Town and Country Planning () Act 1997

ANGUS COUNCIL

REPORT ON OBJECTIONS TO THE FINALISED ANGUS LOCAL PLAN REVIEW VOLUME 3

Reporters: Richard E Bowden BSc(Hons) MPhil MRTPI Richard G Dent BA(Hons) DipTP FRTPI

Dates of inquiry: 23 January – 25 April 2006 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

VOLUME 3

CONTENTS

Introduction

page

Part 4, Town and Village Directory - villages and other settlements

Arbirlot: Settlement Boundary 1 : AM1, Housing - Kirkbank 9 : Omission 10 Baldovan, Pitempton and Balmuir: Omission 15 Balgray, : Omission 21 and : Development Boundary 25 Balkeerie and Eassie: Boundary - Eassie Hall 30 Berryhill, by Fowlis: Omission 31 Birkhill/Muirhead and land north of Liff Hospital: Omission 38 Bridgefoot: Omission 43 Bridgend of Lintrathen: Development Boundary 49 : Omission - Ballumbie House 59 Village 63 Craigton of : Omission 65 Eassie Muir: Development Boundary – Omission 67 : Omission - East Mains Farm 70 Edzell: Omission – Former Mart 77 Emmock: Omission 81 Finavon: Omission 86 : Allocation Fk2, East of Kinnell Gardens & 89 Omission of land at South Gardyne Street Grahamstown, by : Omission 113 and Tealing – Omission 115 Inveraldie and Tealing: Omissions – Tealing House & Walled Garden 120 Kellas: Omission 125 : Omission of a settlement boundary 129 Kirkton of Auchterhouse: Omission 132 Kirkton of : Settlement Boundary 136 Kirkton of Monikie: Omission 139 Letham: L2 – Housing, Jubilee Park 143 Letham: L3 – Housing, East Hemming Street 147 Letham Grange Development Strategy 148 Liff: Omission of land at Woodside Road 155 Logie, by Montrose: Development boundary 160 : Development boundary 163 : Settlement boundary 165 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Monikie: Omission 167 : Omission 171 Newbigging by : Omission 175 Newbigging by Tealing: Omission 186 Newbigging by Tealing: Omission - land at Leyshade Farm 190 Newbigging by Tealing: Omission - land at Newbigging Farm 195 : Omission 200 North : Settlement boundary 204 North Dronley: Omission 207 Padanaram: Settlement boundary 210 Panmure Estate: Omission 212 Piperdam: Paragraph 4 and Pd1 - Residential Development 216 South : Omission of land at Broomfield Nurseries 220 South Kingennie: Omission – single plot 224 South Kingennie: Omission - land to the west 226 Hospital: St1, Opportunity Site Strathmartine Hospital Estate 230 : Omissions – South, North and South-East 238 Westhall Terrace: Omission 248 Westmuir: Settlement boundary 252 Woodville: Wv1 - Development Approach 254

Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

INTRODUCTION

This report considers all objections lodged, and not subsequently unconditionally withdrawn, against the terms of the finalised Angus Local Plan Review including the first, second and third rounds of pre-inquiry changes.

The report is set out in 3 volumes:

• General and policy objections (Parts 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6) and appendices; • The larger settlements – Arbroath, , Carnoustie and Barry, , , and Montrose; • The remaining settlements in the Town and Village Directory along with all other settlements.

The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes (Scotland) Regulations 2004 implement European Union Council Directive 2001/42/EC (the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive) on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. Under these Regulations, all new and replacement structure and local plans - and those started on or before 21 July 2004 but not adopted or submitted to the legislative procedure for adoption before 22 July 2006 - must be subject to SEA. Scottish Ministers, however, may direct that a particular plan or programme is exempt, if they decide that such an assessment is not feasible.

Initially it was anticipated that the Angus Local Plan Review would be capable of adoption prior to 22 July 2006. Accordingly, a strategic environmental assessment would not be required under the terms of the Directive. More recently it was recognised that adoption by 22 July 2006 had become unlikely and a written request for exemption was submitted to the Scottish Ministers on 16 February 2006. The Scottish Ministers granted the exemption, as requested, on 28 March 2006.

The inquiry took place between 23 January and 25 April 2006 in various locations in Angus. Where requested, the proceedings were conducted as a formal public local inquiry but, for the most part, the objections were discussed at informal hearings. The Reporters sat separately other than for the hearing of objections against Policy SC1, Housing Land Supply and Policy SC6, Affordable Housing.

In considering objections, account has been taken of the evidence presented at the inquiry, written material, supporting documents and site inspections. When requested, the Reporters visited objection sites on an accompanied basis.

Evidence submitted following the close of the inquiry was taken into account only if it was received before the particular matter to which it related had not been dealt with by the appropriate Reporter. Any late documents have simply been passed to the council to be considered as thought fit.

Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Recommendations are made in respect of all objections heard at the inquiry and those where objectors elected to rest on written submissions. Objections deemed by the council as invalid (or not in conflict with the terms of the plan) have not been considered and are not the subject of recommendations.

Overall, it is believed that the recommendations would lead to the local plan conforming to the provisions of the and Angus Structure Plan.

Richard E Bowden Richard Dent Reporter Reporter Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Arbirlot: Settlement Boundary

Objector Reference

James Fairweather 825/1/1 Mr & Mrs G J Willey 832/1/1 Evelyn T Graham 898/1/1 Mr & Mrs D W Docherty 901/1/1 & 902/1/1 Matthew Pease 911/1/1

Supporters

P & J Van Wees 153/1/1 Dr Graeme Sutherland 817/1/1 Justin & Angela Austin 818/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Formal inquiry (Mr & Mrs Willey and Richard Dent Mr Fairweather), informal hearing (Evelyn Graham) and written submissions ______

Background

3.1 Arbirlot is a small village set on generally level ground in the steep sided valley of the Elliot Water. The valley is known as a “den”. It is included in the town and village directory with a settlement map depicting the boundary but no village statement.

3.2 The boundary follows the Elliot Water to the west, relates closely to property boundaries to the south-east, and, to the north and north-east, includes an open area which rises up sharply from the general level of the village to higher land beyond. This area contains one house, Treetops. Much of the village, other than the open land to the north and north-east is a designated conservation area which also extends over a large, sloping, generally wooded area to the west and south and across agricultural land to the south-east.

3.3 Policy S1, Development Boundaries, provides guidance in respect of proposed development within boundaries, proposed development in the countryside and development contiguous with a development boundary.

Basis of the objections

3.4 Evelyn T Graham objects to the extension of the village boundary to create a plot in the open area to the north and north-east and believes that the priority should be improvement rather then enlargement.

1 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.5 The plot is large and, hence, any subsequent house on the site would itself be too large. It would exacerbate longstanding drainage and flooding problems, impact adversely on the conservation area and listed buildings, particularly, in this latter respect, in terms of the likelihood of inappropriate detailed design. The houses in the village are generally of similar appearance and a new house of contrasting design would set a bad precedent. In any event, there is a derelict site in the village at Walkerbank. That would be suitable for renovation which, in turn, would remove an eyesore.

3.6 Mr & Mrs Docherty also contend that an additional house would change the appearance and close-knit character of Arbirlot, there being no need to extend the boundary when other sites are available within the village.

3.7 James Fairweather is concerned about the lack of notification but, nevertheless, does not consider there is any need for additional development, particularly in view of the potential at Walkerbank and other possible gap site opportunities. Although it has been indicated that only one house is proposed, the objection site is capable of accommodating four or five houses.

3.8 Development of the site would require significant earthmoving and retaining walls which would have a detrimental impact on the character and landscape setting of the village. Access would be a problem and there are concerns about drainage and flooding. No public benefit would be derived from the proposed extension.

3.9 Mr and Mrs Willey have undertaken much restoration work on the 1850s former manse, Denside House, a C(s) listed building. Development within the proposed extended boundary, because of the steep slope of the land, would severely affect the setting of the house and the garden would be overlooked. The proposal has come forward in response to a representation but without the required assessment. On the other hand, the landscape analysis undertaken on behalf of Mr and Mrs Willey clearly shows the land to be integral to the setting of both the adjacent listed building and the Arbirlot Conservation Area.

3.10 The extension, which increases the village area by some 20%, is illogical insofar as the boundary has elsewhere been adjusted and drawn tightly around Arbirlot in a sensible and defensible manner. SPP3, Planning for Housing, advocates the possibility of utilising brownfield sites – of which there are examples in the village - prior to extending the boundary and releasing greenfield sites. Similar guidance is contained in the structure plan. The proposed extension would set an undesirable precedent and lead to pressure for further releases. In any event, the expansion area is not a natural extension, relating poorly to the existing settlement and not justified by any demonstrable shortage of housing land supply or local circumstances. It does not accord with the local plan review development strategy and is not justified in terms other than to facilitate a future planning application. This approach is contrary to the purpose of the development plan which should guide development to appropriate locations.

3.11 As a backdrop to Denside House, the topography of the expansion area and its proximity to the house would inevitably cause any development to have an adverse impact

2 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

on the setting of the listed building. The building is sited at the head of the approach drive and framed by fields and trees beyond. The importance of setting is emphasised in the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas and NPPG18, Planning and the Historic Environment, and reflected in structure plan Policy 5A, Historic Environment. Similarly, development of the expansion area would be out of character with the conservation area, the boundary of which should be extended to include the steeply sloping land as this area effectively contributes to the landscape character and setting of the village.

3.12 There is a presumption in favour of development within the settlement boundary under Policy S1 and it is apparent that the council accepts the principle of building a house on the site. It is clear that the proximity to Denside House of any new building and the need for retaining structures would involve a need for mitigation measures. Although the council believes that trees and/or shrubs might be appropriate, any screening would take many years to become effective. Eventually, new trees would have an adverse impact on the buildings to be screened leading to for removal. Any building would involve major alterations in the natural landform and break the skyline at the top of the slope. It is clear that building would not “fit” into the landscape and would therefore be contrary to the spirit of local plan Policy ER5, Conservation of Landscape Quality.

3.13 Whilst any proposal that comes forward would require detailed consideration, sketch proposals for a house on the site demonstrate that the fears expressed are justified. Recent drawings show a higher roof which would be some 3 metres higher than the crest of the hill exacerbating the dominance of the building.

3.14 The land should not be included in the development boundary. However, should the boundary remain as proposed by the council, the local plan review should clearly qualify the scope for development by imposing restrictions on the scale and type of acceptable development. In any event, the conservation area boundary should encompass the area of the proposed boundary extension.

3.15 Matthew Pease endorses the objections to the proposed expansion area on the basis of severe detrimental impact on the setting of the listed building and the character of the conservation area. Development would erode the remaining traces of the original settlement pattern of Arbirlot which is mostly limited to the lower level land. Only one more recent house is at a higher elevation.

The council’s response

3.16 Development boundaries protect the landscape setting of towns and villages and prevent uncontrolled growth. Review and amendment takes place through the local plan process. In this case the extension was proposed following representations in terms of the consultative draft local plan review.

3.17 The steeply sloping objection site is clearly defined and effectively encloses the north-east part of the village. Mature woodland and the skyline mark two sides of the site and

3 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review provide a defensible boundary. Within the village, where the church is the dominant building, the objection site has a relatively low profile and is not visible from most locations. There being no similar site, the inclusion of the land within the boundary would not set a precedent. Specific allocations are not made in the local plan review for developments of less than 5 houses. There being no development allocations in Arbirlot, a settlement statement has not been provided. Policy S1(a), which relates to new development within development boundaries, would apply. In this case, subject to protecting the skyline and appropriate planting and landscaping, there would be the opportunity to build a single house without causing an unacceptable impact on the character of Arbirlot, adjacent properties, including Denside House, and the conservation area. It was on this basis that the extended boundary was proposed.

3.18 It is accepted that part of the local plan development strategy guides and encourages the majority of development, including local housing, to locations within the larger settlements. They have the capacity to accommodate new development and are well integrated with transport infrastructure. Guidance in SPP3, Planning for Housing, in respect of extensions to existing settlements is not relevant, the scale of the proposal being a more important consideration.

3.19 The field comprising the objection site is within the landscape setting of Arbirlot. The enclosed nature of the land places the site within the context of the village rather than in the countryside extending beyond the crest of the slope. Any development would require to accord with other local plan policies including design and proximity to the conservation area and listed building. Although any development would be higher on the hillside than any at present, the scale of the site is such that a well-designed house could be built within a landscaped setting that reflects the landform and wooded surrounds. The existing lane could provide an access although constraints would limit any development to a single house. Adequate provision would be required for drainage and surface water although no particular problems are known to exist. Detailed matters would be assessed through the development control process although the sketch drawings submitted indicate that the skyline would be protected. It is significant that the Architectural Heritage Society for Scotland (AHSS) has seen no inconsistency in the proposed extended boundary.

3.20 The extension of the village boundary as proposed does not allocate the land for residential use. In turn, the extension should not be regarded as being equivalent to granting outline planning permission or suggest that the building of a new house is a fait accompli. The benefit to be derived would be that of a new family house.

3.21 The conservation area was designated in 1975 but the local plan preparation process is not an appropriate means to consider the extension of the boundaries. Although the objection site contributes to the setting of Denside House, the existing conservation area boundary is adequate to protect the setting of the village and does not require change.

3.22 Renovation of the derelict site at Walkerbank would be supported. However, each site, including the objection site, must be looked at individually and any proposals considered

4 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

on individual merit. The extension of the boundary, as proposed, would not prejudice the prospect of the restoration of the land at Walkerburn.

3.23 P & J van Wees, Dr Graeme Sutherland and Justin & Angela Austin support the proposed extension of the settlement boundary.

3.24 Mr and Mrs van Wees note the council’s view that the site should be utilised for a single house with a legal agreement to this effect. Siting, design, and materials should be sympathetic to the conservation area. In this respect, attention is drawn to comments by the AHSS offering no objections as a house on the site would not be inconsistent with the village layout provided that it follows the open terracing, takes account of the Denside House in terms of siting, does not protrude over the horizon and is sheltered by trees to the north. Drawings have been prepared showing possible layouts and a section through the site with a 3 storey house located to the north-east of Denside House.

Conclusions

3.25 Insofar as claimed lack of notification is concerned, I have no reason to believe that the council did not undertake an adequate level of publicity or provide the opportunity to lodge objections against the terms of the finalised local plan review. Section 12(5) of the 1997 Act and Regulation 30 of the Town and Country Planning (Structure and Local Plans)(Scotland) Regulations 1983 set out the requirements in respect of publicity and I note that the council has prepared a formal Statement of Publicity and Consultation which will form part of the submission to the Scottish Ministers. Individual notification is not required.

3.26 The council has argued that the village extension is justified in terms of landscape setting but accepts the amended boundary was proposed in response to a representation seeking a single house on the land. On the other hand, objectors have expressed concern that there has been no landscape assessment of the proposal and that the prospect of building a house has over-ridden the proper consideration of whether the extension is justified in planning terms. In this respect I believe that is important to define settlement boundaries only where they are justified in their own right other than where a planned expansion is required for a particular land use need. For instance, where an allocation is required to fulfil strategic housing or employment land supply, settlement expansion may be necessary. SPP3 provides appropriate guidance.

3.27 There is no specific need for an extension. Nevertheless, the local plan review offers a legitimate opportunity to reappraise settlement boundaries and determine whether any amendments are appropriate. Indeed, despite the practice of the council, the preparation of a local plan also offers an ideal opportunity to reassess conservation area boundaries. The Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas recognises that responses to local plans offer a convenient public consultation process although, of course, conservation area boundaries are formally designated through a separate statutory procedure. Similarly, NPPG18, Planning and the Historic Environment, indicates that local plans should outline proposals for designating conservation areas and for reviewing their boundaries.

5 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.28 I note that the Arbirlot boundary depicted in the existing Angus Local Plan extends across the Elliot Water and includes the wooded slope to the west of the river and several houses at the top of the slope. The boundary in consultative draft local plan review excluded the land to the west of the river, the revised boundary line closely following the edge of the built form of the village. I am of the opinion that this rationale was reasonable and justified, providing clear guidance whereby any future development potential, albeit limited, would be directed to land within the boundary. On the other hand, development proposed immediately beyond the boundary would be subject to assessment under Policy S1(c) which seeks to impose rigorous control over development in such locations. In terms of the smaller settlements in Angus, of which Arbirlot is an example, this approach meets the development strategy of the plan, including directing the majority of development to the larger settlements.

3.29 In terms of the approach adopted in the consultative draft document and the over- arching development strategy, the extension of the boundary to the north-east in the finalised local plan review must, in my opinion, be fully justified in respect of the landscape setting of Arbirlot. There is general agreement that the land contained within the proposed extension is integral to the setting of the village. I share this view. However, the council and objectors differ in their interpretation of the role of the sloping field encompassed by the proposed extended boundary. The council believes that the land is effectively part of the village because of the sense of enclosure created by the woodlands and the top of the slope. In any event, the slope is not widely visible from locations within the village. It is only at the crest of the slope that the open countryside starts. Conversely, objectors argue that the village is confined to the level land close to the Elliot Water. Only one house, Treetops, which is not part of the traditional village, extends some way up the slope. Further development in the extension area would destroy the value of the land as an important backdrop within the landscape setting of Arbirlot.

3.30 In my opinion the field comprising the proposed extension area has little physical relationship to the remainder of the village which is, for the most part, restricted to level land close to the Elliot Water. The break of slope on the south-eastern boundary of the extension area is clear and marked by a substantial boundary wall to the rear of Denside House. Recent planting emphasises the boundary. Treetops is above the general level of the village but this is not typical and does not constitute a development pattern that should be repeated. The access to the extension area is essentially of an agricultural nature and cannot be construed as a typical village road. Even if improved, the access would appear contrived and, in my opinion, would not lead to the incorporation of the extension area into the main fabric of Arbirlot. Development of the area would appear as an awkward adjunct. Accordingly, I conclude that it would be inappropriate to draw the settlement boundary around the objection site.

3.31 Notwithstanding the foregoing conclusion, and accepting that the open countryside commences at the top of the slope, I nevertheless believe that, in land use terms, the objection site has an affinity with the countryside to the north-east. The current undeveloped nature of the land is a significant element in the landscape setting of the village. Whilst not widely visible, I believe that development on the site is likely to have a more significant visual impact than suggested by the council and the supporters. This would be unfortunate as

6 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

the disposition of the site is of value in providing a backcloth to this part of the village. It is important in terms of both the character of the adjacent conservation area and, particularly, a part of the setting of the listed Denside House.

3.32 Even if I am wrong in believing that the village boundary should not include the objection site, I note that the local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide a definition between the built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space which are important to the setting of settlements and on which development will not be permitted. The presence of a boundary does not indicate that all areas of ground within that boundary have development potential. On this basis, should the local plan review continue to show the boundary as indicated in the finalised document, I conclude that the area should be clearly specified as land on which development should not be permitted.

3.33 The objectors have expressed concern about the prospect of the development of the objection site and the construction of one or, perhaps, more houses. The council has emphasised that only one house is envisaged and Mr and Mrs van Wees have stated that only a single house is required and that they would be prepared to conclude a legal agreement to this effect. I have considered this matter primarily on the basis of assessing the most appropriate line of the Arbirlot settlement boundary but I have nevertheless noted the sketch plans that have been submitted in respect of a potential house on the objection site. It is for the council in its development control role to determine any formal planning application which may be submitted. However, in my opinion, the construction of a house on the site similar to that in the sketches would be likely to be a dominant structure breaking the skyline, particularly when viewed from close to Denside House, and involving significant earthworks to the detriment of both the setting of Denside House and the character of the conservation area. As indicated in the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, there is no statutory definition of “setting” but authorities are firmly encouraged not to interpret the term narrowly.

3.34 Without more details I am unable to assess whether or not an access of a suitable standard could be provided and I have no evidence to draw any conclusions in respect of the claims concerning flooding and drainage. I note the general support for development of brownfield sites and accept that the potential for restoration at the Walkerbank site should not be linked directly to the future of the objection site. Whilst objectors have referred to precedent, I do not envisage that the extension of the boundary as proposed would prejudice the council in its exercise of its development control function.

3.35 In terms of the conservation area, I have noted the request that, come what may, the boundary should be extended to include the objection site. The boundary of the designated conservation area extends significantly beyond the settlement boundary to the west and, especially, to the south. The conservation area was designated in 1975 but I have not been provided with any analysis undertaken at the time or a more recent conservation area appraisal. Nevertheless, I believe it is not unreasonable to assume that the extent of the conservation area was intended to encompass the wider setting of the village itself and include land that was considered important to the setting. In this respect, insofar as the

7 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review objection site has been recognised as integral to the setting of the village I believe that the inclusion of the land within the conservation area is justified.

3.36 I accept that the council has not regarded the local plan review process as an opportunity to amend conservation area boundaries although, as I have pointed out, this is does not reflect the advice contained in the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas and NPPG18. I therefore consider that, in this instance, that it would not be inappropriate to indicate in the local plan review that it is intended to extend the existing Arbirlot Conservation Area boundary to include the objection site. It would be understandable if the council wishes to prepare a conservation area appraisal and undertake specific local consultation prior to formal designation of the extended area.

Recommendation

3.37 I recommend the local plan review is modified as follows:

the Arbirlot boundary map should exclude the objection site from the area contained within the village – in other words, the boundary shown in the consultative draft local plan review should be restored;

in the event that that the foregoing recommendation is not accepted, the Arbirlot boundary map should include a note to the effect that the objection site is considered important to the setting of the village and development will not be permitted on any part of the land;

the Arbirlot boundary map should indicate that the objection site is intended for inclusion within the Arbirlot Conservation Area by means of annotation of the map itself or by means of a symbol included in the Village Inset Map Key.

8 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Auchmithie: AM1, Housing - Kirkbank

Supporter

Crudie Farms 627/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.38 The only submission in respect of allocation AM1 for new housing development at Auchmithie in the finalised local plan review was a note of support for the council’s proposal. As there were no objections lodged in that regard the council has made no comment in respect of the letter of support and there is no requirement for me to consider the matter further.

9 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Auchterhouse: Omission

Objector Reference

Mrs Easson (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan) 649/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.39 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.40 It is argued on behalf of the objector that the finalised local plan review should extend the development boundary of Auchterhouse to incorporate 2.4ha of mainly degraded agricultural land and mature woodland in the objector’s ownership. This would release the potential to develop at least 20-30 houses initially and up to approximately 50-60 houses in total in a phased development over a 10 year period, with access most likely being achieved by clearing some of the existing woodland area adjoining the main road passing through Auchterhouse. It was clarified that the term ‘degraded’ referred to the fact that the non- wooded areas are currently vacant land with nothing growing on it but it was accepted that this was not irreversible and so there remained scope for it to be used again for agricultural purposes. It was pointed out that there was pressure from developers and house-builders to develop the site in question, indicating a market interest in houses at this location. Whilst it was acknowledged that there are no shops or other facilities within Auchterhouse, the nearest shop being 2 miles away at Muirhead, it was pointed out that the site is close to a bus stop with regular services operating. It was also noted that the proposed development would be served by the primary school at Kirkton of Auchterhouse 2-3 miles away which has a school roll of 43 and a capacity for 50 pupils.

