PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL 25 September 2019 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 MODIFICATION AND ADOPTION Report by Depute Chief Executive, Chief Operating Officer (Report No. 19/275) PURPOSE OF REPORT This report and the associated appendices present the conclusions and recommended modifications arising out of the Examination of the Proposed Local Development Plan 2. It notes that, in the majority of cases, the Reporter accepted the Council’s position as set out in the Plan, or in the responses to representations submitted for examination. In addition, the report notes an assessment of the Strategic Environmental Assessement (SEA) implications and an update of the Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record which take into account the modifications made to the Proposed Local Development Plan. The report recommends that the Council accepts all the recommended modifications, plus the technical and consequential changes, and proceeds to the adoption of the Plan. The report also sets out the procedures required to modify and adopt the Plan. 1. BACKGROUND / MAIN ISSUES 1.1 The Proposed Local Development Plan 2 (the Proposed Plan) sets out the strategy to guide future land use and development within Perth & Kinross up to 2028. The Proposed Plan contains policies and proposals covering the principal land use issues and sets out where new development should or should not happen. When adopted, the Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) will replace the existing Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan (LDP1) adopted in February 2014. 1.2 The Council approved the Proposed Plan, for a period of representation, at its meeting on the 22 November 2017 (Report No17/387). Following on from this the representations received were considered and those that remained unresolved were reported to the Special Council Meeting of 29 August 2018 (Report No 18/263 refers). This meeting also considered the Council’s proposed response to those representations. The Council agreed that the Proposed Plan along with the unresolved representations be submitted to Scottish Ministers for Examination. 2. EXAMINATION 2.1 The Proposed Plan was submitted to the Scottish Ministers on 14 September 2018 and, following the satisfactory consideration of the Council’s Participation Statement, the Examination commenced on 5 November 2018. The Examination was undertaken by four independent persons known as Reporters, and referred to in this report as the Reporter. The Reporter is appointed by Scottish Ministers, with the administration of the Examination process undertaken by the Government’s Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA). The full cost of the Examination is the responsibility of the Council and amounts to £122,532.29. 2.2 The Reporter has now completed the Examination of the Proposed Plan against the unresolved representations and the Council’s submissions (as agreed at the Special Council meeting on 29 August 2018), and has outlined the modifications to be made to the Proposed Plan. Appendix 1, provided in electronic format, sets out in detail all of the modifications and changes made to the plan as proposed by the Reporter. Appendix 2, provided in electronic format, contains the full Examination Report and addendum. Copies of these Appendices are also available in the Members’ Lounge. 2.3 The Reporter, in the Examination of the Proposed Plan, considered all of the 50 groupings of issues arising from the unresolved representations. The Examination process included a series of unaccompanied site inspections. A total of 18 further information requests were submitted to the Council and other parties. Most sought clarification on site specific issues. The remainder related to issues covering infrastructure contributions, housing land supply, placemaking, flooding, retail, air quality and minerals. 2.4 There was no requirement to hold a formal inquiry or hearing session. Having taken into account all of the information submitted, the Reporter has set out conclusions and recommendations in relation to each of the issues in the Examination Report. This was delivered to the Council on 11 July 2019, the date originally scheduled by the DPEA. 2.5 The Examination report is essentially binding on Planning Authorities - this is in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Grounds for declining to follow recommendations) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Regulation 2 states that authorities may only depart from recommendations that: “(a) Would have the effect of making the LDP inconsistent with the National Planning Framework, or with any SDP or national park plan for the same area; (b) Are incompatible with Part IVA of the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regs 1994; (c) Would not be acceptable having regard to an environmental assessment carried out by the planning authority on the plan following modification in response to recommendations; (d) Are based on conclusions that could not reasonably have been reached based on the evidence considered at the Examination.” 