as the site plan shows the only site access is directly from Commercial Road. The indicative flood map shows that this access and egress route would be cut-off during peak flows.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 16 SEPA believe that the proposal could be modified to overcome their concerns. The agent, has however, advised that it is not possible to amend the scheme to SEPA’s satisfaction.

There are significant environmental and economic considerations regarding the successful development of this site for the benefit of the surrounding area and Hawick. The site has been identified as a regeneration area for a number of years, the new Local Plan and SPG reaffirming that requirement. There have been other developments in this area that have been approved with a SEPA objection in place, notably the erection of twelve townhouses in Victoria Road Hawick and the Sainsbury supermarket in Commercial Road Hawick. The proposed building occupies a greatly reduced ground area than the buildings to be demolished which would provide greater compensatory storage and the Finished Floor Level of the building has been raised to 101.15m AOD in line with the predicted 1 in 200 year flood level. On this basis, it is considered that the proposal can be supported.

If Members are inclined to support the application, then the existence of the SEPA objection would result in the requirement for notification of the decision to the Scottish Government.

Drainage

Policy I14of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 and policy Inf6 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 requires surface water drainage to comply with sustainable urban drainage systems. The drainage plan submitted with the application indicates that all surface water would drain to the Scottish Water sewer, contrary to the advice of SEPA. A condition would ensure that a SUD system is applied to this site.

Residential Amenities

Policy H2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that development that is judged to have an adverse impact on the amenity of existing or proposed residential areas will not be permitted.

No.30 is a dwellinghouse situated to the south west of the site separated from it by a driveway. The proposal is for a four-and-a-half storey building 7m from the front elevation of this dwellinghouse. However, the proposed building would be set back 2m further into the site than the existing building and would be a similar height and scale and so it is considered that the proposal would have no worse an impact on no.30 that the existing situation. A stone boundary wall is proposed for the boundary with no.30 and there would be no parking related to this development on the driveway of no.30.

There are residential properties to the rear of the site but these are on much higher ground some distance from the proposed building and so the residential amenities of occupiers of these properties would not be affected by the proposal.

Archaeology

Planning and Building Standards Committee 17 The site is of significant archaeological interest and so the Council’s Archaeologist has requested that archaeological conditions be attached to any planning permission for this proposal.

Developer Contributions

Policy H9 of the Scottish Borders Consolidated Structure Plan 2001 - 2018 states that the Council will seek to secure affordable and special needs housing within new housing developments. Policy H1 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 states that where the Local Housing Strategy or local needs assessment identifies a local housing need, the Council will require the provision of a proportion of land for affordable or special needs housing. Policy G5 states that where a site is acceptable but cannot proceed due to deficiencies in infrastructure or due to environmental impacts the Council will require developers to make contributions towards the cost of addressing such deficiencies.

Should Members be minded to approve the application on-site provision of affordable housing at a rate of 25% (6 units) is required. Contributions will also be required at a rate of £468 per market unit (net of the affordable housing units) for Drumlanrig Primary School. These would be secured through the completion of a legal agreement.

CONCLUSION

09/00629/FUL:

The proposal is considered to comply with policies G1, H2, H3, BE1 and BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 in that the proposal is of an acceptable layout and design and would not harm the character or appearance of adjacent Listed Building or the Conservation Area and would not harm residential amenities of nearby residential properties.

09/00702/LBC

The proposal complies with policies BE1 and BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 in that the mill building is in a poor physical condition and is continuing to deteriorate. The current condition and appearance of Wilton Mills has a damaging effect upon this part of the town. Whilst the two engineers reports have indicated that the building could be repaired, they have both expressed concern about the costs and thus the viability of doing so. There are considerable benefits to the wider community of the redevelopment of this site.

09/00703/CON:

The proposal complies with policy BE4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan Adopted 2008 in that the buildings are of little architectural merit and buildings do not contribute positively to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

RECOMMENDATION BY HEAD OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY SERVICES

Planning and Building Standards Committee 18 In respect of planning application 09/00629/FUL I recommend that the application be approved subject to notification to the Scottish Ministers, an appropriate legal agreement addressing contributions towards the provision of affordable housing and educational facilities in the locality and subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

2. 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.

3. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work (which may include excavation) in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining a Historic Building Survey which has been formulated by, or on behalf of, the applicant and submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow archaeological investigation, at all reasonable times, by a person or persons nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Historic Building Survey Report. Reason: To preserve by record a building of historical interest.

4. 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.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 19 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.

5. 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 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.

6. A sample of the proposed stonework for the building to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The development then to be completed in accordance with the approved sample. Reason: The stonework requires further consideration to ensure a satisfactory form of development, which contributes appropriately to its setting.