10 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.41 Whilst noting that the existing housing at Auchterhouse is generally low density, it was stated that the site concerned would probably be developed with a variety of housing densities, although the objector would accept a lower density if the council required it. The objector accepts that the council’s standard affordable housing ratio of 40% could be applied here, resulting in approximately 20 affordable housing units overall.

The council’s response

3.42 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.43 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.44 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.45 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary in the council’s view. In summary, there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan

11 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.46 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified. Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.47 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.48 The council points out that the development boundary has been recently drawn around Auchterhouse where the mature trees add to the character of the village. The scale of the objector’s proposal is inappropriate, in the council’s view, as it would effectively treble the size of Auchterhouse from its existing 20-25 low density houses, which are mainly detached properties set in their own gardens, and would involve a loss of important trees. Other concerns include the fact that there are no shops, services or other local facilities in Auchterhouse, apart from bus services, to serve the significant ‘back-land’ expansion now proposed. In addition, other houses already approved in its catchment area will place capacity pressures on the local primary school at Kirkton of Auchterhouse even without the current objector’s proposals. Furthermore, the Roads Authority has expressed concern about the suggested access envisaged, via the woodland area, which would be close to a bend in the main road. The council states that there may be other constraints on the site imposed by the consultation zone related to a LP gas line in the vicinity which, whilst not necessarily prohibitive, would require to be resolved in consultation with the Health and Safety Executive, in accordance with para 1.42 and Policy S5 of FALPR.

12 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Conclusions

3.49 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.50 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the potential for providing more affordable housing should additional housing land be released. [Wider consideration of affordable housing issues in South Angus are discussed earlier in this report]

3.51 I conclude that, in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.52 In this context I now turn to consider whether the development boundary extension and housing land allocation at Auchterhouse proposed by the objector in this particular case should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I agree with the council that the scale and back- land location of the housing land allocation being promoted by the objector are inappropriate given the existing size and form of this small settlement with its setting of mature woodlands and low density gardens. I also note the potential constraints on access to the site concerned, being close to a road bend and involving potential loss of trees which provide amenity, as well as in relation to the statutory consultation zone associated with a gas pipeline nearby. Furthermore, I note that there are potential constraints on the local school capacity in the context of existing housing commitments in the wider catchment area.

3.53 Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment in this particular case and conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant the proposed extension of the development boundary of Auchterhouse or the allocation of the 2.4ha site proposed for housing by the objector within the finalised local plan review.

13 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Recommendation

3.54 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

14 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Baldovan, Pitempton and Balmuir: Omission

Objector Reference

Linlathen Developments & Taylor Woodrow Group 922/1/3 (per Keppie Planning)

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.55 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.56 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the strategy of the approved structure plan in respect of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) is to allocate housing land predominantly in Dundee with a limited number of sites in Angus allocated to meet housing needs. Development in the wider HMA is to be primarily focussed on the Dundee Western Gateway (DWG). In this context it is argued that there are serious constraints to development of the DWG, such that in terms of the criteria set out in PAN38, the DWG site should be considered non-effective and unlikely to make a significant contribution to the structure plan requirement. It is therefore argued by the objectors that additional sites must be released immediately to meet the shortfall in effective housing land in the Dundee and South Angus HMA. Accordingly, it is contended that sites which have potential to meet the structure plan requirement, including the site identified by the objectors at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir, should be allocated for housing immediately within the context of the finalised local plan review.

3.57 The 127.5ha greenfield site at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir lies south west of the allocated site at Strathmartine Hospital. Development of the site now proposed is expected to be primarily residential in nature and would include associated essential infrastructure such as roads, drainage, affordable housing and a contribution towards community services/facilities and education facilities. It is suggested that the site could be developed in 4 phases of mixed housing types commencing with 10ha at Balmydown, adjoining Strathmartine Hospital, for 70-80 housing units a school (to replace the Strathmartine Primary School) and playing fields. Phase 2 would be a 23ha site at Pitempton for around

15 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

200 housing units with the remaining phases, at Balmuir and Baldovan, to follow later. Following landscape assessments and a landscape capacity drawing, presented in support of their case, the objectors have put forward an indicative Masterplan together with an access strategy for the objection site. Whilst there has been some informal dialogue with officials, the objectors accepted that the Masterplan had not been explored in detail with the council and had not yet been the subject of public consultation. It is suggested that a development brief should be prepared by the developers, in consultation with the council, jointly for this site and the adjoining Strathmartine Hospital estate.

3.58 The objection site, which is on the edge of Dundee city and abuts DWG, is considered to be immediately effective. Furthermore, it is argued that the proposed initial phase would provide an interim solution to assist in addressing the housing needs of Dundee and South Angus HMA, as identified in the structure plan, in the context of the failure of DWG to deliver the required housing which has been allocated there. Road capacity studies and indicative surveys show that the road network can accommodate the proposed development at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir and that essential services can be accessed at reasonable cost.

3.59 In the objectors’ view, development of the land at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir would:-

* complement the development of the allocated site at Strathmartine Hospital; * be satisfactorily absorbed as the topography and nature of the site allow for compartmentalised development of a readily identifiable homogenous area set in a structured landscape setting; * not lead to the coalescence of any Angus towns with Dundee or each other; and * not impact detrimentally on the character and setting of any Angus town or Dundee.

3.60 In support of the proposed allocation of the site at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir the objectors make reference to national planning policy and guidance, including SPP1, SPP3, SPP17, PAN 38, PAN 44, PAN65 and PAN 67 as well as Housing Policy 1 of the approved structure plan and Policy S1 of the finalised local plan review. In summary, whilst acknowledging that the council has met the structure plan requirements for South Angus, in particular for Monifieth, Carnoustie and the Sidlaws, it is contended on behalf of the objectors that allocation of the objection site would not be contrary to the structure plan. This is because it would be providing an element of assistance in this local plan towards meeting the DWG shortfall of 400 housing units, which should be welcomed. It is acknowledged that, ideally, the whole of the objection site would be released through the structure plan strategy in due course. Meanwhile, in terms of the local plan review, the proposal is to seek agreement that the whole objection site is endorsed in principle and then to ensure that there is a controlled and co-ordinated release of the site in phases - partly before 2011 and the remainder in the post 2011 period, in accordance with an agreed Masterplan.

16 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.61 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.62 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.63 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.64 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. It notes that the Inquiry Reporter at the recent Public Local Inquiry into the Dundee Local Plan Review concluded that:

'Regarding development within the Western Gateway, outstanding issues do exist but progress towards resolving them is being made. Implementation of the Western Gateway proposals would not be helped if the strategy on which proposals are based

17 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

were to be set aside within a relatively short time of having been approved as part of the structure plan. Successful implementation of major new proposals is considerably assisted where development planning provides some certainty for the medium to longer term.'

3.65 The council points out that any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.66 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.67 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.68 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.69 In advance of the hearing the council did not present any evidence relating directly to the Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir site being promoted by the objector in this case. At the hearing it stated that - in the context of the structure plan housing requirements and the associated housing land allocations in the finalised local plan review, as discussed above - it

18 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

regarded the objectors’ proposals for Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir to be premature at best. It also pointed out that important aspects of the preliminary studies and conceptual masterplanning undertaken by the objectors - for example relating to the landscape context and regarding access, other infrastructure and school provision - raised a number of issues that had not been fully explored with planning officials or in a public forum.

3.70 In the council’s view, the very large scale and location of this greenfield site in a visually prominent position on the urban edge of Dundee also gives rise to other concerns. In particular the housing proposals, in overall terms, would be of a significant scale - exceeding the sum of all the housing land allocations made for South Angus - and, if implemented in full, it would represent a new settlement forming an extension to Dundee. In the council’s view this raises matters of a strategic nature which should be properly addressed in a structure plan review not in the local plan review. Furthermore, the council is concerned that the proposal would essentially be in direct competition with the DWG site. The effectiveness of the DWG site is a matter already dealt with in submissions and earlier in the inquiry. In summary, based on all of the above considerations, the council argues that the proposal should not be accepted in whole or part but instead should be rejected as being at best premature and more appropriate as a topic for discussion in the context of a review of the structure plan in due course.

Conclusions

3.71 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.72 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.73 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South

19 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.74 In this context, I now turn to consider whether a housing land allocation at Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir, either for the site as a whole to be developed in phases or perhaps for only part of the 127.5ha site at this stage, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the case put forward by the objectors includes reference to strategic and local factors, with the former being based largely on the perceived shortcomings of the Dundee Western Gateway (DWG) allocation - together with the fact that the Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir site is effective and could address the perceived shortfall arising from non-delivery of housing land allocations at the DWG, in order to meet structure plan and local plan targets for the Dundee and South Angus HMA. In the context of the strategic issues that I have already dealt with above, I am persuaded by the argument put forward by the council that it is at best premature, and therefore inappropriate at this time, to consider possible alternatives to the DWG. In any event, if there was a failure to deliver in full or in part on that site I endorse the council’s view that any resulting shortfall in the Dundee part of the HMA would need to be rectified in Dundee City’s administrative area, not in the South Angus part of the HMA.

3.75 I also endorse the concerns expressed by the council that the scale of the objection site is such that if it was implemented in full, even if it was phased, this would be a major housing allocation exceeding the sum of all other allocations put forward in FALPR for South Angus as a whole. Furthermore, even if in due course it became clear that the structure plan’s housing land requirements were not being addressed in full in the South Angus HMA, there are other concerns raised by the large scale and greenfield nature of the objection site. For example, the Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir site in question is located on the edge of the urban area of Dundee where, in my view, it currently forms a visually prominent and important part of the landscape setting for the city. I conclude that the council is right, therefore, to suggest that these strategic issues would be more appropriately addressed in the context of a structure plan review rather than as a local plan housing land allocation, even if consideration was restricted to one part of the site concerned. Based on all of these factors, I also conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances at present to warrant the Baldovan/Pitempton/Balmuir site being allocated for housing, in whole or part, in the finalised local plan review, even if it was phased in the manner proposed.

Recommendation

3.76 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

20 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Balgray, Tealing: Omission

Objector Reference

Mr & Mrs R Smith 890/1/1 (per The Charlton Smith Partnership)

Procedure Reporter

Written Submission Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.77 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that Development Boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”.

Basis of the objection

3.78 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the finalised local plan review should extend the Development Boundary of Balgray, Tealing to incorporate the existing properties at Nos. 30 and 31 Holdings and also the land owned by the objectors between Nos. 31 and 32 Holdings to offer the potential for up to 2 new houses. At present none of these parcels, apart from No.32 Holdings, lies within the designated Development Boundary. It is pointed out that SPP15 (para21) positively encourages councils to allow more development to keep countryside communities alive and vital. Further relevant national policy and guidance is set out in SPP3 and PAN72 on small scale rural and infill housing development. It is noted that Balgray has already lost its Post Office and its village hall. It is argued that Tealing Primary School and a nearby church at Kirkton would also be supported by an increase in the local resident population. It is noted that the community is supported by a shopper bus service operating to and from Dundee once a day. It is contended that the proposed westward extension to the Development Boundary of Balgray would be logical to incorporate the existing residential properties at Nos. 30 and 31 Holdings. At the same time, this would enable the possibility of the vacant field between Nos. 31 and 32 Holdings to accommodate one or possibly two new houses – noting that such a limited development would not normally count towards the housing land allowances for the area.

21 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.79 It is noted that the greenfield site between Nos. 31 and 32 Holdings lies outwith but adjacent to the Development Boundary of Balgray, which is a small settlement with no facilities or services. There have been a number of houses built in Balgray in recent years. In the council’s view the inclusion of the land concerned within the Development Boundary would lead to a coalescence of building groups and compromise the generally rural character of the area. Accordingly it considers that it would be inappropriate to extend the Development Boundary at Balgray in the manner sought by the objectors.

3.80 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. The council contends that the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA identified in the finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward. Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan.

3.81 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.82 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

22 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.83 The local plan, in particular Policy S1 and Countryside Housing Policies, provides the basis for dealing with detailed proposals for sites lying outwith Development Boundaries. It is noted that since publication of the finalised local plan review, there has been new national policy and guidance on rural development, in particular SPP15: Rural Development and PAN 72 Housing in the Countryside. This has led to the council reviewing its Countryside Housing Policies and the countryside housing section of the finalised local plan, which are set out as Proposed 3rd Round Modifications to the finalised plan review, published in December 2005.

Conclusions

3.84 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.85 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.86 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.87 In this context I now turn to consider whether the Development Boundary extension and housing land allocation at Balgray proposed by the objectors should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I endorse the council’s assessment that the limited scale of the housing promoted by the objectors would best be dealt with not through a modification to the Development Boundary, but by means of a planning application to be considered in the context of the Countryside Housing policies of the finalised local plan review – which the council is proposing to modify in the context of new planning policy and guidance in SPP3, SPP15 and PAN72. [This is discussed in more detail under the Countryside Housing section of this report]. The local case made for extending the Development Boundary has not been

23 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review compelling given the particular character of the Balgray area generally, which consists of several small building groups. For all these reasons, I conclude that it would be inappropriate to extend the Development Boundary of Balgray. In reaching this conclusion I concur with the council that the objectors’ proposal would lead to a coalescence of building groups, which I consider would be detrimental to the rural character of the area.

Recommendation

3.88 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

24 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Balkeerie and Eassie: Development Boundary

Objector Reference

Mr & Mrs K Durston (per McCrae & McCrae) 60/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

Written submission objections lodged on the same topic:

(a) Newtyle & Eassie Community Council 53/1/1 (b) Mr Michael Ryan 85/1/1 (c) Gordon S Robertson 542/1/1 (d) Mr & Mrs Paul Phillipson–Masters 856/1/1 (e) Mr & Mrs G Robertson 869/1/1 (f) Mrs Joyce Murray 886/1/1 ______

Background

3.89 The development boundary for Balkeerie and Eassie shown in the finalised local plan review (FALPR) comprises three separate parcels. The objection seeks to link two of these parcels by means of a linear extension to the development boundary alongside the road serving the settlement and to extend the village westwards marginally by including a vacant site adjoining the FALPR settlement boundary. The original objection sought 4 amendments to the development plan boundary – the two outlined above together with the proposed incorporation of 2 other small sites (Sites 1 and 2) as part of the western-most parcel of the settlement. Those last two proposals have been incorporated in the finalised plan, as suggested modifications put forward by the council prior to the hearing.

Basis of the Hearing objection

3.90 The inclusion of Sites 1 and 2 in the council’s modifications is welcomed by the objectors. It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the other two proposed modifications (Sites 3 and 4) should also be incorporated within the development boundary for Balkeerie and Eassie. Site 3 is put forward as being suitable for 2 single-storey houses on agricultural land of little value. In the objectors’ view it would be an infill development at the west end of the settlement, between farm cottages and some traditional farm buildings – which could themselves be converted to housing, thereby consolidating a building group through linear development. It is contended that the proposal for site 3 would be in compliance with SPP15 paragraph 18 and in accordance with the policies of the finalised local plan relating to category 2 RSU which support developments of the scale and type proposed. It is suggested that allocation of this site for housing would consolidate the existing building group by extending it westwards to a definable and logical point. In respect of Site 4 the revised

25 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

objection is for this to now form a 150m x 30m (rather than the original proposal for 200m x 30m) link between Balkeerie and Eassie which are linear settlements already. It is argued that the proposal for inclusion of Site 4 within the settlement boundary - in order to provide housing along this linear corridor between two existing areas of the village - would link the settlement and provide cohesion, as well as improving community spirit and boosting the local school roll.

Basis of the Written Submissions Objections

3.91 (a) Object on the basis that the change to the boundary shown in the finalised plan review is unnecessary and undesirable because:

* It contributes to an over supply of housing land compared to stated targets * There is no shortage of available housing for rent locally were this to be the intent of the owners * There is no shortage of development land or property for sale within about 3 miles of the proposed site * There is no issue of lack of housing for those working nearby * It will make a fundamental change to the open nature of the village * It encourages irreversible change of use of agricultural land contrary to stated policies of Angus Council * It encourages long distance commuting using private transport contrary to Local Agenda 21 * It removes an incentive for local landowners to renovate identified existing housing and utilise brownfield sites.

3.92 The community council points out that Balkeerie is not a single homogenous village but groups of houses with significant open space between them. The area proposed for inclusion in the development boundary consists of two sections of high quality agricultural land with a reed bed in between. The original development boundary respected this historical form with the boundary following traditional buildings, a farm lane and the main road. In responding to a proposal to change the boundary elsewhere in Balkeerie, the council has stated “It is not appropriate for the local plan to establish an arbitrary boundary when the most robust development boundary is formed by the extent of existing built development, and there is no other physical line to take the boundary to.” The community council supports this approach and argues that it should be applied in a consistent manner.

3.93 (b) Objects to the proposed changes to the development boundary on the basis that this would allow development to join together what have until now been isolated house groups, into a larger grouping, destroying the open form of the village. The two ‘plots’ situated on the other side of the reed bed are still viable agricultural plots of high quality farming land. The proposed change to the development boundary would allow housing to be built on either side of the reed bed leaving the reed bed as a single, isolated piece of ‘derelict’ land and begin the process of closing in what has been a settlement of open and spaced appearance.

26 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.94 (c) & (e) Object to the changes for the following identical reasons:

* The nature of the area will be changed, Balkeerie is not a continuous group of buildings but a series of small groups, and it is the open nature of the village which gives it its character. * Existing land should be used before new changes are allowed. * There are empty properties here – with one still for sale after months of marketing and there is other spare land already allocated - so it is inappropriate to encourage building on good agricultural land.

3.95 (d) Any development near the water treatment works would seriously harm the objector’s view across the vale of Strathmore. He strongly objects to any development as it would destroy the open character of Balkeerie and is totally unnecessary. Currently properties are standing in the village which are unsold, unlet, uninhabited or derelict and so in the objector’s view more effort should be taken in addressing this situation instead of building new homes only to see them lying empty as well.

3.96 (f) Objects on the basis that there is no need for more development land in this area as there are empty cottages which have not been renovated. It is argued that by allowing good agricultural land to be used for building encourages those who own unrenovated properties to leave them to deteriorate. It is contended that the proposed boundary changes are not in line with Angus Council’s policy to favour brownfield sites and to preserve agricultural land.

The council’s responses:

To The Hearing objection

3.97 The council considers that the issue of whether there should be an amendment to the development boundary of Balkeerie and Eassie rests on whether the three areas of land included in the boundary shown on the FALPR, as amended, read as part of the settlement or as part of the open countryside beyond. The development boundary shown in the finalised plan review reflects what existed, as altered at the time of the draft plan prepared in 1998. The council considers that the 2 small areas (Sites 1 and 2) now included within the development boundary relate well to the existing development adjacent to them and their incorporation rounds off and consolidates the form of the village. If Site 3 was incorporated into the development boundary it would create an opportunity for further house-building up to the boundary of the operational farm and thereby raise issues for the amenity of its occupiers, in the council’s view. The council argues that this would be inappropriate and unwarranted. In the case of Site 4 the proposal for a 150m long area to be included in the development boundary would extend ribbon development to the east of the settlement – which the council does not consider appropriate, noting that it would change the open nature of the village.

3.98 Specific allocations are normally only made for sites of 5 or more houses but sites within development boundaries can be considered for development subject to servicing and access etc being acceptable - proximity to the reed beds would also be taken into

27 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

consideration in this case. Sites of less than 5 houses are not counted towards the land supply required to meet Structure Plan requirements

3.99 The council concludes that no change in policy or development boundary relating to Balkeerie and Eassie is justified in response to the objections relating to Sites 3 and 4.

To The Written Submission objections

3.100 The council states that the issue in relation to the proposed amendment to the development boundary rests on whether the areas of land to be included within the boundary read as part of the settlement or as part of the open countryside beyond. As stated above, the development boundary in the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review reflects that which previously existed but which was altered at the time of preparation of the Angus Local Plan in its draft form in 1998. It is considered that the two small areas (Sites 1 & 2) now within the proposed development boundary (adjacent to existing development and the reed bed waste water treatment plant) relate well to existing development adjacent to them and the incorporation of these areas within the development boundary represents a rounding off and consolidation of the form of the village. It is pointed out that one of these areas is bounded by the Balkeerie Burn and does not form part of an agricultural field and the other is a small part of the larger field to the north.

3.101 Local agenda 21: Sustainable development of settlements is part of the strategy of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review. The 2 areas referred to above are the only areas in this location considered to be appropriate for inclusion within the development boundary which could potentially accommodate limited development in support of the local community and the existing primary school. The council points out that whilst renovation of existing properties in the rural area can make a positive contribution to the local environment, that is a matter for property owners. It is not accepted that inclusion of a small area within a development boundary for a village should necessarily prevent renovation work.

Conclusions

3.102 Based on the reasons put forward by the council, I support its proposed modifications to include Sites 1 and 2 within an amended development boundary for Balkeerie and Eassie, as sought by the objection 60/1/1. I am not, however, persuaded by the arguments put forward by the same objector in support of inclusion of Sites 3 and 4 which have been rejected by the council, rightly in my view. I endorse the council’s concerns that inclusion of Site 3 would incorporate a 50m wide swathe of land situated between existing farm cottages and the farm buildings at North Nevay Farm. I consider that this would be detrimental to the amenity of the existing residents and to the village as a whole and a satisfactory case for it has not been made on behalf of the objector. In particular the argument that it would consolidate a building group is not sufficient in my view to justify the proposed amendment. Similarly, the references to SPP8 and RSU Category 2 do not merit the proposed linear development envisaged by the objector in this case. I share the council’s concerns in this regard and in respect of Site 4 put forward by the objector.

28 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.103 Whilst I note that the linear scale of the proposed area for Site 4 has been reduced from 200m to 150m, in my view this remains an unwarranted and unjustified proposal for major ribbon development to link two of the existing groupings that make up Balkeerie and Eassie. Whilst I have no doubt that new houses on that strip of land referred to as Site 4 would have the potential to boost the local school roll, I do not consider that this is sufficient reason to agree to such a wholly unacceptable form of major ribbon development which is against good planning principles. I reject the arguments put forward in support of this proposal, in particular I do not regard the proposed linking of two of the established groupings of the village in this way as providing a means of cohesion or improving community spirit within the settlement. I note the concerns expressed by all the other objectors who do not welcome any extensions to the village boundary.

3.104 I am in agreement with the council that the outright rejection of any change to the development boundary, as sought by the other objectors, is unwarranted for the reasons put forward by the council. I note that the proposed marginal modifications to the settlement boundary, as now amended by the council’s Proposed Modifications to incorporate sites 1 and 2, along with the existing opportunity for limited development at the eastern end of the village, would provide some scope for small-scale new development at Balkeerie and Eassie. I do not regard this as detrimental to the overall amenity of the village or as a threat to the open form of the village which is one of its defining characteristics. I also do not regard the proposed modifications to the development boundary as automatically resulting in new development. Any planning application would need to be dealt with on its merits taking account of the planning policy context and the particular local circumstances - including its physical context within the settlement and considerations relating to the amenity of existing residents. I also reject the contention that the proposed amendments to the settlement boundary would in some way inhibit renovation or sales of existing properties within Balkeerie and Eassie, and consider that such suggestions are not well substantiated.