2.6 Criterion (d) relates to the possibility of clear errors (including factual errors) by the Reporter, but not to occasions where the Reporter has reached a different planning judgement from the planning authority. 2.7 I am satisfied that none of the circumstances provided for in regulation 2 applies and therefore the Council is required to accept the Reporter’s recommendations. The failure to comply with these regulations would present a high risk of legal challenge in the Court of Session. Key findings and modifications 2.8 To assist Members a series of summary sheets have been prepared for each of the Issues the Reporters looked at. These provide information on: • The extent to which the Reporters recommendations agreed with the Council’s submission. • Any requirement to update the Strategic Environmental Assessment and Habitats Regulations Appraisal . 2.9 Appendix 3, provided in electronic format contains the summary sheets. A copy is also available in the Members’ Lounge. 2.10 The following section provides an overview of some of the key conclusions reached by the Reporter and, where appropriate, discusses the implications of the modifications. It is worth noting that the majority of the Reporter’s recommendations are in line with the Proposed Plan, or the suggested responses contained in the Council’s submissions to the Examination. The more significant exceptions, where the Reporter recommends modifications which are not in line with the Council’s position, are highlighted below. Vision, objectives and spatial strategy sections (Issues 01, 14, 16, 24) 2.11 In general, the Reporter is supportive of the Council’s Vision, Objectives and Strategy making only minor modifications to aid clarity. 2.12 In relation to the housing land strategy the key point to note is that the Reporter did not accept the development industry’s representations to increase the housing land targets. The Reporter was supportive overall of the Councils strategy to meet the housing requirement and considered it to be in accordance with TAYplan and Scottish Planning Policy. 2.13 The Reporter has however recommended that, as the Plan will now be adopted in 2019, not 2018 as originally intended, that the Plan period be amended to take it to 2029. This required consideration of a housing land requirement for an additional 1 year. However, as a result of the Additional Information Requests from the Reporter, the Council was able to satisfy the Reporter that there was sufficient flexibility in the Plan as proposed to accommodate this change without new site allocation. This change does not present any issues for the Council and indeed gives greater flexibility for the preparation of LDP3. Policies (Issues 02 – 13, 15 & 17 – 23) 2.14 In general the Reporter is supportive of the policies contained in the Plan. One notable exception is with part of Policy 1D Placemaking (discussed below). The majority of the recommended modifications add clarification and many were supported by the Council in its submissions to the Examination. Of particular note is the strong support for the Infrastructure Contributions, Housing Mix, Green Belt and New Development & Flooding Policies. 2.15 Policy 1D Placemaking. In response to a representation, the Council made a suggestion to the Reporter that the upper limit of the identified density ranges set out in the Plan would be an absolute upper limit stating that “applications which exceed the identified capacity range will not be permitted”. The Reporter found against this premise indicating that “it would be inappropriate to treat the lower and upper figures in these ranges as finite and immutable. “ 2.16 The Reporter goes on to state “I agree with the position taken by A&J Stephen Limited, Homes for Scotland and Springfield Properties in their FIR04 responses that identified capacity ranges on both allocated and consented sites must reasonably be treated as indicative only. I agree that identifying a capacity range is the best way, at this early stage of plan preparation, to identify a broadly acceptable quantum of development for a site. However, requiring all proposals throughout the plan period to remain within this range in either all circumstances or in unspecified exceptional circumstances has not been adequately justified. “ 2.17 The Reporter recommends the deletion of the last two sentences of the policy and replacing them as follows:- “These capacities are indicative. On sites with an identified capacity range, any proposal for residential development that falls outside this range will be considered where adequately justified by the applicant and when any associated impacts upon infrastructure, open space and residential amenity can successfully be addressed.” 2.18 Policy 5 Infrastructure Contributions. Having taken into consideration the Recent High Court Appeal decision against the Aberdeen City / Shire developer contributions policy the Reporter found PKC’s approach robust . The Reporter made some modifications to the suggested wording which will allow for changes to the current Guidance and the introduction of future changes to it. The revised wording is helpful to the application of the Guidance.