7. The roofing material to be natural slate. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.

8. Details of the enclosure and glass bridge at the mill lade/wheel pit and an information board to be submitted and approved by in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The development then to be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: The mill lade and wheel pits are of architectural and historical significance.

9. Details of the height, extent, materials and capping of the perimeter wall to the Commercial Road frontage to be submitted and approved by in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The wall to be constructed of salvaged stone. The development then to be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area.

10. The colour of all external joinery, including the timber boarding, doors and windows, to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The development then to be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 20 Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area.

11. Visibility splays shall be provided and maintained on each side of the access road. These splays are the triangles of ground bounded on 2 sides by the first 4.5m of the centreline of the access road (the setback dimension) and the nearside trunk road carriageway measured 90m (the Y dimension) in both directions from the intersection of the access with the trunk road. In a vertical plane, nothing shall obscure visibility measured from a driver’s eye height of between 0.26m and 1.05m anywhere along the Y dimension. Reason: To ensure that drivers of vehicles leaving the site are enabled to see and be seen by vehicles on the Trunk Road carriageway and join the traffic stream safely.

12. The proposed means of access to the trunk road shall be constructed to a layout and type (and method) of construction to be approved by the Planning Authority, after consultation with the Roads Authority, before the development is commenced. Reason: To minimise interference with the safety and free flow of traffic on the Trunk Road.

13. There shall be no drainage connections to the Trunk Road drainage system. Reason: To ensure that the efficiency of the existing drainage network is not affected and that the standard of construction is commensurate with that required within the Trunk Road boundary.

14. A new bus stop to be provided to the specification of the Planning Authority on the north bound side of Commercial Road at a location to be agreed with the Planning Authority before the development commences. The bus stop to be provided to the agreed specification before the flats are occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

15. All parking bays within the site must be a minimum of 2.5m x 5m in size. Where the bays are up against a boundary marker such as a wall, fence or hedge, the bay must be a minimum of 6m. The parking to be completed to the specification of the Planning Authority before the flats are occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

16. 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, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory arrangements are made for the disposal of surface and foul water.

17. Before development on the site begins, a scheme for the protection of birds 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. Where it is established that there is a breeding bird interest, no works shall be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: To protect breeding birds within the site.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 21 18. A development licence for bats is required from the Scottish Government. The developer must provide a copy of the licence to the Planning Authority before any works or demolition of the buildings within the site commence. Reason: To safeguard natural heritage interests at the site.

19. The mitigation and enhancement measures outlined in Section 6 of Brindley Associates Bat Survey Report July 2010, to be carried out as part of the development and completed before the flats are occupied. Reason: To protect bats within the site, which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994.

20. Details of all proposed means of enclosure within and around the site 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.

21. The trees within the application site shall not be felled, lopped, lifted or disturbed in any way without the prior consent of the Planning Authority. Reason: The existing trees represent an important visual feature which the Planning Authority considered should be substantially maintained.

22. Before any part of the permitted development is commenced, the trees to be retained on the site shall be protected by a chestnut paling fence 1.5 metres high, placed at a minimum radius of one metre beyond the crown spread of each tree and the fencing 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 on the development site, the loss of which would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area.

23. 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, and shall include:

Planning and Building Standards Committee 22 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.

24. No development shall take place except in strict accordance with a scheme of hard landscaping works, which has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Details of the scheme shall include:

i. existing and finished ground levels in relation to a fixed datum preferably ordnance ii. location and design, including materials, of walls, fences and gates and treatment of existing walls iii. hard surfacing works and materials iv. existing and proposed services such as cables, pipelines, sub-stations v. A programme for completion and subsequent maintenance.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory form, layout and assimilation of the development.

Informatives:

The consultation response from the Council’s Flood Protection Officer is attached for the information of the applicant.

In respect of condition 20, the consultation response from the Council’s Landscape Architect is attached for the information of the applicant. The site plan should be amended to include the construction of boundary walls to the rear of the flats and the Clock Tower Building to create enclosed courtyard style gardens.

In respect of condition 23, a tree-lined avenue along the Commercial Road is required as per the Supplementary Planning Guidance for Commercial Road. Opportunities exist to enhance the local habitat network for bats and breeding birds through planting of native thorn species rich extended hedgerows or small plots of semi-natural woodland. A pond or SUDS feature can also enhance the local habitat network for bats.

This planning permission does not carry with it the right to carry out works within the trunk road boundary. The applicant should consult with Transport Scotland Trunk Roads Network Management Directorate through its Management Organisation, BEAR Scotland, on the terms and conditions, under the Roads legislation, that require to be agreed to enable works within the trunk road boundary to be approved.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 23 Trunk Road modification works shall in all respects comply with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges and the Specification for Highway Works published by HMSO. The developer shall issue a certificate to that effect, signed by his design organisation. Any work within the trunk road will require a Minute of Agreement with Transport Scotland. Trunk Road modifications will, in all respects, be expected to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 2005.