3.105 Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment in this particular case and conclude that there is merit in incorporating Sites 1 and 2 within the development boundary – as now put forward by the council in the Proposed Modifications. However, I conclude that the case to also include Sites 3 and 4 within the development boundary of Balkeerie and Eassie has not been effectively made, for the reasons stated.

Recommendation

3.106 I recommend that the development plan boundary of Balkeerie and Eassie is amended in the manner put forward by the council in its Proposed Modification to the finalised local plan review, to incorporate Sites 1 and 2 but to exclude Sites 3 and 4 (all as defined in Objection 60/1/1).

29 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Balkeerie and Eassie: Boundary - Eassie Hall

Objector Reference

Eassie and Nevay Community Association 865/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden ______

Background

3.107 Page 174 of the finalised local plan review shows the Balkeerie and Eassie development boundaries. These comprise 3 separate and distinct building groupings, of which the one to the north-east includes the village hall at its western margin. [NB Other objections concerning the Balkeerie and Eassie development boundaries have been considered as a group in another section of this report]

Basis of the objection

3.108 It is argued that the boundary encompassing Eassie Hall is incorrect as it excludes part of the area owned by the objectors that would be required to re-build the hall in 2007. It is hoped that this can be easily rectified for the future community benefit.

The council’s response

3.109 The council states that generally it would prefer to leave the development boundary as shown in the FALPR as the hall building itself and the ruinous buildings in the field to the east provide the most definitive lines along which to draw the development boundary Nevertheless in order to assist the proposals to rebuild the village hall in the Proposed Modifications published in September 2005 the council sets out a proposal to amend the development boundary to reflect the land owned by the village hall – as advised by its committee. On the basis of this proposed modification, the objection has subsequently been CONDITIONALLY WITHDRAWN.

Conclusions

3.110 I am satisfied that the objectors have made a reasonable case, noting that their objection has resulted in a Proposed Modification by the council to satisfy their concerns. I conclude that there is merit for the Development Boundary of Balkeerie and Eassie to be amended marginally to include the ground of the redeveloped Eassie Hall, as proposed.

Recommendation

3.111 I recommend that the local plan review should be modified in this case as proposed by the objectors and set out in the Proposed Modification put forward by the council.

30 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Berryhill, by Fowlis: Omission

Objector Reference

Berryhill Binn Farms (Ian Moncrieff) 697/1/1 (per John Duff Planning)

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.112 At Berryhill there is an existing development of 19 houses, comprising a mix of new build and conversion/replacement of redundant farm buildings, which was approved in 2000 as part of a rationalisation and diversification of farming activity at Berryhill Farm. Although the housing element of that project has been completed the establishment of an organic farming business that was envisaged at the time has not progressed. The local plan objection now seeks to provide (on 3.4ha) a further 38 houses, comprising 24 private dwellings, 8 affordable houses and 6 shared ownership houses. These would be in association with a wider rural diversification project incorporating a new car park for ramblers, an increased public footpath network as well as a children’s play area and a wildflower meadow. There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.113 The objector owns 336ha of agricultural land at Berryhill Farm and employs 2 full- time staff plus himself, as well as 12 part-time workers. The proposal, in line with SPP15 Planning for Rural Development and PAN73 on Rural Diversification, seeks to provide 38 additional houses as a means of funding further diversification of the farm activities and to secure the longer term future of the workforce. It is noted that the council’s principal objections are, firstly, that there is no justification for the housing element of the proposals as additional new housing is not required to meet the council’s housing land supply targets from the approved structure plan and, secondly, that Berryhill Farm is not a suitable site for additional housing. It is pointed out that the report of survey of the structure plan emphasised the imbalance between the location of jobs in the west of Dundee and the surrounding area and the new house building opportunities in the north, north-east and east. In seeking a sustainable mix of land uses that report stated that employment and housing development to the west of the city forms a core of the long term strategy of the structure

31 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

plan. In this context, it is noted that the approved strategy sets out a target of 750 houses to be provided at Dundee Western Gateway (DWG) by 2011. It is stated on behalf of the objector that whilst around 150 houses of that target will be provided at Liff Hospital, it is widely regarded as unlikely that the remaining 600 units will be delivered by 2011 because of site and infrastructure constraints. It is argued, therefore, that the DWG is not an ‘effective’ housing supply.

3.114 It is pointed out that the Dundee Western Gateway Concept Plan places an emphasis on Dundee City Council and Angus Council to search for suitable housing sites within the DWG. It is noted that the only area of Angus within the search area appears to be Berryhill Farm, although Angus Council maintains that the farm is not within the DWG area of search. This is wrong in the objector’s view, as Berryhill can reasonably described as being close to the heart of the DWG search area which is defined in the report of survey of the DWG Concept Plan as being between the A90(T) and the A923 roads. It is argued that the sites identified by the council as being in the DWG are not connected to one another and cannot reasonably constitute a ‘gateway’ in themselves. It is noted that recent experience, including at Piperdam, Fowlis, Berryhill and Flocklones, demonstrates that there is a strong demand in the area concerned. This view is supported by the Sidlaw Special Housing Project, which shows strong demand for a variety of house types in the Sidlaw area, including at Fowlis. It is stated that it is unfortunate that the FALPR, which envisages an overwhelming balance of housing land supply to the north and east of Dundee, pre-dated the findings of the Sidlaw Project report referred to above.

3.115 Based on all of the above considerations, it is contended that Berryhill Farm is in the Dundee Western Gateway (DWG) and that the proposals for Berryhill would provide a mix of high value housing and meet a need for more affordable and social housing. This would form part of an effective farm diversification scheme that would enhance rural employment, tourism and leisure activities. There is adequate spare capacity in the local water and drainage networks, as well as at the local school to serve the proposals. Accordingly, the housing components put forward now for Berryhill, if approved, would form part of the effective housing land supply and could be delivered by 2011, and are of such a limited scale that they would not prejudice the implementation of the DWG, in the objector’s view. The objector refutes the council’s suggestion that when the initial housing at Berryhill was approved he gave any commitment to make no future applications for additional housing development or not to promote further farm diversification at Berryhill. It is stated, however, that the current proposals would complete the diversification process, with the houses now proposed being required as an economic engine to unlock finance for the other components of the farm diversification scheme being put forward. In this way it would not require public infrastructure investment and would be in accord with the principles of the local plan and national planning guidelines. Finally it is stated that the council’s argument that Berryhill has no facilities and services to support existing or potential residents is absurd, noting that there has been a rapid take-up of the initial housing and there are no demands for public infrastructure at this location.

32 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.116 The council states that it has no problems with the farm diversification or tourism and leisure components of the proposals now being put forward by the objector and its concerns relate specifically to the new housing element which is being sought. It notes that Berryhill Farm is situated in open countryside to the west of Dundee where there are no facilities or services to support existing or potential residents. It points out that the local plan strategy is to direct additional housing to the main settlements which provide a range of services and facilities, giving priority to the re-use and redevelopment of brownfield sites. It is stated that the proposal for a further 38 houses at Beryhill represents substantial housing development in a rural location and would raise significant concerns over its contribution to the housing land supply in South Angus HMA. Whilst the proposed contribution of affordable housing would be a welcome addition, it is necessary to evaluate the whole proposal against national planning guidance and development plan policy. It is noted that PAN74 indicates that the requirement for affordable housing should be considered as part of the overall housing requirement identified in the structure plan not a separate element. The proposal has been considered in the context of the development strategies for South Angus set out in the approved structure plan.

3.117 A wide range of greenfield and brownfield sites in the Dundee and South Angus HMA has been promoted by developers and/or landowners for inclusion in FALPR. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001- 2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.118 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the

33 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.119 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of additional sites for allocation for housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.120 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.121 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.122 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of the factors outlined above, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). Furthermore, it points out that the approved structure plan in Schedule 1 differentiates between Dundee Western Gateway and South Angus and on this basis the council contends that there is no locus for Angus Council, through FALPR allocations in South Angus, to make up any shortfall in delivery of the DWG.

3.123 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land

34 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.124 The council makes some additional observations in respect of the particular circumstances of the Berryhill objection. Whilst noting that the original housing approved at Berryhill in 2000 was intended to aid a rural diversification project at the farm, in line with SPP15, the council states that it considered that approval to be the final housing element on the site, not a first phase. It states that it supported the objector’s farm diversification proposals at Berryhill in 2000, by allowing housing there to fund other elements, on a ‘once only’ basis. That process has since been completed, although the envisaged organic farm component was not progressed. In this context, the council states that it is under no obligation to agree to further housing at this location to assist further farm diversification, particularly when there is no requirement for the proposed mainstream housing component, for the reasons outlined above. It points out that the current proposal would effectively treble the number of houses at the site. It is also concerned that the Berryhill site is remote from any local facilities and services and is accessed via a poor local road and footpath network. If the latest housing proposals were approved, albeit expressed in terms of subsidising further farm diversification and rural employment, the council is concerned that this would set an unfortunate precedent encouraging other farmers in the area to come forward with similar proposals.

Conclusions

3.125 Firstly, I note that there is no dispute that all of the farm diversification proposals of the Berryhill objection, with the exception of the additional housing components, are consistent with national policy and guidance on rural diversification and conform to structure plan and local plan policy principles. There is also no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.126 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

35 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.127 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceeds the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provides scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan review to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.128 In this context, I now turn to consider whether making a further housing land allocation of 38 units at Berryhill Farm, in addition to the 19 units already built there under a farm diversification scheme agreed with the council in 2000, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the case put forward by the objector includes reference to strategic and local factors, with the former being based largely on the perceived shortcomings of the Dundee Western Gateway allocation and the fact that the Berryhill site can be regarded as ‘effective’ and could make up some of the shortfall resulting from non- delivery of the DWG allocation by 2011. In the context of the strategic issues I have already dealt with above, I am persuaded by the argument put forward by the council that it is not necessary, and hence inappropriate, at this time to consider possible alternatives to the DWG. In any event, if there was a failure to deliver in full or in part on that site, I endorse the council’s view that any resulting shortfall in the Dundee part of the HMA would need to be rectified in Dundee City’s administrative area, not in the South Angus part of the HMA.

3.129 The fact that the Berryhill site is effective, in terms of it being free of development and infrastructure constraints does not mean that this greenfield site should automatically be considered as a priority housing site. I acknowledge that, in terms of the scale of the DWG allocation, the Berryhill proposal for 38 additional houses would be relatively small. Nevertheless, I endorse the council’s concerns that it would treble the size of the existing housing provision at this isolated rural location and would represent a substantial housing allocation in a part of rural Angus where there are no local community facilities and services. In this context, I am also concerned that this would not be a sustainable housing initiative as it would be heavily dependent on car usage for almost all journeys by the residents. The fact that the existing residents at Berryhill apparently accept the lack of local facilities and services, and hence their dependence on car travel, does not mean that the council can or should ignore the principles of sustainability - set out in current national planning policy guidance, as well as in structure plan and local plan policies on these matters - when formulating its housing policies for the finalised local plan review.

3.130 I now turn to consider the other arguments put forward on behalf of the objectors, firstly, the reference to the proposal to deliver 8 affordable housing units and 6 shared ownership units as part of the overall total of 38 new houses now proposed. Whilst in principle this would make a welcome contribution to the overall provision of affordable housing in the South Angus area, I do not consider that this in itself is sufficient reason to justify approval of the Berryhill package of housing as a whole when there is no requirement for the mainstream private housing element proposed.

36 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.131 In terms of the potential local benefits of the proposal that are highlighted by the objector, I note that the principal justification for the housing component is to cross-fund the other farm diversification elements of the overall package of proposals - and thereby help to increase the tourism and leisure attractions of the area and to secure local employment at Berryhill Farm. Whilst the principle of such diversification is in line with national policy guidance for rural areas, I note that the council has already given a positive response to the objector’s earlier farm diversification proposals and agreed in 2000 to 19 housing units at Berryhill Farm. This was specifically for the purpose of providing a financial engine to drive farm diversification proposals at that time, in order to secure the jobs at Berryhill Farm. Whilst all of the 19 housing units agreed in that package have been built, I understand that, for whatever reason, one of the diversification components of that earlier scheme – into organic farming - has not progressed. I note that there is a dispute as to whether or not the earlier agreement was a first phase of diversification, as the objector contends, or a ‘once and for all’ agreement, as the council regarded it. I note the objector’s statement that the current proposal is the final phase of housing proposed for Berryhill. Nevertheless, as far as I have been made aware, no indication was given previously by the objector that the housing proposals agreed in 2000 would be the initial phase of a housing development at Berryhill that would in due course treble in size in order to provide further cross-subsidy to other farm diversification components.

3.132 In summary, there is no dispute that, in theory, additional housing units could provide finance to facilitate new initiatives at Berryhill and that such diversification would be broadly in line with national, as well as regional and local, planning policy objectives for rural areas. There is, however, no planning policy drawn to my attention which provides for successive phases of housing to be permitted in isolated rural areas, within 6 years as in this case in Berryhill - or indeed whenever there is a perceived need for further cross-subsidy of diversification measures stimulated by economic difficulties at a farm. In this context, I share the concerns of the council that if the housing at Berryhill was allowed to treble in size to 57 units in total, not only would this be inappropriate in the local and rural South Angus contexts and in terms of sustainability. It would also set an unfortunate precedent, in my view, by potentially stimulating similar initiatives elsewhere in Angus leading to sporadic housing developments in the countryside. Accordingly, whilst I understand the current economic difficulties at Berryhill Farm which have led to the latest proposals for further farm diversification, I conclude that the case made by the objector for allowing 38 new houses at this location, as part of a wider package of initiatives, does not outweigh the local and wider concerns set out above. I reach this conclusion based not only on consideration of the structure plan requirements but, most importantly, also in the context of 19 housing units having recently been developed at this location, which were approved on an exceptional basis by the council specifically to address the problems at this particular farm.

Recommendation

3.133 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

37 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Birkhill/Muirhead and land north of Liff Hospital: Omission

Objector Reference

A & J Stephen Ltd and Bett Homes Ltd 944/1/1 (n of Liff Hospital) (per Montgomery Forgan Associates) 944/1/2 (s of Birkhill/Muirhead)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

[The same objectors have lodged an objection 892/1/1 relating to an omission elsewhere in the vicinity of Liff which is dealt with separately in this report]

______

Background

3.134 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The objections concerns the case for allocating land to the south of Birkhill/Muirhead (944/1/2) and secondly to the north of Liff Hospital (944/1/1) as new strategic reserve housing sites.

Basis of the objections

3.135 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the proposed sites - firstly immediately to the south of Birkhill/Muirhead and, secondly, north of Liff Hospital - should be considered as suitable housing locations meriting identification as ‘strategic reserve’ sites within the finalised local plan. This is in the context of proven local market demand and meeting strategic housing needs for the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. It is argued that the sites concerned are strategically well placed to serve the area west of Dundee and to deliver community benefits and an appropriate level of affordable housing within a re- established village core, all in accordance with structure plan and local plan aims and objectives with regard to housing land provision and in line with national planning policy (SPP3) and associated guidance in PAN 38. The objector argues that there is a severe shortage of supply in the South Angus landward area of the Dundee and South Angus HMA, with drainage constraints in the north and east landward area that are unlikely to be resolved in the foreseeable future.

3.136 In this context it is contended that the proposed new ‘strategic reserve’ allocations, firstly just south of Birkhill/Muirhead and secondly, the area north of Liff Hospital, would help to ensure that there is a five year effective housing land supply in the Dundee and South

38 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Angus HMA to meet the structure plan allowances to 2011. It is pointed out that the 14.2ha Birkhill/Muirhead site is well contained on its eastern and western boundaries by mature woodland and to the south by rising ground with the northern boundary being the southern edge of Birkhilll/Muirhead. With masterplanning and landscape treatment it is envisaged that this particular site would provide approximately 360 houses , including an appropriate level of affordable units. The other site to the north of Liff Hospital is set within rising ground which peaks at the ridge to the south of Birkhill. Accordingly, it is argued that housing development here would not impact visually above the existing mature landscape of Liff Hospital to the south and would tie in with the current residential proposals for that hospital site. It is noted that the principle of identifying reserve sites being safeguarded for future development is already supported in the finalised Angus Local Plan, for example at Forfar, in line with national planning advice.

The council’s response

3.137 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.138 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

39 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.139 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.140 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.141 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.142 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.143 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.144 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review. The council does not present evident relating directly to the sites adjoining Birkhill/Muirhead and to the north of Liff Hospital being promoted by the objectors in this case, or in respect of the specific contention that these two areas could be endorsed as strategic reserve housing sites.

40 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Conclusions

3.145 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

1.146 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.147 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.148 In this context, I now turn to consider whether making housing land allocations in the form of ‘strategic reserve’ sites for the two areas identified by the objectors should be endorsed on an exceptional basis. I note that the areas put forward by the objectors for housing development are both greenfield in nature being open countryside with some woodland nearby and outwith the defined development boundary of any settlement. The local case made for allocating these sites as strategic reserves has been based on the scope for developing masterplans to provide a landscape setting enhancing their existing local contexts. I am not persuaded that this argument, even if valid, carries sufficient weight to overcome the lack of strategic justification within South Angus for the principle of designating further new housing allocations of the type and scale envisaged, even as strategic reserve sites. In coming to this conclusion I have taken into consideration the national planning policy and associated guidance referred to by the objectors. Furthermore, if the proposed sites were allocated for housing, even as strategic reserve sites, in my view this would set an unfortunate precedent which could result in additional pressure for further major housing land allocations, possibly described as strategic reserve sites, elsewhere in South Angus. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant allocation of either of the two parcels of land put forward by the

41 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review objectors, to the south of Birkhill/Muirhead and north of Liff Hospital, for housing development, even as strategic reserve sites within the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.149 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

42 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Bridgefoot: Omissions

Objector Reference

Mr Marshall (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan) 899/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

Capt W Rennie Stewart 564/1/1 (D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden ______

Background

3.150 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objections

Objection 899/1/1

3.151 Mr Marshall does not take issue with the strategic arguments concerning housing land supply or the statistics relating to that put forward by the council. Nevertheless, it is argued on behalf of this objector that the finalised local plan review should extend the development boundary of Bridgefoot westwards to include land at Bridgefoot Nursery which is surplus to the Nursery’s operational requirements. Whilst Mr Marshall has run the Nursery business successfully at this location for many years and lives on the site, in the face of competition from larger, nationally based outlets its business has been declining in the last ten years. Mr

43 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Marshall is nearing retirement and at that point the nursery is likely to cease to trade. It is pointed out that the Nursery site concerned was previously considered as a possible site for housing when Bridgefoot formed part of the administrative area of Dundee. The land concerned extends to approximately 0.8ha and so could provide approximately 20 new houses. Whilst acknowledging that the land concerned is good quality and could be sold for agricultural use, it is argued that the site is ideally suited for housing. It adjoins other houses and agricultural land and has good public transport links and close access to Strathmartine Primary School. It is also contended that the proposed amendment to the development boundary would consolidate Bridgefoot as a settlement, providing a sustainable housing solution.

Objection 564/1/1

3.152 Whilst this objector, in written submissions, accepts that the local plan has to comply with the structure plan approved in 2003, it is noted that very little housing land is allocated for the South Angus Housing Market Area. It is understood that this is because the structure plan advocates most of the housing land release for the Dundee and South Angus HMA to areas within the Dundee City boundary and for the vast majority of this to be within the Western Villages strategy. It is argued that there is no immediate prospect of that particular development gaining planning permission and there are serious constraints to development of that Dundee Western Gateway initiative proceeding. Accordingly, it is argued on behalf of the objector that there serous doubts as to whether that allocation will make any meaningful contribution to the housing land supply, in which case the structure plan strategy is not being delivered despite being in the firth year of the structure plan period. In the context of the knock-on effect of this on other land holdings in the HMA, and the requirement of the local plan to conform to the structure plan, it is stated that the ability to allocated land where it can be delivered is compromised and housing land supply is not keeping pace with demand. On this basis it is contended that the structure plan is fatally flawed and alternative housing land releases requires to be made to address the land supply issues.

3.153 In this context, it is argued on behalf of the objector that the area of land, extending to approximately 1ha, on the northern edge of Bridgefoot, should be allocated for housing and the development boundary of the village amended accordingly. It is pointed out that the site concerned is well related to the heart of the village and housing here would form an infill between the adjoining primary school to the east and site SA(a) which is being developed for housing immediately to the west.

The council’s response

3.154 The council points out that both the Bridgefoot Nursery site and the site being promoted by Capt. Stewart lie outwith but adjacent to the development boundary of Bridgefoot and Strathmartine, being immediately to the west and north, respectively. This is a small settlement on the fringe of Dundee which has no shop or other local facilities apart from its school. It is noted that Strathmartine Primary School, which adjoins the Stewart site and is close to Bridgefoot Nursery, has a school roll of 43 which is close to its capacity of 50 pupils. It is also noted that there is an existing housing allocation (SA(a)) at the north-

44 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

western edge of Bridgefoot which has planning permission involving a farm steading and new-build housing. There are also allocations for new housing in the vicinity at Strathmartine Hospital and several other major housing proposals in the local area, which are subject to local plan objections. The strategic housing concerns of the council are dealt with below.

3.155 At the local level with all the small Angus settlement on the fringe of Dundee being under pressure for additional housing development, local people are supporting the council in preferring small-scale organic growth to large scale new housing land releases which would change the character of the villages concerned. The council is also concerned that incorporation of the Nursery site within the development boundary would represent a linear extension of Bridgefoot along Rosemill Road, constituting ribbon development into a rural area which is not justified - and would be likely to lead to pressure for housing development on the agricultural land immediately to the north and south of the nursery site. It also notes that there are potential flood risk issues concerning the Dighty river in this locality, although Mr Marshall is unaware of any such problems affecting his site. In the council’s view the existing boundary of Bridgefoot and Strathmartine is cohesive and has experienced a considerable amount of housing development in the last 10-15 years, so does not need further major growth at this time.

3.156 The council points out that the wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.157 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.158 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual

45 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.159 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.160 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is fatally flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.161 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.162 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.163 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South

46 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

Conclusions

3.164 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.165 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the potential for providing more affordable housing, including retirement housing, should additional land be released. As stated earlier in this report “whilst to some extent seductive in view of the large unidentified need for affordable housing in South Angus, we share the council’s opinion that the provision of affordable housing is a subservient requirement to the broader structure plan strategy.”

3.166 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.167 In this context I now turn to consider whether either or both of the two proposals - for development boundary extensions and housing land allocations at Bridgefoot - put forward by the objectors should be accepted on an exceptional basis. In general terms, whilst the existing settlement boundary shown in the finalised local plan review is somewhat oddly shaped in wrapping round the existing developments of the village, I endorse the council’s assessment that this boundary is logical and cohesive.

47 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Objection 899/1/1

3.168 I understand the problems facing the Bridgefoot Nursery in terms of the competition from larger discount stores and appreciate that Mr Marshall is nearing retirement and not wishing to continue in business at this location in the longer term. These, however, are not valid planning reasons sufficient to justify a major extension to the development boundary, even on an exceptional basis. I share the council’s concern that the proposal put forward by Mr Marshall for a boundary extension to accommodate approximately housing units would be inappropriate for the following reasons:

• It would create a most unusual linear extension to the village; • This would result in ribbon development along Rosemill Road; • There would be resulting pressure for further housing development to the north and particularly to the south of Mr Marshall’s site which would be more difficult for the planning authority to resist in future; • It would result in unnecessary loss of good agricultural land which the owner acknowledges has potential to return to productive agricultural use if it is no longer required for the Nursery.

Objection 564/1/1

3.169 This site is slightly larger than the one to the west of the village but in general terms it is marginally better situated than the Bridgefoot Nursery land. This is because approximately 20% of it would form infill development if housing was promoted at the southern end of the site, between the school and site SA(a). The remaining 80% however would be a slightly awkward rectangular appendage, albeit not linear, at the northern end of the village. The arguments presented on behalf of the objector have not been persuasive in this regard.

3.170 In each case, the objection sites, if developed for housing, would increase the overall stock of the village substantially – by around 20 houses for the nursery site or perhaps 25 houses for the northern site. Either of these developments would also be likely to place significant additional pressures on the local primary school which is already operating near capacity. Furthermore, such developments would not be sustainable since there is likely to be a high dependency on car usage as there are no shops or other local facilities in the village and the public transport services are limited. Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment in this particular case and conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant an extension of the development boundary of Bridgefoot to accommodate either of the proposed housing developments put forward by the objectors.

Recommendation

3.171 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

48 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Bridgend of Lintrathen: Development Boundary

Objector Reference

Mr Roger Dunham 866/1/1 & 866/1/2 Mrs Fiona Dunham 867/1/1 & 867/1/2

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

Written submission objections related to Bridgend of Lintrathen

(a) Mr A S Kinniburgh 812/1/1 & Mrs W Kinniburgh 813/1/1 (b) Mr & Mrs G Riley 815/1/1 (c) Anne Duff 845/1/1 (d) Mrs Clare A L Osborne 671/1/1 (e) Mr Michael Anstice 698/1/1 & Mrs Carolyn Anstice 699/1/1 (f) Elspeth G Simpson 747/1/1 (g) Geoff & Louise Cooper 809/1/1 (h) Mrs Margaret C Kirkpatrick 882/1/1 (i) Anne Finn 884/1/1 & Gareth Finn 885/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.172 Following the publication of the finalised draft local plan review, which put forward an extension to the southern development boundary for Bridgend of Lintrathen (as shown on P184 of FALPR), there were objections lodged by a large number of local residents. This led to an invitation for the council to meet with the local residents of Bridgend of Lintrathen to discuss the proposal. There was a general feeling expressed by villagers that the new area of land shown as enclosed within the amended southern boundary would be inappropriate for development, for the reasons outlined below. Whilst many residents were opposed to any new development or expansion of the village, two alternative locations for very limited housing development were put forward by some objectors – (a) the land immediately to the west of Lochside Lodge, which is a restaurant with rooms, on the western boundary of the village; and (b) the site immediately to the east of Braefoot cottage, adjoining the north-east

49 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

corner of the village boundary. Another area of undeveloped land, immediately to the south of site (b) on the opposite side of the road, is a large landscaped area known as The Glebe, owned by the Church of Scotland. It was explained at the hearing that this mature landscaped area with trees was generally excluded from consideration for development as the land concerned is an important part of the landscape setting of the village in general and for Linlathen Church and Melgam House in particular.

Basis of the objections

The hearing objections:

3.173 Those objectors who requested a hearing pointed out that the local primary school, which is remotely located some distance to the south of the village boundary, has a falling school roll (which resulted in a teaching post being lost from the school in 2004). These objectors suggest that in order to safeguard the school roll there is a need for more affordable properties in the area, in order to attract families with school aged children. It is acknowledged by these objectors that there is no scope for infill within the existing village boundary. Accordingly, any increase in housing would have to involve an extension to the development boundary as it is understood that there is very little prospect of planning permission being granted for sites that are situated outwith the defined boundary.

3.174 In this context, the objectors express support for the decision to make provision for some new build houses in Bridgend of Lintrathen, to add to the 13 dwellings of the village, however they do not consider the parcel of land allocated by the council in the finalised local plan review is the best site available. In their view that site on the southern perimeter of the village is too open with no natural landform features or trees. They are concerned, therefore, that development along that southern boundary of the village would affect the view of the loch and existing housing, particularly when approaching from the south after passing the school and heading down the hill into the village, which is one of the main approaches Bridgend of Linlathen. They point out that the site concerned is an open field used for farming and argue that it should remain as such to protect this view and the setting of the village. It is pointed out that the majority if not all residents in Bridgend of Lintrathen seem to agree with the above criticisms expressed regarding that particular site.

3.175 In this context, discussion also took place at the hearing regarding the two alternative sites that had been suggested - to the west and north-east of the village, respectively. It was pointed out that any housing development of site (a), adjoining the Lochside Lodge, would be north-facing and would entail loss or thinning of some of the screening trees immediately to the south which make the site concerned dark. The objectors consider that, notwithstanding these constraints and the fact that it is overlooked from Lochside Lodge, there may be scope for perhaps 1-2 houses set back on this land. This would retain the open aspect of the front of the site, which is nearest to Lochside Lodge and closest to the road. It was noted that site (b) adjoins the house known as Braefoot, to the west, that has a boundary hedge and trees that are to be retained. Given that the adjoining site to the east is used as sheep-pens that are in operational use, it was pointed out that the remaining land between the road and the steeply sloping, rocky hill immediately to the north is very small and narrow

50 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review making it difficult to achieve even a single house on the available land. Furthermore, it is understood that this site has some drainage constraints. Two other potential sites were also highlighted during the discussion. Firstly, the area to the north of Braefoot was mentioned as worth exploring, although its visual prominence is a cause for potential concern. This is a higher level, open area on the wooded hillside facing westwards over the loch. This site, which is prominent when viewed from across the loch, has been used in the past as a site office with portacabins. Finally, despite the strategic landscape importance of the Glebe, as outlined earlier, the roadside frontage part of the Glebe, adjoining Primrose Cottage, was put forward by these objectors as a possible housing opportunity, if it was sensitively developed.

3.176 The objectors acknowledge that the council has adopted a sensitive and evolutionary approach to development at Bridgend of Lintrathen in the last 20 years, which has resulted in some conversion and renovations of existing buildings. In the objectors’ view, change here does not have to be detrimental to the village or its residents, and on this basis it is argued that the council should not turn away housing proposals solely on the basis that local people do not want development in the vicinity of their own properties.

Written submissions objections:

3.177 Below is a summary of the main points raised by individuals making written submissions objections (in the order of those listed at the outset)?

Objector (a)

* No proven demand for low cost houses in the village, people would be drawn from outwith the area which is not the Council’s stated aim. * Lintrathen has no amenities. * The scale of the proposal would represent 25% + increase in the size of the village. * The character and scale of the village would be ruined and be an environmental blight. * Waste of valuable agricultural land for crop growing, and loss of open farm land on the flank of the village, disastrous to its rural setting. * Access off unclassified, narrow, hilly road, used to walk children to school. It is already hazardous, no footpaths lighting or speed restriction. * No parking facilities, this road can be congested at times. Extra housing means extra traffic. Limited public transport. * Limited employment opportunities in the area therefore incoming people would have to travel to work thus defeating the council’s stated aim to reduce car use.

3.178 Relevant references from the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review are highlighted.

51 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Objector (b)

3.179 Object to any and all proposed development boundary changes within the village of Bridgend of Lintrathen for the following reasons:

* No proven need for affordable housing and the village offers no local facilities; no public transport infrastructure and new residents would require their own private transport increasing traffic in the village * Parking – no public parking available and the road to the school is sometimes used for parking adding to congestion for passing traffic and this road is also used to walk children to and from the school * Employment opportunities are limited in the area * The proposed boundary extension shown on the FALPR is on the side of the village with the majority of houses (8), to increase the number of properties by 4 or 5 would be an increase of 50% putting further strain on roads, environmental issues and waste management * The area is reasonable agricultural land currently used for crops, it is visible from one of the main approaches into the village and would have a negative effect on the setting of the village. It offers no visual protection and is a valued landscape for residents and visitors entering the village. * The proposal contravenes the development strategy of the plan, Policies S1 and S6.

Objector (c)

3.180 Proposed site is unsuitable as it would completely destroy the view of the objector and that of the reservoir on entering the village from the south. There is little chance of work in this area so low cost housing would necessitate travel by car to employment elsewhere – there is no local public transport serving the village. The access would add more traffic on a narrow road used to walk children to school. Recent house sales have been to people wishing weekend homes so no input to the community.

Objector (d)

3.181 Question whether there is any need for low cost housing. Houses exposed for sale in Lintrathen often take a long time to sell. In addition additional housing would be likely to damage the amenity of a quiet and secluded village.

Objector (e)

3.182 As owners of both sides of the riverbank adjoining the proposed housing development area shown in the FALPR these objectors oppose any housing development in the village of Lintrathen on the following basis:

* The field slopes quite steeply to the river with drainage likely to reach the bank and the water.

52 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

* We require access to the river for maintenance. * The river when in spate is quite dangerous (we do not wish to be held responsible for childproof fencing) * Misuse of farmland. * Any requirement for ‘affordable housing’ in this area is long out of date. Retiring water board or agricultural workers have generally already bought the houses they lived in. * Site faces onto a narrow road with steady and sometimes fast traffic * The setting of the village will be spoilt by extra houses and traffic * Nearest shop is seven miles away and there are only two buses per week to Kirriemuir * Alternative site suggested to the west of Lochside Lodge would be a disaster to the business as the view from the restaurant is a vital part of the service.

Objector (f)

3.183 While agreeing with the principle of providing affordable housing, the objector considers that the proposed site is totally inappropriate for the following reasons:

* Dangerous access on narrow road leading to primary school * No employment prospects * Drainage * Other more unobtrusive sites have been put forward which would safeguard the attractive rural setting.

Objector (g)

3.184 Objects to any village boundary extension for development of a cluster of houses on grounds of:

* Lack of requirement – appears to no current requirement for housing to meet local needs but could be met by self build opportunities * Traffic issues – road to the school is narrow with no footpaths, increased traffic arising from development would be a concern * Detrimental effect on character of the village * Environmental issues relating to waste water and flooding

3.185 Individual self-builds on alternative sites in and around the Lintrathen area would be more acceptable if constructed in the vernacular style of the village.

Objector (h)

3.186 Object to inclusion of agricultural or forestry land in the defined development boundary. In particular a) object to proposal for 4 or 4 plus affordable houses on farmland on the brae to the school. This number would create a distortion in the village and would result in a disproportionate increase in size b) traffic using the village roads has increased

53 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

significantly in the last few years adding to that would add to hazards for walkers, cyclists, children walking to school c) lack of suitable infrastructure, little public transport or other faculties. No affordable housing (for rent, shared ownership or outright purchase) should be proposed in any rural area without a robust Housing Needs Survey being conducted which would illicit the needs of the entire village.

Objectors (i)

3.187 Object to proposed development in Lintrathen for the following reasons:

Road safety – children walk to school on this road which has no pavement or street lights, further traffic on this stretch of road would make an already potentially dangerous situation even worse.

Sewage – these objectors believe sewage would require to be drained into the Melgam and there have already been problems in the area.

The council’s response

3.188 The council points out that the strategy for development of housing in the countryside in Angus seeks to focus new housing in existing villages. It also looks to support housing on appropriate sites in Category 2 Rural Settlement Units which are categorised by falling populations and where there are schools and services to support. Lintrathen is a village in such a location but it is recognised there is only a school with no shops or other local services. People would have to travel into Kirriemuir 11.25 km away for such services.

3.189 Following consultations with residents of Bridgend of Linlathern after publication of the FALPR, the council acknowledges that the general feeling among existing residents is that the new area included within the proposed extended southern development boundary (shown on P184 of FALPR) would be inappropriate for development for a number of different reasons, as outlined above. It also states that, following these discussions, it appears that the need for affordable housing in the local area - which is an issue raised by the Community Council - has not been identified through a formal assessment. Furthermore, there is some doubt amongst the villagers that there would be much local demand for such accommodation. The council notes that whilst one or two local people suggest that there may be demand for plots for self build or other family housing in the area, other residents are not supportive of any new housing in the village. Based mostly on the significant numbers of local objections to the amended development boundary, it is proposed (in the Modifications published by the council in September 2005), that the southern boundary of Bridgend of Lintrathen be moved back to follow the boundary of the curtilages of existing residential properties at the bottom of the field.

3.190 Turning to the alternative locations suggested by some residents for development, the council has expressed the following concerns about development on site (a) to the west of Lochside Lodge, and on Site (b) to the east of Braefoot Cottage:

54 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• the potential impact of development on the rural character of the approaches to the village (both sites); • the loss of trees, particularly from site (a), and also a hedge in the case of site (b); • the very limited capacity of site (b) to accommodate development, given the narrow width and rocky character of the site; • drainage constraints on site (b).

3.191 In terms of access, it notes that the visibility of site (a) is good and the council’s Director of Roads has no objections in principle to its inclusion in the finalised local plan. Whilst there are concerns about access relating to site (b) which is located on the outside of a bend in the unclassified public road, it accepts that a shared access serving 2 adjoining properties here would be acceptable.

3.192 In summary, despite some concerns the council acknowledges that, in principle, the land immediately to the west of Lochside Lodge may have potential for development for 2-3 houses at the rear of the site. This would be dependent on whether the majority of the trees around the site could be retained, as these provide an important screen backdrop, and if new buildings here can be designed and sited in a manner that complements this location. It stresses the importance of positioning and orientation of any new houses on this site in order to retain the visual amenity of the adjoining Lochside Lodge restaurant and rooms, as far as possible.

3.193 The council, whilst stressing the important role of the Glebe in providing a landscape setting for key heritage buildings of the village, stated at the hearing that it did not rule out the scope for perhaps 2-3 roadside frontage housing plots alongside Primrose Cottage, whilst retaining the core of the Glebe in its present form. If this was done it anticipated using dykes or other means to provide the necessary enclosure of the plots, rather than fences which would otherwise detract from the visual amenity of this important landscaped area. Apart from expressing concern about the long term view of the elevated portacabin site on the treelined hillside above Braefoot Cottage, the council did not completely rule out the possibility of limited housing development on that site.

3.194 Having explored the various possibilities for limited housing development in and around the village the council has weighed these up against the opposition expressed by a number of people from the village to any more development at Bridgend of Lintrathen - based on their local concerns about the likely impact on local infrastructure, the requirement for children to walk up the hill road with no footpath to school and a lack of local services. In this context, the council has concluded that no additional sites should be identified for development nor any alternative adjustments made to the development boundary of the village.

3.195 Accordingly, the council proposes to amend the development boundary on the southern edge of Bridgend of Lintrathen back to the extent of the curtilages of residential

55 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review property at the bottom of the field, and proposes no other amendments to the development boundary.

The Objectors’ responses to the council’s proposed amendment

3.196 In summary, based on the modification set out on Page100 of the Proposed First Round Modifications published in September 2005 and the accompanying plan shown on P101, the written objections (a), (b), (e), (g) have been conditionally withdrawn, whilst objectors (c), (d), (f), (h), (i) maintain their original objections.

Conclusions

3.197 The fact that Bridgend of Lintrathen has a falling school roll is not sufficient reason to facilitate or plan an expansion the village, in my opinion. Based on the very limited information available to me, I am not in a position to comment on the need for affordable housing provision at Bridgend of Linlathen. There appears to be no disagreement between the council and local residents of Bridgend of Lintrathen that the extension to the southern boundary of the village proposed in the published version of FALPR is inappropriate. I am of the same view, for the reasons outlined on behalf of local objectors, in particular because of the prominence of that potential development site when viewed whilst heading down the hill along the minor road leading from the school to the village. Given the low volumes of local traffic, however, I do not share the concerns raised about road safety along the road leading to the school. Nevertheless, new development on that land would be impossible to screen adequately and new houses at that location would be obtrusive and out of keeping with the scale and character of the village as a whole, which should be conserved in my view.

3.198 Notwithstanding the above, I am in agreement with Mr and Mrs Dunham’s views expressed at the hearing regarding the following:

• firstly, that some limited housing development even in a small village like Bridgend of Lintrathen need not necessarily be detrimental to the character of the place as a whole, if well planned, of a suitable scale and of high quality design and materials; and • secondly, that proposals for limited additions or infill developments to the village, if carefully located and sensitively designed, should not be rejected out of hand by the council purely on the basis of vocalised resistance from existing residents to development of any type affecting their village. Such opposition to development, in order to be valid, needs to be based on sound planning reasons and not just on the basis of what individuals would prefer to see happen – or in this case not see happen - in their village.

3.199 I note that given the existing form of the village there is only very limited, if any scope for infill developments at Bridgend of Lintrathen, within the development boundary shown in the Proposed Modifications development boundary P101. I am persuaded, therefore, that most if not all significant new developments would probably need to take

56 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

place on sites not currently shown within that defined boundary. I note that the council seeks to adopt a supportive approach in its countryside planning policies to be applied for sites outwith development boundaries. This is in line with the new national policy set out in SPP15: Planning for Rural Development issued in February 2005. In this context, and for the reasons outlined below in each case, I do not see any justification for expanding the settlement boundary of Bridgend of Lintrathen to include:

• site (b) the small, narrow strip of land immediately to the east of Braefoot Cottage – particularly with its very limited development potential and when it has access and drainage constraints and presents other challenges in terms of the rocky outcrops and the landscape features along its boundaries; • the main part of the Glebe area – I recognise and fully endorse the important role of the Glebe in providing a landscape setting for Melgam House and Linlathen church. Nevertheless, I would not rule out the potential scope, at least in principle, for one or perhaps more sensitively designed houses being accommodated along the road frontage adjoining Primrose Cottage, whilst retaining the large majority of the Glebe in its present form and function; • The small cleared site above Braefoot Cottage on the wooded hillside. Nevertheless, despite it being visible, particularly when viewed from across the loch, there may be scope for a sensitively designed house to be located on the site that has been used as a site office with portacabins.

3.200 In all of the above cases I am confident that the council could respond as appropriate to specific development proposals – with reference to the policies of the local plan review, including the revised countryside housing policies as set out the Proposed 3rd Round Modifications [as subsequently modified further by the council following the hearing on countryside housing objections which have been considered in detail elsewhere in this report]. In my view, these various policies can be used to guide and inform the council’s development control function in response to any development proposals for these sites on a case-by-case basis. I would envisage that the particular challenges presented by each of these sites would require a highly original design solution, demonstrating a sensitive response which fully addresses the particular constraints of the site concerned and respects its setting, in order to justify planning permission being granted. Otherwise the planning authority would refuse permission and the sites concerned would remain undeveloped.

3.201 Whilst the same arguments could be said to also apply to site (a) to the west of Lochside Lodge, in this particular instance I conclude that there is a case for the council to consider an extension to the development boundary of the village, for the following reasons:

• the site concerned is significantly larger (than site (b) for example); • it offers more scope for a planned development – I would endorse the council’s view that it may offer potential for perhaps 2-3 houses; • it apparently has no drainage or access constraints, based on the limited information available;

57 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• if the development of housing here is restricted to the rear (south) of the site, within and against the backdrop of the existing mature trees, it could be readily developed without a significant loss of visual amenity for: o the owners and users of the restaurant and rooms at Lochside Lodge; or o those approaching Bridgend of Lintrathen from the west, which is one of the main entrances to the village; • an extension to the village boundary to accommodate this site would encourage potential developers to explore this as a first priority, being the preferred location to which the council seeks to direct any limited expansion for the village. In principle, this would then fulfil the role that the council was seeking to achieve with its previous proposal to expand the southern boundary of the village marginally; • with such an extension, albeit very restricted, being put forward as a positive statement of limited development potential for the village in the adopted local plan review, the other sites discussed above would remain to be considered only on a case- by-case or exceptional basis.

3.202 I would stress that any development of this particular site - whether it was within a designated extension to the village’s development boundary, as I would prefer, or as a site adjoining the existing boundary - would require to be very carefully planned. In particular, any housing here would need to be sited and designed in such a way that it respects the landscape setting of the site itself and to protect the visual amenity of both the neighbouring property and the village as a whole. This might best be achieved by the council providing a development brief for the site, to guide intending developers.

Recommendation

3.203 Based on my conclusions set out above, I recommend that the local plan review is modified to:

o Amend the development boundary on the southern edge of Bridgend of Lintrathen back to the extent of the curtilages of residential property at the bottom of the field (as shown on the Proposed Modifications of September 2005 (pp100 and 101); o Amend the development boundary at the western edge of Bridgend of Lintrathen to include the land referred to above as site (a), immediately to the west of Lochside Lodge; and o Provide guidance as to how some of that land newly incorporated within the amended western boundary might be sensitively developed for a strictly limited number of new houses, based on the considerations I have set out above in my conclusions.

58 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Burnside of Duntrune: Omission - Ballumbie House

Objector Reference

Earl of Dundee 836/1/1 (per CKD Galbraith)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.204 There is widespread development pressure in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. Ballumbie House and its estate has a defined development boundary in the finalised local plan review and that document records that there were a total of 184 approved housing units at Ballumbie House, either with planning permission or under construction, at June 2004. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.205 The objector seeks around 30 ha of land to the south of Burnside of Duntrune and west of Ballumbie House development boundary to be allocated in the finalised local plan for a 6 hole extension to the existing golf course at Ballumbie House and residential development to make this viable within an overall development brief to be approved by the council. The objector also seeks the development boundary of Ballumbie House to be amended accordingly.

The council’s response

3.206 Firstly, the council gives brief consideration to the specific local issues raised on behalf of the objectors in respect of the Burnside of Duntrune site. It notes that the objection site comprises agricultural land located in the Dundee Urban Fringe to the west of the

59 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review development boundary for Ballumbie House. The objection does not specify the number of houses that would be required to facilitate the golf course development.

3.207 The finalised local plan review section on Ballumbie House (P175) in Policy Ba1 provides for the development of a total of 238 residential units here. Although a substantial number have already been built, at June 2004 there remained 184 houses to be constructed. Development has only recently restarted and it is anticipated that construction will spread over a number of years. Policy Ba2 already provides the basis for consideration of proposals which extend the recreational potential of the golf related development at Ballumbie House.