Transport Scotland advises that it would appear likely that the level of development proposed for the site will require a full right turning lane designed to standard layout of TD41/95 of DMRB Volume 6 Section 2.

The internal roads shall require construction consent. The full extent of the works will be determined by the level of development proposed at the time of construction. The parking areas, excluding the 4 visitor bays for the flats, will not be included within the construction consent and shall not be adopted as public upon completion.

The reinstatement of the footway associated with the proposed closure of existing accesses onto Commercial Road must be to the satisfaction of Transport Scotland.

The water body which is in the vicinity of the development area to be protected by adopting SEPA Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 (general guidance and works affecting watercourses), PPG 3, 4, 7, 13 (site drainage), PPG 2, 8 (oil storage) and PPG 6 (construction and demolition) as appropriate.

In respect of the Listed Building Consent application 09/00702/LBC I recommend that the application be approved subject to referral to Historic Scotland and subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

2. The works of demolition hereby permitted shall not be begun until documentary evidence is produced to show that contracts have been entered into by the developer to ensure that building work is commenced within a period of 6 months following commencement of demolition. Reason: To prevent premature demolition in the interests of the character of the Conservation Area.

3. 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

Planning and Building Standards Committee 24 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.

4. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work (which may include excavation) in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation outlining a Historic Building Survey which has been formulated by, or on behalf of, the applicant and submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Access should be afforded to allow archaeological investigation, at all reasonable times, by a person or persons nominated by the developer and agreed to by the Planning Authority. Results will be submitted to the Planning Authority for review in the form of a Historic Building Survey Report. Reason: To preserve by record a building of historical interest.

5. Sufficient stone to be set aside from the demolition to provide the proposed boundary wall along the Commercial Road frontage and a written schedule of materials to be salvaged must be submitted to and agreed with the Planning Authority before the demolition occurs. Reason: In the interests of the character of the Conservation Area.

6. Details of the enclosure and glass bridge at the mill lade/wheel pit and an information board to be submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The development then to be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: The mill lade and wheel pits are of architectural and historical significance.

7. Before development on the site begins, a scheme for the protection of birds 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. Where it is established that there is a breeding bird interest, no works shall be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: To protect breeding birds within the site.

8. A development licence for bats is required from the Scottish Government. The developer must provide a copy of the licence to the Planning Authority before any works or demolition of the buildings within the site commence. Reason: To safeguard natural heritage interests at the site.

9. The mitigation and enhancement measures outlined in Section 6 of Brindley Associates Bat Survey Report July 2010, to be carried out as part of the development and completed before the flats are occupied. Reason: To protect bats within the site, which are protected under the Wildlife and

Planning and Building Standards Committee 25 Countryside Act 1981 as amended under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994.

Informative:

In respect of the Conservation Area Consent application 09/00703/CON I recommend that the application be approved subject to referral to Historic Scotland and subject to the following conditions and informative notes:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out within three years of the date of this consent. Reason: To comply with the provision of Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997.

Planning and Building Standards Committee 26 4. A method statement regarding the removal of surplus material to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the demolition commences. Reason: To ensure th methods for removing the surplus material is satisfactory to the Planning Authority.

5. Before development on the site begins, a scheme for the protection of birds 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. Where it is established that there is a breeding bird interest, no works shall be carried out during the breeding bird season (March-August) without the express written permission of the Planning Authority. Reason: To protect breeding birds within the site.

6. A development licence for bats is required from the Scottish Government. The developer must provide a copy of the licence to the Planning Authority before any works or demolition of the buildings within the site commence. Reason: To safeguard natural heritage interests at the site.

7. The mitigation and enhancement measures outlined in Section 6 of Brindley Associates Bat Survey Report July 2010, to be carried out as part of the development and completed before the flats are occupied. Reason: To protect bats within the site, which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994.

Approved by Name Designation Brian Frater Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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

Author(s) Name Designation Julie Hayward Principal Planning Officer

Planning and Building Standards Committee 27 Planning and Building Standards Committee 28 PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE ITEM NO 10

13th SEPTEMBER 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

Nil

2.2 Enforcements:

Nil

3 APPEAL DECISIONS RECEIVED

3.1 Planning Applications

3.1.1 Reference: 09/01384/FUL Proposal: Changes to approved house design (previously approved on consent 06/01526/FUL) Site: Former Mill Buildings Adjacent Dean Cottage, Old Manse Road, Eddleston Appellant: David Cessford & Mandi Mackenzie

Reasons for Refusal: The proposed development is contrary to policy G1 (12) of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2008 in that the redesigned house is not of a scale, massing, height and density appropriate to its surroundings and that the proposed extension or alterations are not appropriate to the existing building.