3.208 The council points out that proposals for golf course development will be assessed against Policy SC32: New Golf Course Development which clearly states that:

"Housing and/or other land uses proposed in support of a new golf course will only be supported where it accords with the development strategy and relevant policies of this Local Plan."

3.209 At the strategic level, the council points out that the wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.210 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.211 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land

60 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.212 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.213 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.214 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.215 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

61 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.216 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.217 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.218 I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for endorsing new residential development to the west of the Ballumbie House development boundary on an exceptional basis, in order to facilitate golf course development there on a 30ha site. I note that the finalised local plan review in Policy Ba1 limits residential development for Ballumbie House to the existing approved 238 units in dispersed groups, as shown on the local plan Proposals Map on P176, together with the conversion of Ballumbie House to provide 14 residential units. I also note that Policy Ba2 recognises the recreational potential of golf-related development at this location and sets specific criteria in this regard, to ensure that it would be compatible with existing uses and to safeguard the local environment.

3.219 In this context, I share the concerns expressed by the council that the Ballumbie House estate policies are set within open countryside. Accordingly, in my view it would not be appropriate to have further pockets of housing and related development on agricultural land outwith the defined development boundary of Ballumbie House, solely to facilitate golf course developments. I am also concerned about the open-ended nature of the objector’s proposals, particularly since there has been no indication given of the final number of houses to be developed for this purpose. This gives rise to other issues relating to the potential impact of incremental and unplanned growth of housing and related developments here - both in the local context, in terms of the landscape setting, and in respect of its contribution to the strategic housing land supply of the South Angus HMA. In summary, I conclude that the arguments put forward in support of the objection are not persuasive when set against the legitimate concerns expressed by the council in the local and strategic contexts.

Recommendation

3.220 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

62 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Colliston Village

Objector Reference

The Geddes Group 659/1/1 (per B Roger & Young)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.221 Page 189 of the finalised local plan review (FALPR) shows the Colliston development boundary. It shows no housing allocations or proposals for Colliston. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.222 The objector is concerned that there is no land for further housing development allocated within the settlement boundary of Colliston. Whilst acknowledging that some villages are best left as existing and others have no scope for expansion, it is argued that there is demand for housing at Colliston, particularly given its link to the Brechin/Arbroath commuter road. In addition, it is pointed out that the village offers infrastructure to support expansion, including a church, public house, primary school and a hall - noting that some of these local facilities and services require growth to sustain them. An area immediately to the north of part of the development boundary of the village and immediately to the west of another part of the boundary is owned by the objector and in his view a small number of new houses here would round off the settlement.

The council’s response

3.223 The council has not prepared a statement of evidence in response to this objection.

3.224 The objection has subsequently been conditionally withdrawn, although it is unclear on what basis as there is no evidence from the council that it is proposing to endorse the principle of new housing development at this location or to alter the development boundary of Colliston to incorporate the land proposed by the objector for a small number of houses.

63 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Conclusions

3.225 I have no information from the council regarding its views on new housing on the objection site or concerning any modification to the development boundary of Colliston shown in the finalised version of the local plan review to accommodate a small number of new houses on the objector’s site, as proposed. The support of local facilities and services is not sufficient to warrant an exceptional allocation of the site concerned for housing when it adjoins but lies outwith the development boundary of the settlement. I am also concerned that if this objection was upheld based on such limited evidence to support it, there is a risk that it would set an unfortunate precedent that would be likely to lead to other similar requests for inappropriate development that would be more difficult to reject. Based on these considerations, I conclude that there is no justification to uphold the objection in this case.

Recommendation

3.226 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review should be not be modified in this case.

64 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Craigton of Monikie: Omission

Objector Reference

John Anderson (per McCrae & McCrae) 925/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.227 The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.228 It is argued on behalf of the objector that the finalised local plan should have extended the development boundary of Craigton of Monikie eastwards to enable two new houses for local people to be built on a 0.6ha gap site. This would consolidate the building group by becoming of an infill development, between a recently constructed existing house to the west and two houses immediately to the east, alongside a minor road on the eastern edge of the settlement. This is a revised and reduced proposal following withdrawal of an earlier objection in support of 15 new dwellings to be constructed on a 7.5ha site to the north-east of the same village. In the objector’s view the current proposal would comply generally with SPP3 paragraphs 18 and 34 and PAN72 in respect of infill and small scale rural developments. The objector points out that the two housing sites would be readily accessible via a metalled track to the south, which is close to the B961 and A92 roads. The development would be close to Monikie Primary School and could contribute to securing its future by modestly increasing pupil numbers, in the objector’s view. It is stated that this is not a flood risk area and that private drainage would be installed to serve the proposed new properties. In summary, it is argued that the proposal would continue the pattern of linear development already evident in Craigton of Monikie.

The council’s response

3.229 The council notes the Craigton of Monikie is located in a Category 1 Rural Settlement Unit (RSU) and the long established loose grouping of buildings here has been consolidated in recent years by a significant residential development of 12 new houses on the

65 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review site of a former poultry farm. It considers the existing settlement is self-contained and cohesive and the housing that exists outwith the development boundary is dispersed in nature. In this context, the proposal to extend the development boundary is regarded as inappropriate as it would result in ribbon development in open countryside along the north side of an unmade track to Craigton Farm. It points out that the 85m distance between the existing properties along the track far exceed the 50m which would normally be considered as a gap site in Category 1 RSU areas. Accordingly, it is not considered appropriate to extend the development boundary onto agricultural land as proposed, particularly as this could set a precedent for other similar situations across Angus.

3.230 The council also argues that the objector’s proposal could be more appropriately determined through the development control process, with reference to countryside housing policies of the local plan. Policy SC5 provides criteria for assessing proposals for housing in the countryside which are not met in this particular case.

3.231 Since publication of FALPR, new national policy on rural development has been issued (SPP15). Based on consideration of this, together with objections lodged in respect of the countryside policies of FALPR, the countryside section of FALPR has been modified. In summary, the council considers that there is no basis on which to accept the objection in this particular case.

Conclusions

3.232 I endorse the assessment made by the council that the current development boundary of Craigton of Monikie is self-contained and cohesive. In addition, I conclude that the existing properties outwith this boundary are dispersed, such that they do not merit inclusion within a revised development boundary, as proposed by the objector. For these reasons, together with the fact that the gap which the objector seeks to fill is 85m wide, I conclude that the proposed ‘infill’ would in fact constitute ribbon development, which I consider would be undesirable and inappropriate in the local context. The arguments presented on behalf of the objector have not been persuasive in this regard. The fact that there are some examples of linear developments in the vicinity and that the proposed new houses would be accessible and have the potential to boost the local school roll marginally are not sufficient reasons to justify the proposal, in my view. Furthermore, I conclude that if the objection was to succeed in this case it would create ribbon development in open countryside and this would set an undesirable precedent for other similar situations elsewhere in Angus.

Recommendation

3.233 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

66 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Eassie Muir: Development Boundary - Omission

Objector Reference

Mr & Mrs Christie 662/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.234 The development boundary for Eassie Muir shown in the finalised local plan review comprises two separate parcels. The objection seeks to extend the larger of these parcels south-eastwards in order to provide a site for housing development. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.235 In the objector’s view the boundary of Eassie Muir shown in the finalised local plan review (P198) provides insufficient ground for new housing. It is argued that there is considerable demand for new housing in this particular area, including housing to meet local needs. Accordingly the objector proposes an extension to the boundary of Eassie Muir to the south-east, from its existing boundary up to the main A94 road that passes to the south of the village.

The council’s response

3.236 The council states that whilst the development boundary at Eassie Muir includes scope for limited development on appropriate sites, this is not a location which should be actively promoted for larger scale development. It points out that is a large village close to this location where a site for development of 24 houses has planning permission. In the council’s view, Glamis is a more appropriate location for development as it has a primary school and other services.

3.237 It notes that planning permission for housing development on the objection site has been previously refused (Application 01/88/0432) and that decision was upheld on appeal. In the council’s view there are no new circumstances which would lead to a decision in favour of development on this site. The Director of Roads has confirmed an objection to

67 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

development in this location as “development on this site would result in a significant intensification of use of the existing junction.” Furthermore, the council notes that there is a potential flood risk in relation to the Eassie Burn, such that the objection site is identified as being subject to risk of flooding, having regard to the 1 in 100 year flood risk maps.

3.238 A planning application was submitted for residential development of the area within the development boundary to the rear of Lintmill Cottages, immediately adjacent to the objection site. A Flood Risk Assessment for that proposal was requested from the applicant and when this was submitted for consideration by SEPA and the council’s Roads Department as the Flood Risk Authority, the application was withdrawn on 9 November 2005. The council notes that SEPA made the following comments on the Flood Risk Assessment in relation to this, and another nearby site:

“...Both these application sites are at risk of flooding and therefore not suitable for development. Consequently SEPA objects to these planning applications. The sites in question have a risk of flooding and it follows that to allow development to proceed may place property or persons at serious risk...”

3.239 In relation to the local plan objection site, in addition to the concerns about access, potential noise impact from the A94, and possible flood risk the council does not support the extension of development into this area as it would create ribbon development between the existing development boundary at Eassie Muir and the A94. This has been a consistent policy view since the late 1980’s.

Response by the Objector

3.240 The objector states that a flood risk assessment of the area by an independent consulting engineer has been undertaken recently and accepted by SEPA and the council’s Roads Department. It is argued that, whilst the flood risk envelope encroaches onto the western corner of the objection site, it is misleading to suggest that the site is at such risk from flooding that it should not be developed. The objector also points out that at other locations in Angus – such as Friockheim and Newbigging - the council has supported housing allocations outwith the development boundary and alongside a public road. On this basis the objector is concerned about a lack of consistency in the council’s approach with regard to Eassie Muir – pointing out that intensification of road and junction use would be true of all new development sites.

Conclusions

3.241 Firstly, I endorse the council’s concern that the proposal in this case would result in ribbon development, which is unwarranted. Secondly, it is evident that the proposed housing site that would be created if the development boundary of Eassie Muir was extended south- eastwards would be contiguous with the main A94 road. In this context, I consider that the proposed development would result in potential problems of noise and access junction issues, which are of particular concern as the A94 is a major road. Furthermore, based on the evidence presented, I am persuaded by the council’s argument that there is an unacceptable

68 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

level of flood risk in the immediate vicinity of the site concerned. I note that the only other arguments put forward on behalf of the objector in support of the proposed development boundary extension are based on the fact that:

• there is a considerable demand for housing in the area concerned; • other housing allocations have been for other settlements outwith existing settlement boundaries and alongside public roads.

3.242 I do not consider that these observations are sufficient to outweigh the arguments against such a development, as outlined above, particularly when there are other housing opportunities in the vicinity, including approval for 24 new houses in nearby Glamis.

3.243 Accordingly, I conclude that there are no exceptional reasons to justify the proposed extension to the development boundary of Eassie Muir in the manner proposed by the objector in this case.

Recommendation

3.244 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

69 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Edzell: Omission - East Mains Farm

Objector Reference

D L B (Scotland) Limited 827/1/1

In support of the finalised local plan review

Dalhousie Estates

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.245 The objection site extends northwards from the village of Edzell across generally open, agricultural land between the River North Esk and the B966.

3.246 A small part of the objection site is within the settlement boundary and the remainder lies within the countryside beyond the village.

3.247 The village statement indicates:

Given the physical boundaries to the village, careful consideration of the scale, future direction, design and layout of new development will be required to ensure that it respects the form and setting of the village and integrates with the surrounding rural landscape. In the light of recent permissions for residential development … the strategy for Edzell is to allow for a period of consolidation and to limit additional residential development within the plan period to the redevelopment of brownfield and infill sites within the village boundary.

Edzell lies within the Brechin/Montrose housing market area.

Basis of the objection

3.248 The objector seeks the allocation of land at Edzell for a golf course and residential development.

3.249 The local plan review fails to conform to the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan with substantial housing land deficiencies in the Brechin/Montrose housing market area. A housing land allocation at Edzell would alleviate the problem, particularly in respect of the severe shortfall of quality housing in the landward part of the housing market area. Development at Edzell would assist the objective of stimulating the commercial and

70 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

economic regeneration of nearby Brechin. The proposed golf course would complement the existing Edzell Golf Course and re-instate a course that existed prior to the Second World War.

3.250 The provisions of the local plan review do not conform to the structure plan insofar as the allocated land would not provide a 5 year effective housing land supply at all times. The structure plan also requires recognition of the need to meet local demand in smaller settlements such as Edzell where demand for quality housing has been established. Around 54 completions were achieved in the 3 year period to mid-2005. On the other hand, there are severe marketability constraints in Brechin.

3.251 The council has proposed new allocations at Brechin and Montrose that are unnecessary and, in any event, the local plan review seeks to deliver only 126 new units whereas the structure plan requires an additional 240 units. The local plan review relies on a number of constrained sites that have failed to attract development interest in the past.

3.252 In terms of affordable housing it is clear that the local plan review will not provide the assessed requirement and, in this respect also, the document runs contrary to the structure plan and, in addition, to the provisions of PAN38, Housing Land, as it is necessary to make specific provision for affordable housing in addition to the identified levels of mainstream housing.

3.253 SPP15, Planning for Rural Development, supports additional residential development wherever and whenever it can be shown to be beneficial to the surrounding area or settlement without undue detriment to the countryside. The proposed development of houses and a golf course at Edzell is precisely the type of development SPP15 is seeking to encourage.

3.254 It is clear that the structure plan requires review and that this review would conclude that the base housing land requirement in the Brechin/Montrose housing market area should be increased by 50%.

3.255 At present the entire allocation for the landward area of the Brechin/Montrose housing market area is a brownfield site at Edzell for 6 houses. This is inadequate and does not fulfil the requirement for the provision of a range and choice of locations and sites.

3.256 Development as proposed at Edzell would make good use of existing infrastructure and foster the concept of building sustainable communities. It would be close to a public transport route and have reasonable access to national routes. As stated in SPP15, new development can support and sustain the rural economy. Edzell has a wide range of facilities including a new school and health centre, hotels, shops, two small supermarkets, library and bank which provide a vibrant economic character and offer a largely self-sustaining situation.

3.257 Low density development along with high individual amenity and the setting of the village ensure that Edzell is a desirable and attractive location. The character is derived from the broad High Street and the grid iron layout along with a combination of man-made and natural features. The proposed residential development would be primarily located behind

71 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

the built frontage of the recently completed primary school and health centre. It would not be intrusive and would be a logical extension of the settlement envelope. The golf course to the east would contain the residential development. Footpaths would link to the existing system.

3.258 The golf course would be wooded parkland in nature contrasting with to the existing heathland course. It would provide a full range of ancillary facilities and would be completed in advance of any residential development.

The council’s response

3.259 Structure plan Housing Policy 4 indicates that local plans should allocate land to meet the allowances detailed in Schedule 1, that a range and choice of sites should be provided within each housing market area, priority given to the re-use of previously developed land and that the majority of the additional allowances for the Montrose/Brechin housing market area should be directed to Montrose and Brechin themselves.

3.260 Table 2.1 of the finalised Angus Local Plan Review indicates that the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan housing land allowance for the Brechin/Montrose housing market area for the period 2001 - 2011 is 835 units. Taking account of the 224 completions in the period 2001 - 2004 and sites with planning permission or under construction at June 2004, there is a net requirement for 320 units to be allocated in the period to 2011.

3.261 In line with the structure plan, the local plan review identifies a range and choice of sites within the housing market area to meet this allowance by allocating a mix of brownfield and greenfield sites within the main towns of Brechin and Montrose as well as a small brownfield site in Edzell which total 384 units. Some sites previously identified in the first Angus Local Plan are confirmed as being effective in the 2004 Housing Land Audit whilst others are new allocations and will become effective within the 5 year period of the new local plan.

3.262 The scale of the land allocations meets the structure plan allowance and there is no need to allocate additional land. Consultation with Homes for Scotland has raised no concerns in respect of the adequacy of the housing land allocations in the Brechin/Montrose housing market area. On the other hand, the approved structure plan strategy, implemented through the local plan, would be undermined by the release of additional housing land in Edzell.

3.263 The objector’s contention that the local plan fails to satisfy the structure plan allowances for the Brechin/Montrose housing market area appears to be based on a misunderstanding of structure plan Schedule 1. The housing land supply assessment undertaken by the council takes account of the housing land audit for 2005. This demonstrates that the supply meets the full housing land allowances for the housing market area for the period to 2011. Indeed the identified supply provides sufficient housing land to contribute to the indicative allowances for the period 2011 - 2016.

72 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.264 The objector wrongly believes that affordable housing provision should be in addition to the housing land requirements set by the structure plan. The structure plan indicates that local plans should make provision for specific housing needs identified through a local housing needs assessment within the wider housing land allowances. PAN 74, Affordable Housing, states “The requirement for affordable housing should be seen as part of the overall housing requirement identified by a structure plan, not a separate element”.

3.265 There is an affordable housing requirement for the Brechin/Montrose housing market area of 95 units in the period 2004 – 2011. A requirement of 25% affordable housing on all allocated sites within the local plan review would generate 80 units. However, windfall sites may come forward, for example at Sunnyside Hospital Estate, which would also contribute towards the total requirement.

3.266 In terms of the golf course element of the proposal, NPPG 11, Sport, Physical Recreation and Open Space, indicates that councils should identify sites or general locations in local plans for additional courses in areas of unmet demand and, in evaluating proposals for golf courses, should consider any unmet demand identified by sportscotland (previously the Scottish Sports Council).

3.267 The council commissioned sportscotland to assess the current supply of and demand for golf course development in Angus. The study confirmed that beyond the urban fringe around Dundee, there is no significant unmet demand. On this basis there is no requirement for an additional golf course at Edzell.

3.268 Policy SC32, New Golf Course Development, indicates that the council will only support proposals for additional golf courses where it can be demonstrated that the development would meet unfulfilled local and/or visitor demand and is consistent with other relevant policies of the local plan. In this respect, the Leisure Services Department has concerns about the economic viability and demand for a further golf course at Edzell due to its isolated location in terms of population and the existence of a good quality course at present. No analysis identifying and quantifying the catchment and demand for an additional golf course in this part of Angus, as well as the number and location of houses considered necessary to cross-fund the project, has been submitted.

3.269 Overall, there is no justification for allocating land for a new 18 hole golf course at Edzell. Furthermore, as sufficient land has been allocated within the Brechin/Montrose housing market area to meet the structure plan requirements, there is no need to allocate additional greenfield land. PAN43, Golf Courses and Associated Developments, indicates that the housing element of golf course proposals should be considered within the development plan requirement for housing land and assessed against development plan policies. The leisure or tourist facility should not in itself provide the basis of approving housing development which would not normally be acceptable in planning terms.

3.270 The community council has expressed concern about further development beyond the existing limit of built development. In this respect, the local plan draws attention to the attractive qualities of Edzell in terms of its townscape and landscape setting and states that

73 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review these should be respected in considering the scale, location and form of any future development. The strategy for Edzell recognises the level of recent development in the village and seeks to allow for a period of consolidation by limiting additional residential development to brownfield and infill sites within the village boundary.

3.271 Consideration of the potential for and direction of growth at Edzell is a matter for a future local plan. It is not appropriate to allocate land in this location without consideration of a wider assessment of other land allocation options in terms of key planning considerations including landscape and visual impact, accessibility, availability of drainage, water and capacity of the primary school as well as the views of the village community.

Dalhousie Estates

3.272 The finalised local plan review emphasises the need to carefully consider any future development. However, a recently submitted planning application, although on brownfield land within the village boundary, involves proposals that are of a scale and character which are wholly inappropriate in an edge-of-village setting. They do not accord with the local plan requirement to ensure the scale, future direction, design and layout of new development should respect the form and setting of the village and integrate with the surrounding landscape. Accordingly they do not meet the criteria contained in Policy SC3, Windfall Sites.

3.273 The objection, if accepted, could pre-empt infrastructure provision and lead to a dislocated form of development. The terms of the finalised local plan review should therefore remain unchanged and decisions regarding the future expansion of the village should be delayed until the next review. In the meantime, any proposal to extend the village to the north should be resisted.

Conclusions

3.274 Having considered objections to Policy SC1, Housing Land Supply, it was concluded that the local plan review makes adequate provision in terms of the structure plan requirements. The strategic document has been approved and is not the subject of critical examination under the auspices of the local plan inquiry. In particular, it was concluded that there is a surplus provision in the Brechin/Montrose housing market area of 64 houses in the period to 2011. This comprises:

Completions 224 to June 2004 Existing sites 291 Allocated 384 Total 899 SP target 835 Surplus 64

74 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.275 The surplus was thought to be not unreasonable and, along with any future windfall sites, provides a suitable element of flexibility. Accordingly it was concluded there is no justification for additional allocations in the period to 2011.

3.276 Although the objector has suggested that the new allocation of 126 houses is short of the structure plan requirement, this figure must be taken in the context of the wider situation set out in the annual audit. The audit shows sites agreed as effective and that have planning permission as well as the sites previously identified in the first Angus Local Plan and new allocations.

3.277 The council has explained that the 2005 audit has shown the availability of more housing land and indicated that the supply extends into the second structure plan period beyond 2011. The audit is undertaken in consultation with those having a direct interest in housing land, including the house building industry, and there has been no indication of any fundamental disagreement to the 2005 statistics.

3.278 Despite the suggestion by the objector that additional land is required in respect of affordable housing, the council has drawn attention to the recent guidance contained in PAN74 and I agree that a separate allocation is not required.

3.279 Overall, as set out in the conclusions to the consideration of objections to the terms of Policy SC1, Housing Land Supply, there is no requirement, in strategic terms, for additional allocations in the Brechin/Montrose housing market area.

3.280 The structure plan seeks the majority of additional allowances to be identified in Montrose and Brechin and, despite the objector’s concern about marketability, I believe the local plan review correctly fulfils this requirement. The need to meet demand in smaller settlements is also stated and the objector maintains that Edzell should be allocated additional housing land in order to fulfil a demand for high quality houses in the village. On the other hand the local plan review seeks a period for consolidation and the council points out that this approach is supported by the community council. There is not a moratorium on development but any new housing should be limited to brownfield or infill sites. Dalhousie Estates also supports this approach, at least until the next local plan review.

3.281 The objector indicates that 54 houses were completed in the 3 years to 2005 and I am of the opinion that this scale of recent development in the village, no matter the level of local facilities and services, requires some time to be absorbed. I therefore conclude that the council is correct in seeking to restrain development for a period and limit further growth to infill and brownfield sites within the settlement boundary.

3.282 Part of the objection site falls within the village boundary and, should this be regarded as brownfield land or an infill site, residential development may be considered appropriate in this location. In this respect, Dalhousie Estates refers to a planning application and states that objections to the proposal have been lodged. This particular proposal, of which no details have been provided, is not a matter for consideration under the local plan review inquiry but for the council to determine, at least in the first instance.

75 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.283 SPP15, Planning for Rural Development, advances policy in respect of small scale rural housing developments including clusters and groups in close proximity to settlements and states that this potential should be expressed in development plans. I do not consider the scale of housing proposed, as shown on the indicative drawing, to be small scale or a cluster or group and therefore do not believe that the proposal can draw support from the terms of SPP15. In any event, the scope for new housing developments of this nature should be expressed in development plans. There is nothing in the local plan review to suggest that such development would be suitable at Edzell. Indeed, such development would fly in the face of the limited development envisaged by the council to be the most appropriate for the village over the course of the local plan period.

3.284 Turning to the golf course proposal, I note that the facility would be completed in advance of the construction of houses. This would suggest that the course is not dependent on the provision of houses. Accordingly, it is appropriate to consider the golf course potential in its own right. There is disagreement over the need for an additional course. The council has indicated that sportscotland is of the view that no additional courses are required in Angus other than, perhaps, on the fringes of Dundee. The council is also concerned about viability. On the other hand the objector maintains that a new course would provide a parkland alternative to the existing heathland course. I am not in a position to draw a conclusion in this respect but Policy SC32, New Golf Course Development, sets out the criteria against which any proposal will be assessed. On this basis I conclude it is not necessary to allocate land for a golf course in the local plan review. The lack of a specific allocation would not preclude the approval of a new course subject to assessment against Policy SC32.

3.285 Overall, I conclude that an additional housing allocation on land beyond the settlement boundary is not justified on either a strategic or local scale and that there is no requirement to allocate land for a golf course.

Recommendation

3.286 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

76 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Edzell: Omission – Former Mart

Objector Reference

Hart Estates Limited 883/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.287 The site of the former mart lies to the north-west of Edzell, immediately to the north of Lethnot Road. The site is overgrown with a predominance of rosebay willowherb and no apparent trace of its former use. There are new houses on the opposite side of the road, open land to the west and north, and trees to the east beyond which there is a recreation area. A new primary school and health centre have recently been constructed in the north-east quadrant of the junction between Lethnot Road and High Street.

3.288 The local plan review excludes the former mart site from the settlement, the boundary being Lethnot Road to the south of the site and the western edge of the trees to the east.

3.289 The village statement indicates:

The former mart site … has not come forward for employment use despite being allocated for a number of years but has been the subject to pressure for residential development. Lethnot Road provides a marked division between the built-up area of Edzell and its landscape setting, which is one of the most striking and attractive features of the village. Whilst it is considered that residential development north of Lethnot Road would not be appropriate, the local plan provides opportunities for the redevelopment of the former mart for employment uses of an appropriate scale and nature through Policy SC16, Rural Employment …

Given the physical boundaries to the village, careful consideration of the scale, future direction, design and layout of new development will be required to ensure that it respects the form and setting of the village and integrates with the surrounding rural landscape. In the light of recent permissions for residential development … the strategy for Edzell is to allow for a period of consolidation and to limit additional residential development within the plan period to the redevelopment of brownfield and infill sites within the village boundary.

77 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Basis of the objection

3.290 The local plan review places the former mart outside the development boundary and therefore fails to recognise the development opportunity offered by the site for general employment and housing uses. This is despite land to the north-east of Lethnot Road, adjacent to the B966 being allocated for a new school and health centre and recently completed residential development to the south of Lethnot Road. The changes resulting from these developments increase the urbanisation of this part of the boundary of Edzell and add weight to the case for developing the mart site.

3.291 The stream and bridge to the west of the mart site provide a more defensible boundary. The boundary should be redrawn to include the former mart and the text should identify the land as an opportunity site within the settlement. This would relate to the local plan review objective to give priority to the re-use of previously developed sites.

The council’s response

3.292 The Angus Local Plan, 2000, public inquiry report confirmed that the redevelopment of the former mart site for housing was not appropriate and that development of housing at any location north of Lethnot Road would destroy a fundamental, distinctive and especially attractive feature of the character of Edzell as a planned rural village. This conclusion was reached in the knowledge that the site on the south side of Lethnot Road was proposed for residential use.

3.293 The site was previously included within the development boundary and its allocation for business, craft/tourist related uses or recreational open space was an endeavour to achieve positive re-use of the site which would also facilitate environmental improvement. The site at that time was occupied by the decaying remains of two buildings which were subject to vandalism and of concern to the local community. The description of the site as “brownfield” was discussed at the previous local plan inquiry when Reporter commented that “Apart from the building foundations and a few areas of roadway, the surface appears either to be variably and loosely covered with broken stone. Given also that the timber fencing appears not to be fixed in the ground with solid foundations and is subject to natural decay which would eventually leave no visible trace, I find it doubtful that … this … site could properly be described as brownfield.”

3.294 Most of the buildings have now been removed from the site which has been colonised by wildflower species and has developed a semi-natural character. The previous open character of the site, with a largely grassy surface, has changed and the land is now dominated by brambles with localised regeneration of rowan, sycamore, hawthorn, blackthorn and elder. In effect, the site is becoming woodland. This is not uncommon in rural areas and the condition of the land does not detract from the environmental quality of Edzel reinforcing the previous Reporter’s conclusion that the site cannot be properly classed as brownfield. If the site remains undisturbed this process will continue and the site will become increasingly natural in character and appearance. Consequently it is not necessary or appropriate to promote the land as a development opportunity.

78 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.295 The local plan strategy for employment land is to focus land allocations for employment uses in the main towns. In terms of the rural areas, Policy SC16, Rural Employment, supports small-scale employment opportunities in the countryside where they make a positive contribution to the rural economy and are of an appropriate scale and nature.

3.296 Woodland planting along the western boundary of the residential development south of Lethnot Road is becoming established. In time, this woodland, along with natural regeneration on the mart site and the existing woodland north of Lethnot Road will create a strong visual entrance to Edzell.

3.297 Identifying the site for development would be contrary to the village strategy which is to limit development to brownfield and infill sites within the settlement boundary, a strategy supported by Inveresk Community Council.

Conclusions

3.298 SPP3, Land for Housing, defines brownfield land as “land which has previously been used.” Following the previous local plan inquiry, the report of which was issued prior to the publication of SPP3, the Reporter concluded that it was doubtful if the land could truly be described as brownfield. However, the site of the former mart falls within the scope of the brownfield land definition. Nevertheless, in terms of appearance, I accept that, in summer at least, the site is generally “green”.

3.299 The local plan review provides the opportunity to re-assess the line of the settlement boundary and therefore it would be possible to bring the site within the urban area with a presumption in favour of development. However, I accept the council’s argument that, at this point, Lethnot Road provides an appropriate settlement boundary.

3.300 Although preference should be given to the development of brownfield land, this should not be regarded as carte blanche in terms of potential for development. In this instance I believe that the location of the site beyond the settlement boundary and the condition of the land does not justify a development allocation.

3.301 SPP15, Planning for Rural Development, recognises that small sites that cease to be required for their original purpose may be appropriate for residential use if a net environmental benefit results. This applies principally to the conversion of disused buildings but I believe should also be a consideration in respect of the objection site. However, in terms of environmental impact, I conclude the residential development of the objection site would be incongruous and would not relate well to the village as both Lethnot Road and the woodland to the east of the site form clear and appropriate boundaries.

3.302 In reaching the foregoing conclusion, I have noted the recent health centre and primary school but consider that these form an extension of the existing built-up area to the east of High Street rather than development to the north of Lethnot Road which terminates at High Street.

79 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.303 I also note that the local plan review refers to a period of consolidation in Edzell with any additional development limited to brownfield or infill sites within the settlement boundary. Although I have not been made aware of the potential for other brownfield or infill development, the objective is worthy of support.

3.304 Overall, I conclude that the settlement boundary should not be amended to include the site of the former mart as an opportunity site for residential or business purposes. In this latter respect, the council has pointed out that Policy SC16, Rural Development, provides some scope for appropriate development. I make no comment in this respect but note any proposal would also be required to be assessed in terms of Policy S1, Development Boundaries, sub-section (c), which relates to development proposals on sites contiguous with the development boundary.

Recommendation

3.305 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

80 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Emmock: Omission

Objector Reference

Torith Ltd, R Melvin & Trojan Ltd (per Ritchie, Dagen and Allan) 270/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.306 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

3.307 The objectors are three existing businesses on adjoining sites at Emmock. Torith Ltd is a building and civil engineering contractor which stores equipment and materials here. The site is reportedly surplus to their requirements. R Melvin recycles machinery which is saleable and the remainder stays on site as scrap metal. That objector is coming to retirement age and would be happy to close the operation at this location, apparently. Trojan Ltd is a stone-crushing business. The last of these is not particularly seeking to relocate but if the other two went away they would also do so, according to the objector’s agent.

Basis of the objection

3.308 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the site concerned should be considered as a combined site and all re-zoned for housing development. It is argued that this semi-rural site, which is readily accessible from Emmock Road and from the A90 Trunk road, would be suitable for affordable and general needs housing and this would bring major environmental improvements to the area. It is pointed out that the land concerned has been in use for many years for recycling of machinery and scrap metal storage, as well used in part as a builder’s yard and as a stone recycling facility. The site is therefore is almost certainly contaminated by oils and metals and so would need a lot of remediation in the objectors’ view. Accordingly, whilst the re-location of these uses would improve the visual and environmental quality of the area, it is contended that this would only be economically viable if the land concerned is reallocated for residential use. It is also argued that restoration of the site for agriculture would not be cost-effective whilst other commercially viable uses like retailing would be unacceptable in planning and environmental terms here. It is estimated

81 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review that the total site area extends to 4-5ha which would accommodate around 100 houses (at a density of 20-30 housing units per hectare).

The council’s response

3.309 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.310 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.311 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.312 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the

82 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.313 In summary, the council argues that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.314 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.315 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.316 Turning to the particular characteristics of the Emmock site in question, the council points out that the land concerned has had a long history of providing a base for ‘bad neighbour’ type uses to evolve here, noting that these are necessary uses but difficult to accommodate in most areas. The isolation and screening of the location in question is beneficial for such operations. The council acknowledges, therefore, that such uses would be difficult to relocate to sites elsewhere in Angus. Furthermore, it accepts that there is no prospect of a partial relocation of some of the uses concerned. It reaches this view on the basis that if even only one of the existing uses remained the on-going visual impact and noise nuisance would make the rest of the site unacceptable in environmental terms for new uses such as housing.

3.317 The council points out that there has been no discussion with the landowners and site operators regarding the feasibility of the proposals that form the basis of this objection to the

83 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

finalised local plan. Given the scale and complexity of this exceptionally large brownfield site there are numerous issues that would need to be addressed in such discussions. In any event, however, it points out that the site concerned is isolated and inaccessible by public transport and so would be solely reliant on car usage - which makes it fail sustainability criteria for new housing developments. This is discussed further below.

3.318 The proposed Third Round Modifications revised the finalised plan’s policies on housing in the countryside [and further modifications have since been put forward by the council which are considered separately in this report under the heading of Countryside Housing]. The amended text of the Proposed Modifications of December 2005 state that large proposals for more than 4 new houses on rural brownfield sites would only be permitted exceptionally where it could be demonstrated that there are social, economic or environmental reasons of overriding public interest requiring such a scale of development in a countryside location. The council notes that the amended policy does not place a priority on removal of uses of the types operating on the objectors’ land at Emmock. The council concludes that there are strategic issues of concern here regarding the possible relocation of the existing uses and re-use of the vacated sites for housing. Given the isolation and inaccessibility of the site, the objector’s proposal would not be compatible with the government’s planning policy and guidance in SPP3 and SPP17, as it would result in a significant urban form of development in an isolated location in the countryside. With no shops, services or other facilities in the vicinity the proposal would create a car based commuter housing area which is contrary to the guidance, for example concerning sustainability, and so would be likely to be unacceptable.

Conclusions

3.319 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.320 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.321 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for

84 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.322 In this context I now turn to consider whether a housing land allocation at Emmock, as proposed by the objectors, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. The existing uses on the adjoining sites in question have been described by the council as ‘bad-neighbour’ activities, based on the nature of their operations resulting in noise nuisance and adverse visual impacts associated with storage of materials including scrap metals. Nevertheless, I note that these sites are reasonably well screened and isolated from housing and other uses which might be affected detrimentally by continuation of these operations. Furthermore, no complaints about the existing operators on the sites have been drawn to my attention and the council pointed out that it is generally difficult to find appropriate sites for such uses. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that are no exceptional circumstances to warrant a re-allocation of the land at Emmock within the local plan review solely on the basis of potential benefits arising from the prospect of relocating the present uses from this location.

3.323 I endorse the council’s assessment of the issues associated with promoting housing on this particular site, in particular concerning:

• the fact that the feasibility of a total relocation of all existing operators has not been investigated and a partial relocation of some of the uses concerned would not be sufficient in my view - as if any one of them remained the on-going visual impact and noise nuisance would make the rest of the site still unacceptable in environmental terms for new uses such as housing; • the possible need for remediation if the site is contaminated - which is likely given its history; • the lack of shops, services and facilities in the surrounding area; • the inevitable reliance on car usage by those who would live in any new houses developed at this isolated location – making it contrary to current national policy guidance and contrary to the structure plan and local plan policies which seek to promote sustainable development.

3.324 In summary, I conclude that it has not been demonstrated that there are social, economic or environmental reasons of overriding public interest requiring such a scale of housing development as is being proposed on what would be an exceptionally large brownfield site in an isolated countryside location.

Recommendation

3.325 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

85 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Finavon: Omission

Objector Reference

Craigallan Homes Ltd 615/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.326 Finavon lies to the east of the A90 between Forfar and Brechin.

3.327 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement. The boundary is drawn tightly around existing development.

3.328 The objection site is garden ground attached to Finavon Farmhouse, extending to about 0.8 hectares, a little distance to the south of Finavon and close to an at-grade junction with the A90. There are two existing houses close to Finavon Farmhouse.

Basis of the objection

3.329 The site offers potential for 8-9 houses and should be allocated within the Finavon settlement boundary. There are public roads on all sides and well-defined landscaped boundaries. A bus stop and post box lie adjacent to the south-west corner of the site. Development would represent a natural area of growth and, along with the existing houses, would create a cohesive group of buildings which could be integrated into the area without detriment to landscape character.

3.330 In terms of the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan, the site lies within a primarily remote rural area where limited new housing outwith settlements may be appropriate to stem rural depopulation and/or support existing services. The local plan is required to identify 500 houses in the Forfar, Kirriemuir and the Glens housing market area for the period 2001-2011 with a further 525 in the 2011-2016 period, subject to review. Development of the site would contribute to these requirements, contribute to maintaining a continuous supply and increase choice.

3.331 Development as proposed would be an opportunity to create a sustainable rural community and reduce pressure for development in the open countryside. It would place insignificant demands on existing services and maintain or increase the roll at the local primary school. The bus stop and post box are close by and there is ease of access to the A90.

86 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.332 The general policy of the local plan review is to allocate major new housing development to the larger settlements where there is infrastructure and services to support development. Where there is an opportunity for new development in smaller villages, sites have been allocated and included in development boundaries. Countryside housing policies apply to the open countryside and allow for new houses in appropriate circumstances.

3.333 Insofar as the objection site is not within a development boundary, existing policies would allow one or, exceptionally, two houses. The trunk roads authority would not support a larger development at this location.

3.334 Outline planning permission has been granted for two houses on the objection site subject to an agreement under section 75 of the 1997 Act restricting the maximum number of houses. The agreement has not been concluded and the outline planning permission certificate has not been issued. A detailed application for two houses has been submitted but has not been determined.

3.335 It is not proposed to draw a development boundary around the objection site and small group of houses at this location.

Conclusions

3.336 In considering objections to the overall level of housing land supply under Policy SC1 it was concluded that the local plan review does not require additional allocations to meet the terms of the structure plan. I therefore conclude that there is no strategic justification for an additional housing land allocation at Finavon.

3.337 Insofar as the local plan review is concerned, the majority of development is to be guided to locations within the Angus towns and villages to make use of existing and planned transport and other infrastructure in order to help build sustainable communities. In the light of this priority and in view of the allocation of housing within the Forfar, Kirriemuir and the Angus Glens housing market area, I conclude that there is no general local plan review justification for additional housing land at Finavon.

3.338 Turning to the consideration of the objection in a local context, there is a significant intervening distance between the objection site and the Finavon settlement. The group of houses at Finavon Farmhouse has little relationship with the village to the north in visual or physical terms and I conclude that it would be inappropriate to extend the settlement boundary.

3.339 Although it has been suggested that the existing buildings and 8 or 9 new houses would create a cohesive group, the objection did not include a specific request for a separate settlement boundary. However, in considering this possibility, I believe that a separate settlement boundary at this location would also be inappropriate as the houses are, as described by the council, simply a small group of buildings in the countryside and do not

87 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review constitute a village or even a smaller settlement with its own identity. The prospect of two further houses, should the outline planning permission and any subsequent detailed permission be implemented, does not alter my opinion and would not warrant inclusion within a settlement boundary. As indicated by the council, this limited development is justified under countryside policies.

3.340 It has been argued that a development of 8 or 9 houses could be successfully integrated within the landscape. Even if this were to be the case, I consider that a development of this size would be quite inappropriate. Not only would there be no policy support in a wider context, but the houses would have no relationship to an existing settlement. The concept of creating a cohesive group lacks any elaboration and I am unable to discern any benefit from this thread of the objector’s argument.

3.341 The proximity of the development to a bus stop, post box and junction with the A90 does not persuade me to set aside my conclusions, especially as the council has pointed out that the trunk roads authority would not support a development of the size envisaged. Similarly, the prospect of support for the primary school roll is not an overriding benefit.

Recommendation

3.342 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

88 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Friockheim: Allocation Fk2, East of Kinnell Gardens & Omission of land at South Gardyne Street

Objectors References

Guild Homes (per Paull & Williamson) 875/3/1; 875/4/1& 875/1/1 Kinnell Homes/ Mark Batchelor (per D G Coutts) 558/1/1 A M Webster 746/1/1 & 746/1/2 Mr V Campbell 839/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Formal Richard Bowden

Written submission objections on the same topics:

K C Duthie 837/1/1 A F Duthie 838/1/1 S Webster 263/1/1 & 263/1/2 J E Killan 152/1/1 & 152/1/2 Mrs Norma D Murray 170/1/1 & 170/1/2 Sandra Donald 727/1/1 David Laverty 729/1/1 Denis Arnot 781/1/1 Fiona Arnot 782/1/1 Richard Finlay 841/1/1 P A Wilkinson 952/1/1 & 952/1/2 Martin Vousden 236/1/2 Sam McNiven 783/1/1

OBJECTORS to Fk2 : Housing – East of Kinnell Gardens (b)

(b)(i) Objections Maintained

251/5/1 A B Roger & Young 789/1/1 Graham Hannah 790/1/1 Rhonda Hannah 791/1/1 M Gibb 792/1/1 C Gibb 795/1/1 Faye Buggins 810/1/1 Janice Milne

(b)(ii) Objections Conditionally Withdrawn

796/1/1 A Cheyne

89 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

SUPPORTERS OF Fk2 : Housing – East of Kinnell Gardens (a)

(a) Position Maintained

262/1/1 Jeni Reid 702/2/1 Kirsty Caird 715/1/1 Diane Campbell 726/1/1 Thomas Carcary 759/1/1 J Russell 761/1/1 Graeme Shand 762/1/1 Philip Kelly 763/1/1 C R Gunn 765/1/1 Gerry Austin 766/1/1 Gail Cook 767/1/1 Gregor Cook 768/1/1 A Wilkie 769/1/1 Mark B Storrier 770/1/1 D McDiarmid 771/1/1 S Sardar 773/1/1 Sylvia Breen 774/1/1 Angela J Baird 775/1/1 C T Peers 776/1/1 Samantha J Rae 777/1/1 Glen Whitton 840/1/1 Gail Cargill 943/1/1 Ms Barbara Hendry

(a)(ii) Comments Conditionally Withdrawn

714/1/2 Margaret Boath 719/1/1 George Moir 764/1/1 M Hicks 780/1/1 Alexander Gauld 914/1/1 Archie Ramsay

OBJECTORS TO LAND SOUTH OF GARDYNE STREET (b)

(b) Objections Maintained

218/1/1 Anne Stuart 702/1/1 Kirsty Caird 705/1/1 C Edgely 714/1/1 Margaret Boath 742/1/1 Moira Speirs 891/1/1 Christine Ashcroft-Price 943/1/2 Ms Barbara Hendry

90 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

(b)(ii) Objections Conditionally Withdrawn

716/1/1 Alan Esslemont 811/1/1 Mr & Mrs Thomson

SUPPORTERS OF DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF GARDYNE STREET

(c)(i) Objections Maintained

787/1/1 R. G. Morris 788/1/1 Helen Morris 789/1/2 Graham Hannah 790/1/2 Rhonda Hannah 791/1/2 M Gibb 792/1/2 C Gibb 795/1/2 Faye Buggins

(c)(ii) Objections Conditionally Withdrawn

796/1/2 A Cheyne

Objections to Proposed First Round Modification (a)

957/1/1 Jennifer Spence 962/1/2 John Angus 964/1/2 Alexander Stephen 969/1/1 Kevin Ramsay 972/1/1 Sandy Cruickshank 984/1/2 Mr & Mrs Ramsay 989/1/1 Carol Balfour 1016/1/1 Mr Couttie 1017/1/1 Mrs Couttie 1018/1/1 Mr A R Eggie 1019/1/1 Mrs Eggie

Objections to Proposed First Round Modification (b)

789/2/2 Graham Hannah 1016/1/2 Mr Couttie 790/2/2 Rhonda Hannah 1017/1/2 Mrs Couttie 793/2/2 George Still 1020/1/1 Mr David Balfour 794/2/2 Jessie Still 1021/1/1 Ms Davina Balfour 795/2/1 Faye Buggins 1022/1/1 Mr B Cruickshank 955/1/1 Stewart Stephen 1023/1/1 Mrs Linda Cruickshank 956/1/1 Ronald Heenan 1024/1/1 Mr David Alexander 957/1/2 Jennifer Spence 1025/1/1 Ms Ethel Alexander 959/1/1 Ms Joyce Cook 1026/1/1 Mr W McHardy