Grounds of Appeal: The principal of a large residential property on the land is firmly established due to planning permission on application 06/01526/FUL. The new application has only minor design changes to the previous application. The Community Council & neighbouring property objections are either unsustainable or irrelevant to the proposals of the appeal. If the proposals were implemented it would not cause any demonstrable harm to nearby properties, the building itself, its setting or the wider surrounding area.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations Reporter’s Decision: Sustained, subject to a condition

Summary of Decision: The Reporter, Michael Shiel, concluded that the proposal does not conflict with the relevant provisions of the development plan, and there are no material considerations that warrant the refusal of permission. The Right of Way Condition has been amended by the Reporter to take account of the progress in implementing the permission.

3.1.2 Reference: 09/01644/PPP Proposal: Erection of dwellinghouse Site: Land North and East Of Spindrift Cottage, Kaimflat, Kelso Appellant: Mr M D Ramsden

Reasons for Refusal: 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.

Grounds of Appeal: The site is not prime agricultural land as per letter from Crop Services Scotland Ltd. The boundary hedge will give the site a good sense of enclosure and a natural finish to the building group.

Method of Appeal: Written Representations

Reporter’s Decision: Dismissed

Summary of Decision: The Reporter, Roger Wilson, concluded that it would be unacceptable because it would result in a loss of prime agricultural land, it would harm the cohesiveness of the existing group of dwellings and appear prominent and exposed in the surrounding open countryside. The access is also sub-standard in terms of safety and general convenience for users.

3.2 Enforcements

Nil

4 APPEALS OUTSTANDING

4.1 There remained 1 appeals previously reported on which decisions were still awaited when this report was prepared on 27 August. This relates to sites at:

x Medwyn Rd, West Linton.

5 REVIEW REQUESTS RECEIVED

5.1 Reference: 10/00585/FUL Proposal: Erection of timber deck with balustrade (retrospective) Site: 76 Forest Road, Selkirk Appellant: Mrs Patricia Yuill

Reason for Refusal: It is considered that this development does not comply with Local Plan Policies G1 and H2 in that this development will cause adverse visual intrusion which significantly compromises the outlook and privacy of the neighbouring residential property of Number 74 Forest Road, Selkirk. 6 REVIEWS DETERMINED

Nil

6.1 Reference: 10/00384/FUL Proposal: Installation of 3 No solar panels Site: Harden Vale, Ancrum Appellant: Ms Kate MacInnes

Reason for Refusal: The proposal contravenes Local Plan Policies BE4, D4 and G1 and Structure Plan Policies N18, N20 and I20 in that the design and location of the solar panels on this prime elevation would have an unacceptable adverse effect on the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse and Conservation Area.

Method of Review: Review of papers.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer upheld.

6.2 Reference: 10/00691/FUL Proposal: Erection of log cabin Site: Land South Of Whitchester House, Duns Appellant: R A P Forsell (Forestry)

Reason for Refusal: 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 log cabin hereby permitted shall not be used as a permanent residence and shall be retained as a tourist/leisure facility unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. Reason: The erection of an unrestricted dwellinghouse on this site would not comply with the terms of the Council's Housing in the Countryside Policies. 3. The log cabin hereby approved shall be removed at the expiry of five years from the date of this permission and the site shall be reinstated to its former condition unless a further permission is obtained. Reason: The proposed cabin is not of a permanent construction, and the planning authority require to review its condition at the end of a five year period.

Method of Review: Review of papers.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer overturned.

6.3 Reference: 10/00162/PPP Proposal: Erection of dwellinghouse Site: Land South East of Eastfield Stables, Buxton, Selkirk Appellant: Mr and Mrs Hugh Lovatt

Reason for Refusal: Review of Non determination of application within prescribed timescale.

Method of Review: Review of papers and site visit.

Review Decision: Decision of Appointed Officer upheld (Varied terms of reason for refusal). 7 REVIEWS OUTSTANDING

7.1 In addition to those listed in section 4 of this report, there remained 4 reviews previously reported on which decisions were still awaited when this report was prepared on 27 August. These relate to sites at:

x Land East Of Braidwood, Midlem. x Land South Of The Old Manse, Teviothead, Hawick. x Outbuilding South Of The Old Manse, Teviothead, Hawick. x 3 Scott Crescent, Selkirk.

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 Laura Marshall Public Inquiry & Appeals Co- ordinator

Background Papers: None.

Previous Minute Reference: None.

Contact us at Planning and Economic Development, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel. No. 01835 826585 Fax No. 01835 825158 Email: [email protected]