91 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

960/1/1 Keith Kinnear 1027/1/1 Mrs E McHardy 961/1/1 George Robb 1033/1/1 Mr James MacKintosh 962/1/1 John Angus 1034/1/1 Ms Pamela MacKintosh 964/1/1 Alexander Stephen 1035/1/1 Ms Valerie Dawson 965/1/1 Kirsty McCready 1036/1/1 Mr R P Dawson 966/1/1 Mr A Hendry 1037/1/1 Mr Alexander Donaldson 967/1/1 William Rowe 1038/1/1 Ms Christine Donaldson 968/1/1 Mr D Alexander 1039/1/1 Mr Roger Bird 969/1/2 Kevin Ramsay 1040/1/2 Ms Norma Bird 970/1/1 Ms Jean Morison 1041/1/1 Mr John S Carsewell 971/1/1 R Smith 1042/1/1 Mr Alan Mowatt 972/1/2 Sandy Cruickshank 1043/1/1 Ms Amanda Keillor 973/1/1 Loraine Cook 1046/1/1 Mr James Johnstone 977/1/1 Mr M Gibb 1047/1/1 Ms Yvonne Johnstone 978/1/1 Mrs C Gibb 1048/1/1 Mr Maurice Torfs 979/1/1 Kathy Robb 1049/1/1 Ms Elizabeth Torfs 980/1/1 Mrs Lee Hendry 1050/1/1 Ms Ruth Wilson 981/1/1 Mrs Alexander 1051/1/1 Mr Norman Lawson 982/1/1 Mrs Smith 1052/1/1 Miss L Davidson 983/1/1 Mrs B Cook 1053/1/1 Graham Greig 984/1/1 Mr & Mrs Ramsay 1054/1/1 George Carnegie 985/1/1 Mrs M Wilson 1055/1/1 Nanette Torfs 987/1/2 Mr & Mrs Reid 1056/1/1 Roy Buggins 988/1/1 Scott Darling 1057/1/1 David Condie 989/1/2 Carol Balfour 1058/1/1 Angela Stephen 992/1/1 Jim Johnstone 1060/1/1 Grant Stephen 993/1/1 Mr J Wilkie 1061/1/1 Star Inn 995/1/1 R.G. Rutherford 1063/1/1 Colin Morison 996/1/1 Mr Atholl Murray 1064/1/1 Bruce Ollerenshaw 997/1/1 Ms Marjory Corsar 1065/1/1 Lesley Geekie 998/1/1 Mrs B M Cook 1066/1/1 David Robertson 1001/1/1 Mr Barry Campbell 1067/1/1 Lothian, Borders And Angus Co-op 1002/1/1 Ms Kerry Sidgwick 1068/1/1 Don Blake 1003/1/1 Mr D Leadingham 1069/1/1 John Carswell 1004/1/2 Mrs A Ritchie 1070/1/1 Elizabeth Carswell 1005/1/1 Mr David Pearson 1071/1/1 Rodger Anderson 1006/1/1 Mr Andrew Couttie 1073/1/1 Rod Fleming 1007/1/2 Mr Ian Reid 1074/1/1 Mrs M Fleming 1008/1/1 Ms Norma Brown 1075/1/1 Alan James Keillor 1009/1/1 Mr Edward Brown 1077/1/1 Thomas Valentine 1012/1/1 Mr Michael Morison 1078/1/1 Jennifer Wilson 1013/1/1 Ms Marion Morison 1079/1/1 Susan Carnegie 1014/1/2 Mr Neil Cook 1080/1/1 Patricia Anne Campbell 1015/1/2 Mrs Linda Cook

Reporter: Richard Bowden

92 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Background

3.343 Most of the objections relate to either allocation Fk2 in the finalised local plan review (FALPR) or to proposals by Guild Homes (Tayside) Ltd to seek a new allocation of housing land South of Gardyne St, Friockheim in the local plan review to replace the council’s allocation Fk2 East of Kinnell Gardens, Friockheim for 40 housing units. The objections, in some cases, whilst objecting to one of these two sites are supporters of the other site. In September 2005 the council set out a number of Proposed Modifications to the FALPR Friockheim Village Statement. In particular, it proposed the following amendments to update the finalised plan review, in the light of objections lodged, a consultation exercise undertaken and progress made on particular sites:

• Modification to Fk1 Housing – Millgate 3 Approximately 1.4ha of the former mill site reserved for 16 houses (planning permissions now granted) • Whilst retaining the land allocation to the east of Friockheim, to amend the wording of Fk2 and re-title it East of Kinnell Place to reflect new development adjacent to the site. Fk2 becomes approximately 2ha of land to the east of Friockheim Primary School allocated for 32 houses and a replacement health centre (with details set out for a development brief and a section 75 agreement concerning traffic details for that site); all to be co-ordinated with the following: • A new Policy Fk3: Housing – North of Kinnell Gardens (and modification of the development boundary accordingly) allocating 8 affordable houses, subject to a Section 75 agreement to address traffic issues

Basis of the objections heard at the formal inquiry session

Guild Homes (Tayside) Ltd (GHT)

3.344 It is argued on behalf of GHT that its site at the south of Gardyne St (the ‘Gardyne’ site) should be allocated for housing, a new health centre and related facilities in substitution for the site allocated in FALPR to the east of Kinnell Gardens (the ‘Kinnell’ site). It is pointed out that in its pre-Inquiry Modifications the council proposed to extend the Kinnell site to accommodate a new health centre. GHT objected to that extension and proposed instead an extension of the Gardyne site to include the proposed health centre.

3.345 The suitability of the Gardyne site for residential and related development is not disputed by the Council, as it was the site identified in the Consultative Draft Local Plan as the appropriate site for the location of additional housing at Friockheim, following a landscape capacity study which included an appraisal of key planning considerations including landscape and visual quality. This study concluded by favouring the Gardyne site over the Kinnell site, as it was regarded as more self-contained with a landscape framework capable of accommodating the proposed housing and creating an attractive residential amenity, whilst developing the landscape setting of the village without impinging on the surrounding area. In contrast, the Kinnell site was considered highly visible from the surrounding area and would extend an already elongated west-east pattern of development. In the finalised local plan review the Gardyne site was replaced by the Kinnell site, but the

93 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review council has since acknowledged that both sites could accommodate the proposed level of new housing and the replacement health centre, stating that there are merits and benefits in both locations. This has stimulated divergent views in the local community.

3.346 The council witness accepted that the Gardyne site remains suitable for development in transport and landscape terms and that there are no infrastructure constraints to impede its development. The council, in the Consultative Draft Local Plan, also recognised the potential for the Gardyne site to develop a central area, offering car parking and a public space, which would address community concerns about congestion on Gardyne St. Objectors raised issues regarding drainage and pylons relating to the Gardyne site but these detailed concerns were later withdrawn in response to evidence presented on behalf of GHT.

3.347 It is argued on behalf of GHT that the advantages of Gardyne Street identified at the Consultative Draft Local Plan stage were sound and, as the council’s witness agreed, they remain true. It is noted that the Gardyne site is central to the village, and so provides easy access by foot to local services including retail, health, recreation and leisure facilities as well as scope for integration with those existing facilities and services. Accordingly, it meets sustainability requirements set out in national planning policy and in the approved structure plan and the local plan. Letters of support for the Gardyne site have been received from local traders and from the doctors who operate the existing health centre at Friockheim. These doctors also state that they would not be prepared to move to a health centre located further out of the village. In the objector’s view this illustrates not only the suitability of the Gardyne site for development but the perceived distance and disadvantages of the Kinnell site. With the exception of the Primary School and the existing park, the Gardyne site is closer to all of the facilities of Friockheim and the Kinnell site is shown as being over 1,000 metres away from them. It is noted that the school would be considered to be a “normal” walk distance from the Gardyne site, according to the guidance in PAN75. Similarly the Gardyne site is better located to the existing public transport network and would be within 250 metres of the nearest bus stop.

3.348 Gardyne Street would be realigned with parking lay-bys provided on the north side only, adjacent to the existing residential properties, and a new priority junction development access would be provided west of West Gate. In addition, a new mini roundabout junction at West Gate would be provided to access the development. These measures would have traffic calming benefits as well as allowing residential parking to be improved, while removing existing parking congestion. Off-street parking would be provided for the existing Co-op store removing much of the on-street parking currently experienced around this location, thereby improving facilities for customers and residents. It is noted that this proposal is warmly welcomed by the operators of the store. Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed development at Gardyne Street would have a visual impact on the existing properties on the opposite side of that road, it is contended that the impact would be localised and mitigated by landscaping measures.

3.349 It is stated that the reason the council turned its back on all of the advantages of the Gardyne site and removed it from the FALPR was the perception that the public in Friockheim were strongly opposed to the site. It is argued that the council was misinformed

94 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

with regard to local public opinion on this matter. It seems that the council reached their position with regard to public opinion in Friockheim on the Gardyne site from a number of sources. Firstly, there was the public meeting which was organised in Friockheim and attended by 20 people. There was then the public opinion expressed through Friockheim & District Community Council on the basis of an opinion poll carried out by several members of the public. GHT carried out a survey of the public and it was clear from the 269 completed forms that 175 were in favour of the Gardyne site and 80 in favour of the Kinnell site. The council also confirms that at the Proposed Modification stage, 133 representations were received, the majority of which were in favour of the Gardyne site. It is noted that the council witness confirmed that if it had not been for the council’s perception of public opinion in Friockheim, they would still be supporting the Gardyne site.

3.350 In the view of GHT, the position of the council now appears to be somewhat ambivalent. In their response to objections to the finalised local plan review, the reasons given by the council for supporting development east of Kinnell Gardens, included firstly that the site Fk2 continues the characteristic development pattern of Friockheim. In the objector’s view whilst it may continue the historic pattern, this statement directly conflicts with the conclusions of the council’s own landscape study as to the best pattern for the future, which states that it would be undesirable that significant development extends either westwards of eastwards as the settlement is already elongated west-east. It is pointed out that the council’s own landscape appraisal states that the preferred option is to develop south at Gardyne Street which “would contribute to create a more rounded urban pattern together with providing the opportunity to develop a more coherent village centre”. For the reasons given earlier, the objector also contends that the council’s statement of evidence that the Kinnell site is less visually intrusive contradicts the council’s own landscape assessment and that undertaken by the objector’s specialist landscape consultants.

3.351 The objector notes that the council’s statement also supports the Kinnell site on the basis that it can be extended if required. It is argued by GHT that this is not a basis on which to choose a site which is otherwise unacceptable; pointing out that further development at the Kinnell site would continue to elongate the settlement eastwards. Further it is contended that it would be difficult to provide mitigation through planting to rationalise the eastern village edge if the Kinnell site was chosen, whereas a defensible boundary can be readily achieved for the Gardyne site. Furthermore in the objector’s view, whilst it is close to the school, the fact that cycle and walk ways are proposed for the Kinnell site underlines the fact that it is not well located in relation to other facilities and services and would require to be linked to the centre of the village, whereas the Gardyne site is located in the heart of the village. The benefits of the Kinnell proposals in respect of easing traffic congestion and improving road safety are questioned by the objector who contends that there would be greater benefits accruing from the Gardyne proposals, as outlined earlier.

3.352 The council refers to the Kinnell site using degraded land, based on the fact that there has been mineral extraction from the site in the past. The objector points out that the site has been returned to agricultural land and it remains graded at 3.2 which is exactly the same as the Gardyne site. The council witness agreed that this was not a determining issue.

95 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.353 In summary, the objector contends that the council got it right by promoting the Gardyne site in the Consultative Draft Local Plan and that it changed that allocation for reasons which were factually incorrect and wrong in planning terms. It notes that the council has now retreated to a position which says that the local plan inquiry should resolve where development should go in Friockheim.

Kinnell Homes Ltd (KH)

3.354 Mark and Guthrie Batchelor, trading as Kinnell Homes Ltd. support the council's current position relative to the proposed release of land in the village of Friockheim. It is noted that the council is now advocating the release of two sites in Friockheim, Fk2 and Fk3, both in the ownership of KH, to the east and north of Kinnell Gardens. There is no dispute that both Fk2 and Fk3 are ‘effective’ when tested against the listed criteria of effectiveness set out in SPP3 and PAN38. In KH’s view, the proposed Kinnell development on these sites would be a logical extension to the development already completed by the same objector - and the fact that the houses here to date have all been sold is evidence of a historical demand for the product offered by KH.

3.355 It is noted that the council’s evidence states that the Kinnell site is the better site for the measured expansion of Friockheim, with the least visual impact on the area, and the ability to be absorbed into the existing built framework of the village. It is noted that the landscape witness for GHT argued that expansion eastwards onto the Kinnell site would present a weak edge to the eastern boundary of the village and that development as proposed, although sitting against the current boundary of the village and located behind the primary school, could not be satisfactorily screened from long views from the north and east. It is argued that the opinion of that witness should be given less weight as it is in direct contrast to evidence that she presented to the Local Plan Inquiry one week later for a similar site in Kirriemuir.

3.356 It is pointed out that the traffic witness of GHT acknowledged that the Kinnell site is within accepted walking distances from all of the village services. There is no dispute that the Kinnell sites are closer than the Gardyne site to the primary school, which also acts as the Community Centre for the village. Whilst the same GHT traffic witness advocated measures proposed for the Gardyne site to reduce alleged traffic problems at the Co-op store, he accepted that any 'problem' was relative, and that, in reality, there is no traffic problem and that he is unaware of any accidents at that location. It is pointed out on behalf of KH that a new junction at that locus, as proposed by GHT, with its associated additional traffic movements, would increase the potential for pedestrian/vehicular conflict, particularly as schoolchildren would require to walk past that junction before crossing the main road to get to school. There would be no such road crossing issues and related pedestrian-vehicle conflicts arising for children if the Kinnell site was developed. The GHT traffic witness also accepted that the proposed new car park put forward by GHT could, in fact, attract more customers of the Co-op to use their cars to access the store.

3.357 Whilst the Gardyne site was included by the council in the Consultative Draft Local Plan, following a public consultation exercise that site was subsequently removed and

96 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

replaced by Fk2 and Fk3 - which are closer to the primary school, the community centre, and the public park. KH is in agreement with the council that it is not the number of objections, but the quality of the planning objections that is the deciding factor to be taken into account. It is widely accepted that it is not unusual for sites to be taken out of local plans during the plan process for many different reasons and the council witness confirmed that planning reasons were responsible for the removal of the Gardyne site, and its substitution by the Kinnell sites. It is pointed out that the Fk2 site uses degraded land, of poor agricultural value, and its development would extend the traditional direction of expansion for the village. Traffic management measures to be included for the development would also help traffic circulation in the surrounding area. The Fk3 site which is for affordable housing is a brownfield site, development of which would environmentally improve the area for existing residents. In contrast, the Gardyne site is located on the south side of Friockheim and would present a new direction of growth within the village. Although the eastern edge is bounded by a dry-stane dyke, it is clear that the development of that site would impact on views from the east and south of the village.

3.358 In conclusion, KH urges acceptance of the council's current position relative to the release of housing land in Friockheim, in support of sites Fk2 and Kk3 which are effective and available for immediate development. It is contended that common planning principles would be satisfied by extending the village eastwards to include the Kinnell sites. It is argued that the Gardyne site is unsuitable as a future direction of growth for the village, and development there would be alien to the historical direction of growth, setting an undesirable and damaging precedent.

Mr K Duthie (837/1/1)

3.359 Mr Duthie firstly summarised evidence of the following local opponents of the Fk2 Kinnell Gardens site shown in the FALPR who support instead the objection lodged by GHT, including the promotion of the Gardyne site as an alternative to the Kinnell site:

A B Roger Young (251/51) Graham Hannah (789/1/1) Rhonda Hannah (790/1/1) M Gibb (791/1/1) C Gibb (792/1/1) George Still (793/1/1) Jessie Still (794/1/1) Faye Buggins (795/1/1) A Cheyne (796/1/1) Janice Milne (810/1/1)

3.360 He states that these objectors oppose the allocation of the Kinnell site on the grounds that:

97 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• This would not represent an appropriate direction for extending the village • The alternative site at Gardyne Street was included by the council in the consultative draft local plan as an appropriate location for new housing for Friockheim and it offers a number of community and planning benefits that cannot be provided at the Kinnell site • The boundary provided by the school is useful for limiting future housing expansion of the village eastwards • The Kinnell site is best suited to future commercial and industrial growth • It could lead to a conflict of uses resulting in social and noise problems • The Kinnell site will not provide any planning gain except in monetary terms

3.361 It is noted that the Kinnell site was rejected by the council in 2003 (in the consultative draft local plan) and the local health centre doctors, in expressing a preference for the Gardyne site, have indicated that they have no desire to move east to the Kinnell site.

3.362 Mr Duffy also submitted evidence, as summarised below, on behalf of himself and the following individuals who made written representations in support of the Kinnell site, as promoted by the council:

AF Duthie (838/1/1) A Gauld (780/1/1) D Arnot (781/1/1) F Arnot (782/1/1) G Cargill (840/1/1) R Findlay (841/1/1) A Ramsay (914/1/1) B Hendry (943/1/1)

3.363 The position of Mr Duthie and the others listed above is to support the council in promoting Site Fk2 East of Kinnell Gardens for housing. They contend that this site would have the following benefits over the Gardyne site: • It would preserve the distinctive character and shape of the village • It would have the least impact on wildlife • It would cause least disruption in terms of traffic congestion • It is close to the school and the park.

3.364 The Gardyne Street site is not favoured as many residents of Friockheim, particularly those with properties on the opposite side of Gardyne Street, enjoy watching wildlife over in the woods by the Gardyne site. Congestion on sections of Gardyne Street is exacerbated by parked cars, which causes conflict with lorries and buses using the road. It is contended that development of 40 houses on the Gardyne site would exacerbate traffic problems on Gardyne Street, particularly in the early morning when school traffic generated from the site would conflict with lorries delivering to the Coop store.

98 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Mr V Campbell (839/1/1)

3.365 Mr Campbell lodged an objection which expresses support for the Kinnell site, as proposed in FALPR, and raises local concerns about the Gardyne site proposals. He suggested that the overwhelming majority of local people are strongly opposed to the GHT proposal and argued that the democratic voice and wishes of the people of Friockheim should be the basis for choosing the best site for new housing for the village and this appears to favour the Kinnell site.

Mr A Webster (746/1/1)

3.366 Mr Webster presented evidence, as summarised below, on behalf of himself and the following objectors in support of the Fk2 Kinnell site, as promoted by the council:

JE Killan (152/1/1) MD Murray (170/1/2) S Webster (263/1/1) E Carcary (725/1/1) S Donald (727/1/1) D Laverty (729/1/1) D Arnot (781/1/1) F Arnot (782/1/1) R Finlay (841/1/1) PA Wilkinson (952/1/1)

3.367 It is pointed out that Friockheim is a nineteenth century village built in a triangular form with the apex formed by the church and proceeding eastwards between Gardyne Street to the south and the Lunan Water to the north. When an initial proposal was made by the council, during the consultation stage of the local plan preparation, to promote the Gardyne Street site for housing this was almost unanimously opposed at a public meeting in Friochkeim, organised by the council, in favour of the Fk2 site to the east of Kinnell Gardens. It is pointed out that on the basis of this democratic consultation the council deleted the Gardyne site and allocated the Kinnell site instead in the FALPR, at which point GHT came forward with proposals to construct 40 houses on the Gardyne site, which is contrary to the finalised plan.

3.368 In the objectors’ view the Gardyne site is unsuitable for a number of reasons. Firstly, it would not maintain the traditional triangular form of the village where the school and community centre is the natural centre of Friockheim today with a well equipped public park on the opposite side of the road. In addition, it is argued that the suggested layout put forward by GHT would be unsympathetic to the massing, terraced form and scale of the village. It is stated that the land to the south of Gardyne Street, with the exception of the Coop store is ‘greenbelt’ in nature and the amenity value of the GHT site for dog-walkers and others would be lost.

99 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.369 It is suggested that the proposed public car park at the Gardyne site would soon be required for the new residents and so become unavailable for public use. Furthermore, it is contended that the proposed mini-roundabout, traffic calming measures and dry-stane dyke repairs, all put forward in support of the GHT scheme, could be promoted without 40 new houses at Gardyne Street. It is pointed out that any new housing development would create additional traffic generation at either end of the village. In summary, it is suggested that the GHT proposal would do nothing for the village that could not be achieved by promoting the Kinnell site, which would enable the village to maintain its form and cohesion. It is noted that whilst 90 houses have been built at Friockheim in the last 35 years, over that same period a large number of local shops and services have disappeared. Finally, it is pointed out that if the Gardyne site proposals were approved there would be no valid planning reasons to resist further proposals to the south of Gardyne Street, eastwards up to Gordon Place.

Written Submissions

3.370 In almost all cases, the views of the other individuals who made written objections or representations are reflected in the points summarised by Mr Duthie and Mr Webster above. Nevertheless, for completeness set out below are the council’s summaries of the different groupings of comments made in written representations, which I consider are a reasonable summary of the individual representations lodged:

• Firstly, in respect of objectors to and supporters of the Fk2 Kinnnell Gardens (original draft of the Finalised Local Plan Review) • Secondly, in respect of objectors to and supporters of the proposal for an allocation of land South of Gardyne St • Thirdly, in respect of comments made in support of and objections to the Proposed First Round Modifications September 2005

Objectors to and supporters of the Fk2 Kinnnell Gardens Allocation

3.371 (a) 27 comments in support (see list at the beginning of this topic) Summary of points raised: Support Fk2 : Housing - East of Kinnell Gardens on the grounds that it: * preserves the distinctive character and shape of the village; * will have least impact on wildlife; * will cause least disruption in terms of traffic congestion; * will meet housing requirements to 2011; * is close to the school and park.

3.372 (b) 8 objectors (see list at the beginning of this topic) Summary of points raised: Object to allocation of land east of Kinnell Gardens on the grounds that: * the proposed extension is not considered to represent an appropriate extension to the village of Friockheim; * alternative site at Gardyne Street was included in the Consultative Draft Plan as an appropriate location for new housing in Friockheim; and

100 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

* there are a number of community and planning benefits associated with Gardyne Street that cannot be provided at Kinnell Gardens. * it is riband in nature * it creates a boundary to the school limiting future expansion * this ground is best preserved for future commercial/industrial growth * it could lead to social/noise problems from conflict of uses * it will not provide for planning gain except in monetary terms.

3.373 Objectors to and supporters of a Gardyne Street Allocation

(a) 251/5/2 - A B Roger & Young (SUPPORT) Summary of points raised: Land at Gardyne Street should be included within the settlement boundary and the site added to Table 2 : New Allocations, as a site for housing. This site offers opportunity to * provide the village with an identity and focal point * eliminate a parking problem and Gardyne Street has adequate capacity * provide parking, play area and village green in the village centre where the main infrastructure and shops are located and would maintain the avenue of trees. * to provide a logical site with defensible boundaries which integrate with the existing village form * provide rural character housing with a proportion of affordable units.

3.374 (b) 9 objectors (see list at the beginning of this topic)

Summary of points raised: Oppose building on the southern side of Gardyne Street on the grounds that: * this proposal ignores the views of the majority of those living in the village and immediate surrounding area after Angus Council had completed the democratic discussion process. * the Guild proposal shows a ‘toy town’ development outwith and totally unsympathetic to the existing triangular planned form of the village. * existing ‘significant green belt’ will be lost not created. * increased traffic will exacerbate an existing problem. * that it conflicts with the Finalised Angus local Plan Review * cost of proposed houses will attract business people not families.

3.375 (c) 10 comments in support (see list at the beginning of this topic)

Summary of points raised: Support the proposed development of housing in the Gardyne Street area as detailed in the Guild Homes proposal brochure on the grounds that: * it provides stylish, good sized dwellings with large gardens, as opposed to smaller houses and gardens that appear in so many locations these days.

101 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

* Traffic congestion would be alleviated around the ‘shopping’ area of the village. This congestion would be increased with the additional traffic from the proposed housing at the east end of the village. * It will serve to combine the community of Friockheim with more central approach. Housing stretching further east has the potential to separate the community further

3.376 11 Objections to Proposed First Round Modification (a) (see list at the beginning of this topic)

Object to allocation of land east of Kinnell Gardens on the grounds that: * the proposed extension is not considered to represent an appropriate extension to the village of Friockheim; * further development will add to existing congested roads around Kinnell Gardens * it is riband in nature.

3.377 105 Objections to Proposed First Round Modification (b) (see full list at the beginning of this topic)

Support the proposed development of housing in the Gardyne Street area as: * housing and new health centre would be closer to existing village amenities. * Traffic congestion would be alleviated around the 'shopping' area of the village, with off-street parking. * It will serve to combine the community of Friockheim with more central approach. Housing stretching further east has the potential to separate the community further. * Creates play park

3.378 The following points were also raised by particular objectors or groups of objectors:

3.379 c) 101/1/1 S G Baker Limited

Any development east of Kinnell Gardens will increase both levels of traffic and congestion to the west of Gardyne Street, yet provide no opportunity for improving the existing traffic issues. We also feel such a location to be remote from existing services. The alternative site at Gardyne Street would appear to have the following advantages:

* Would provide a centre to the village and create a central location for a new health centre, housing and off street parking supporting local businesses. * The provision of significant off street parking should also improve much of the current traffic congestion in the west end of Gardyne Street. * At present vehicle progress along Gardyne Street can be very slow. We consider fewer vehicles parked in this street would improve matters, particularly the movement of our heavy good vehicles necessary for our factory to operate.

102 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.380 (d) 789/2/1 Graham Hannah and 790/2/1 Rhonda Hannah

Consider the proposed development to the east of Friockheim inappropriate. Housing would appear to be small, congested and have limited gardens.

It would also over extend the village which could:

* Cause increased traffic congestion adjacent to shops at west end of village. * Separate the community * Could also inhibit further extension to the primary school.

3.381 (e) 793/2/1 George Still and 794/2/1 Jessie Still

Not keen on new additional housing east of Kinnell Gardens. Would object to the health centre moving to the end of the village.

3.382 (f) 958/1/1 Gordon Cook

Angus Council were correct to identify the site south of Gardyne Street in the Consultative Draft for housing as;

* housing and new health centre would be closer to existing village amenities. * Traffic congestion would be alleviated around the 'shopping' area of the village, with off-street parking. * It will serve to combine the community of Friockheim with more central approach. Housing stretching further east has the potential to separate the community further.

3.383 (g) 963/1/1 Mr & Mrs McCombie

No objection to the Gardyne Street development, also a new health centre will be great for the village.

3.384 (h) 974/1/1 Marie James

In favour of housing at Gardyne Street as the proposed health centre would be central. Housing at Kinnell Gardens would mean more traffic around Friockheim Primary School.

3.385 (i) 986/1/1 Neil Penman

Would like to see extension of village to the south to create more balance to village rather than the east. New health centre, housing and roundabout to create better traffic claming would be beneficial to hotels and shops.

3.386 (j) 987/1/1 Mr & Mrs Reid Already enough houses at Kinnell Gardens and too much traffic.

103 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.387 (k) 990/1/1 Ian Ritchie

Supports the housing at Gardyne Street for the following reasons:

* The village needs a heart * The school should remain a country school * Shops and health centre are at that end of the village.

3.388 (l) 991/1/1 and 991/2/1 Dr Walker and Dr Scallon

In full support of the development at Gardyne Street. This would keep amenities at that end of the village including a new health centre if funding is available from NHS Tayside. At no point would the health centre wish to move from its current area in the village. Object strongly to the suggestion of the development at Kinnell Gardens and the situation of a new health centre as part of the development. It is not central to the village or near the chemist/shops. People moving to this end of the village will not tend to be the elderly or frail who are the main users of the health centre.

3.389 (m) 994/1/1 Isabel Mennie

At the moment people from Kinnell Gardens have further to go for shopping. The area is not as envisaged when the property was purchased. Most houses have children and no play area is provided. A new road is also needed to alleviate usage of Guthrie Street.

3.390 (n) 999/1/1 Mr Ian Weir

No objection to development at Gardyne Street, support already recorded on earlier consultation form submitted.

3.391 (o) 1000/1/1 Mr George Morison

Already stated that the site south of Gardyne Street would be very suitable for a housing development. Object to the proposed new health centre.

3.392 (p) 1004/1/1 Mrs A Ritchie

Object to more housing at Kinnell Gardens as this is on my school route.

3.393 (q) 1007/1/1 Mr Ian Reid

Being a resident in Kinnell Gardens, I feel the access road into the housing estate is inadequate. There is far too much traffic for the size and condition of the road.

104 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.394 (r) 1010/1/1 Mr Sandy Flight and 1011/1/1 Ms Jennifer Flight

Looks like a high standard of housing in Gardyne Street which would benefit the village.

3.395 (s) 1014/1/1 Mr Neil Cook and 1015/1/1 Mrs Linda Cook

A health centre at Kinnell Gardens is too far away from the chemist for late appointments and hoping to catch the chemist open.

3.396 (t) 1015/1/2 Mrs Linda Cook, 1018/1/2 Mr A R Eggie and 1019/1/2 Mrs Eggie

Agree to plan of Guild Homes at Gardyne Street

3.397 (u) 1026/1/2 Mr W McHardy and 1027/1/2 Mrs E McHardy

Not in favour of the health centre moving to the east end of the village.

3.398 (v) 1029/1/1 Mr Barry Brown

The proposed development at Gardyne Street is most suitable because it will give young people in Friockheim the chance to buy affordable housing.

3.399 (w) 1030/1/1 Mr William Blair

The proposed development at Gardyne Street is most suitable because it has more affordable homes for local people and improves car parking facilities.

3.400 (x) 1031/1/1 Mr Malcolm Blair

The proposed development at Gardyne Street is most suitable because it has more affordable homes for local people.

3.401 (y) 1032/1/1 Ms Wilma Blair

Any village has to expand and the Gardyne Street development are tastefully done. It will help young people to stay in the community and will also help surrounding businesses.

3.402 (z) 1039/1/2 Mr Roger Bird

There are issues of safety surrounding the Kinnell Gardens development in relation to its proximity to the school and the poor access road.

3.403 (aa) 1040/1/1 Ms Norma Bird

105 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

It would be a mistake to envelop the Primary School and cause additional traffic within the locality of the school. It would also further imbalance the village. Additionally the access is poor at present and the creation of more traffic would make the Kinnell Gardens area more dangerous.

3.404 (bb) 1044/1/1 Mr Craig Fairweather

Development at Gardyne Street is a good idea with more than enough choice. A playpark at Gardyne Street is a must because a lot of younger Friockheim residents live at this end. The addition of a health centre would be great, however it would be disappointing to see the old health centre site become dwellings instead of a more useful asset to Friockheim.

3.405 (cc) 1045/1/1 Ms Alison Greig

No objections to Gardyne Street site and find a new health centre with parking facilities very good. However, the Primary School is not an adequate size and perhaps a new community type building with the facilities which the school presently houses could also be considered.

3.406 (dd) 1059/1/1 and 1059/1/2 Ruth Stephen

1059/1/1 Have always been in favour of the Gardyne Street development. The developer has carefully planned the housing to 'fit-in' with the village. The developer consideration for all - health centre, play-park, dog-walkers, shoppers and parking, and 1059/1/2 The Kinnell housing is chaotic and claustrophobic and makes the village elongated. The developer has offered the same facilities in hindsight and has created a village next to a village!

3.407 (ee) 1062/1/1 John Fenton

Support the proposed development of housing in the Gardyne Street area as: * housing and new health centre would be closer to existing village amenities. * Traffic congestion would be alleviated around the 'shopping' area of the village, with off-street parking. * It will serve to combine the community of Friockheim with more central approach. Housing stretching further east has the potential to separate the community further. * Play area for children * Good for local businesses

3.408 (ff) 1072/1/1 Glenda Mowatt

No objection to any of the sites, but have a preference for Gardyne Street.

106 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.409 (gg) 1076/1/1 Linda Cruickshank

Gardyne Street development would be suitable as it would give Friockheim a new health centre and affordable housing.

The council’s response

3.410 As part of the local planning process, land south of Gardyne Street (the Gardyne site) had previously been considered by the council as being acceptable for residential development. As a result of the level and nature of public opposition to that site being put forward in response to the Consultative Draft Local Plan, the council re-appraised its position and chose to promote instead the land east of Kinnell Gardens (the Kinnell site) in the finalised local plan review (FALPR).

3.411 The village of Friockheim has a distinctive pattern and character with its historic pattern of growth having taken place from west to east. It is pointed out that the development of land to the east of Kinnell Gardens would continue that pattern. It is contended that this would be more in keeping with the character of Friockheim than development to the south of Gardyne Street, which has historically represented the southern limit of the main body of housing within the village.

3.412 Whilst concerns were raised by objectors regarding the landscape impact of developing land east of Kinnell Gardens, the GHT landscape witness accepted that development of the Kinnell site could be appropriately landscaped, linking into existing landscaping of the primary school and the established landscape enclosure of the recreational ground to the south of Gardyne Street. It is argued that housing development on the Kinnell site, with appropriate landscaping, would represent a benefit to Friockheim, insofar as it would replace the existing rather stark urban edge of Friockheim at the east of the village.

3.413 Further concerns have been raised about the accessibility of the Kinnell site; with the objectors pointing out that the Gardyne Street site is closer to some facilities within the village. Given the distances involved and the availability of public footpaths and an appropriate level of bus service, it is argued that such concerns about the Kinnell site are unfounded. Local shops and the Health Centre are all well within walking distances recognised by national planning policy advice as being acceptable. Importantly, the local primary school, which incorporates the library and community centre, is immediately adjacent to the Kinnell site, which lies immediately opposite the major recreational and open space facilities of the village. It is the intention of KH (the developer) and the council to have a pelican crossing put in place at this location. The provision of a new access road for the Kinnell site could also have advantages in terms of reducing traffic congestion and may also provide a traffic safety benefit for local school children. In the council’s view, these measures would address any remaining concerns about accessibility of the Kinnell site.

3.414 Turning to traffic issues concerning the Gardyne Street site, the proposal of GHT is to put in place in some traffic calming measures and also to create a further enhanced parking facility in the vicinity of the Co-op. In those circumstances it is hardly surprising that the

107 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Co-op are supportive of the objector’s proposals. It is pointed out that an enhanced car park here could provide an incentive to existing residents of Friockheim to use their cars to travel to the local shops rather than using more sustainable means of transport. In that context it is argued that the provision of a car park at the Gardyne site would be potentially disadvantageous to Friockheim as a whole rather than advantageous.

3.415 In summary and conclusion it is submitted that Angus Council took proper consideration of the representations made to the consultative draft local plan in taking its decision to not pursue the Gardyne site but to promote instead the site at Kinnell Gardens for housing development in the FALPR. Accordingly, the council recommends no change to the local plan review, as modified by the Proposed Modifications of September 2005.

Conclusions

3.416 I note that the council considers that both the Kinnell and the Gardyne sites are suitable for residential and related developments of the type and scale now being put forward for consideration by various objectors for Friockheim. It is important, therefore, for me to explore in strategic and more local planning terms, the relative merits and drawbacks of the council’s allocation of the Kinnell sites, supported by Kinnell Homes and others, in comparison with the arguments made for and against the proposals put forward by Guild Homes (Tayside) Ltd (GHT) for the Gardyne site.

Suitability of the Kinnell and Gardyne sites for development in principle:

3.417 I note that the suitability of the Gardyne site for residential and related development is not contested by the council and there are no infrastructure constraints affecting its development potential. Indeed it was the site nominated by the council in the Consultative Draft Local Plan as being not only appropriate for additional housing but its preferred choice for the location of major new housing at Friockheim. This followed a landscape capacity study which provided an appraisal of key planning considerations, including landscape and visual quality, for a number of short-listed site options, including the Kinnell and Gardyne sites. I note that the study findings came down in favour of the Gardyne site on the basis of it being more self-contained and with a landscape framework capable of accommodating the proposed housing and providing an attractive residential amenity - developing the landscape setting of the village without impinging on the surrounding area. The main drawback of the Kinnell site was that it was considered highly visible from the surrounding area and would extend an already elongated west-east pattern of village development for Friockheim.

Strategic issues concerning village expansion eastwards or southwards:

3.418 It is evident that there are some limited examples of built developments to the south of Gardyne Street, comprising a few houses and most notably the small Co-op foodstore. Nevertheless, to date the village of Friockheim has been developed essentially in a triangular form utilising the wedge of land between Gardyne Street and Lunan Water. Notwithstanding some local ‘aberrations’ - in the form of the Co-op as well as a small number of long established houses at its western end and along Gordon Place - this has resulted in Gardyne

108 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Street remaining the effective southern boundary of the village up until now. I consider that this has given the village a compactness and a degree of cohesion with an attractive, largely unspoiled and open outlook southwards across the fields and trees to the south of Gardyne Street. It is clear that, even in the period since the introduction of the Co-op store, Gardyne Street has been used as a defensible edge to the village. This has resulted in all recent new housing and other developments being directed to infill and brownfield sites to the north of Gardyne Street where available, as well as to other sites at the east end of the village, progressively expanding the eastern boundary of the village as there are no more central sites available for new development. This pattern of planned new developments has also resulted in the new school being sited at the eastern end of the village, again to the north of Gardyne Street, opposite the village recreation ground and playing fields which are to the south of the road.

3.419 In this context, I note that FALPR allocation Fk2 would continue this pattern by further extending the village eastwards, with the proposed new housing being wrapped around the northern and eastern boundaries of the school. I also note that, if its eastern boundary was limited to that shown as Fk2 in the finalised plan review, as modified in September 2005, houses would not be built further eastwards than the eastern boundary of the existing playing fields. I consider that with suitable landscape boundary treatment this could provide and reinforce an effective eastern boundary for the village. Nevertheless, presumably in the context of the lack of development sites elsewhere in main built up area of the village to the north of Gardyne Street, the council has noted that there would still be scope to provide for some further housing development immediately to the north of the Fk2 site at some point in the future, if required. My general concern is that whilst Gardyne Street and Lunan Water have provided useful edges to contain new development within the wedge between them, this is leading to planned growth being achieved only through successive new developments, including the new school, now having to be grafted on to its eastern perimeter. This makes all such new developments – including the Fk2 proposals - more and more remote from the rest of the village’s facilities and services which have grown up organically in and around the traditional core of the village, towards its western end, which lacks a central focus.

3.420 I note that the GHT proposals would involve a major new greenfield development to the south of Gardyne Street in the vicinity of the Co-op store. In my view if this site was allocated in the adopted local plan and developed as proposed by GHT, this would immediately end the role of Gardyne Street as the broadly effective, if not precise, southern boundary of the village and would have a number of other potential consequences. Firstly, the proposed new development here would be visible, beyond the low dry-stane dyke running alongside Gardyne Street. I acknowledge that this would detract from the open outlook and amenity enjoyed by the village looking southwards across open fields to Friock Wood, although the effects would be mitigated by the proposed landscape planting measures proposed. Secondly, even with the proposed landscaped planting along its boundaries, it would be more difficult in future to resist pressure for later phases of housing and other development to the east and possibly to the west of the GHT site, as the precedent would have been set for developments of a significant scale on the south side of Gardyne Street. Nevertheless, I consider that these are matters that the council can seek to control through a

109 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review development brief and in responding to detailed planning proposals through its development control function. A key strategic advantage and attraction of the Gardyne site proposal is the potential it offers to provide a new central focus for the village - including a site for a new centrally located health centre - as well as associated enhancements of the parking facilities for residents and shoppers and traffic calming measures, all of which are considered in more detail later. In my view, on balance the strategic advantages of the Gardyne site exceed the attraction of the Kinnell site’s proximity to the school and sports facilities and also outweigh the disadvantages of allowing major development to the south of Gardyne Street. Most importantly the Gardyne site offers scope for providing other facilities and services more centrally located for the village, thereby consolidating the village in a more sustainable manner than could be achieved if the Kinnell site was promoted instead. These issues are explored in more detail below.

The scope for offering and supporting a range of village facilities and services:

3.421 I note that there is some disagreement between parties as to the location of the most important facilities and services in Friockheim, with supporters of the Kinnell proposals suggesting that the adjoining school and community centre is the hub of the village whilst supporters of the Gardyne site arguing that the school is on the periphery and that the GHT proposal would be more central to the village and could boost local facilities and services which would be more accessible to most villagers. For the strategic reasons outlined above, I consider that the balance of these arguments is in favour of the Gardyne site but it is important to explore the local issues of relevance in more detail.

3.422 There is no disagreement that the Kinnell site Fk2 would be closest to the school and hence is better placed than the Gardyne site in terms of access for school journeys, particularly since there would be a need to cross Gardyne Street at some point for anyone from the proposed GHT development to reach the school. I am satisfied, however, that the school is within acceptable walking distance of the Gardyne site and that traffic safety concerns relating to pupils heading to and from the school could be satisfactorily addressed by means of a pedestrian crossing in the event that the Gardyne site was developed.

3.423 There is no dispute that the Kinnell site is relatively remote, geographically from the geographical core of the village compared with the Gardyne site. I note that the GHT proposals include provision for a new village square and for enhancing the off-street parking provision for the Co-op site nearby - as well as introducing road safety improvements, including improved traffic calming on Gardyne Street, incorporating a min-roundabout and re-structuring on-street parking there. In addition, GHT have offered part of the Gardyne site to accommodate a relocated health centre. I note that the Friockheim health centre doctors have indicated support for this and a reluctance to move eastwards to the Kinnell site, as it is on the periphery of the village - despite KH also now offering a site for it there. It is evident, therefore, the Gardyne site proposals offer more potential to provide a wider range of new or enhanced village facilities and in a more central location than could be achieved if the Kinnell site was promoted. I note the concern expressed by some objectors that the proposed improvements to public parking associated with the Gardyne site development may encourage increased car usage locally. The GHT proposals for traffic-calming measures, as

110 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

well as environmental enhancements - for example landscape planting and improvements to the dry stane dyke - do not in themselves provide sufficient justification to merit allocation of the Gardyne site for development of 40 houses. Nevertheless, I consider that they would be beneficial to the village as a whole. In my view these local considerations contribute to making the Gardyne sits proposals, on balance, preferable to the benefits of the Kinnell site, which is peripheral and relatively remote in terms of the shops and other facilities and attractions of the village, despite being within reasonable walking distance of all parts of the village.

Local Public Opinion – polls and votes:

3.424 Evidence has been submitted to support the council’s contention that the majority of those who made representations at the local plan consultation meeting it held in Friockheim were not in favour of the Gardyne site then being put forward by the council. I also note, however, that the numbers attending the public meeting were small. Accordingly, there is a question as to how representative this was of local opinion as a whole when the council responded by deciding to allocate the Fk2 site instead of the one to the south of Gardyne Street in the FALPR, solely based on its perception at that time of local people’s views on the matter. I am also aware that the majority of Friockheim people canvassed on a door-to- door basis on behalf of GHT, following the launch of the Gardyne proposals, expressed a preference for the Gardyne site over the Kinnell site. I note that this was also the view of the local health centre and the operators of the Co-op store which is the largest retail outlet in the village. I also note that the numbers of those consulted in that canvassing process was significantly greater than had attended the public consultation meetings held by the council as part of the local plan process. Nevertheless, I am aware of concerns raised by some in the locality that the framing of the questions posed by the GHT public consultation may have affected the outcome to a degree. In any event, I am in agreement with the GHT witness who stated that:

• public opinion, of itself should not determine the most appropriate location for new development; • the issues raised by the public in response to the development plan process may be relevant to the housing land allocation; and • in this case public opinion is divided, even though there is clear support from key service providers (like the health centre and the Co-op) in favour of the Gardyne site.

3.425 I note that the range of responses from local objectors to the finalised local plan underlines the wide differences of opinion on the key local and strategic issues of concern. Not surprisingly, this has resulted in a divergence in the overall conclusions drawn by different groups of objectors, based on the issues raised.

Summary of Conclusions

3.426 I am aware that whatever site is ultimately chosen by the council, it will divide local public opinion on the matter. I am satisfied that both the Gardyne and Kinnell proposals could each be reasonably bounded with landscape treatment. Based on the reasons outlined

111 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

above, I consider that the Gardyne site would offer a more central location and would afford the best opportunity to consolidate some of the core village facilities and services. This is off-set, however, by the fact that the Gardyne site is relatively remote from the local school and would introduce significant new housing development to the south of Gardyne Street which would be visible from existing houses along that street. I conclude, however, that – subject to suitable mitigation measures being put in place to provide a landscaped edge to contain the new development and minimise its visual impact - the overall benefits would outweigh the disadvantages of developing the Gardyne site in preference to the Kinnell site.

3.427 I also conclude that whilst development of the Kinnell site Fk2 adjacent to the school (and with associated planting) could provide a defensible eastern edge to the settlement - as well as maintaining the historic triangular profile of the village, broadly to the north of Gardyne Street - these advantages are outweighed by its peripherality. Furthermore, I conclude that the Kinnell proposals do not offer the level of community benefits associated with the Gardyne proposals, as outlined earlier. I note that the council, having undertaken its own detailed comparative analysis of the shortlisted sites at the consultative draft stage of the local plan review concluded that the Gardyne site was preferable to the Kinnell site – and only reversed its position to favour the Kinnell site in the FALPR when it thought that the balance of local opinion was in favour of that switch. I conclude that the basis of its earlier assessment was sound and that the circumstances in the period since have not changed significantly. Most importantly, notwithstanding some questions concerning the scope of the GHT survey, it is evident that the balance of local public opinion is in favour of the Gardyne proposals. Whilst this is not in itself sufficient to justify allocating the Gardyne site in preference to Fk2, it is of relevance in the context of the council acknowledging that it was only on the basis of its apparently mistaken perception of the majority of local public opinion favouring the Kinnell site that Fk2 was allocated in the finalised plan review document. Indeed Fk2 at Kinnell was chosen as a replacement for the Gardyne site which the council had previously supported on the basis of its own landscape assessment and other criteria. In summary, for the reasons outlined above, I conclude that the Gardyne site should be allocated in the finalised local plan review in preference to the Kinnell site, which should be deleted.

Recommendation

3.428 I recommend that the local plan review is modified in this case in response to the objections in support of the Guild Homes (Tayside) proposals – in particular, the proposal Fk2 should be replaced by the Gardyne site. The text of the local plan review should also be amended accordingly, to ensure that the package of proposals and village/community improvement initiatives put forward in association with the new houses, (as described in the GHT submissions and on their accompanying illustrative layouts and associated roads drawings), are all secured for the benefit of Friockheim as a whole. This might usefully involve the preparation of a development brief for the Gardyne site and its environs.

112 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Grahamstown, Arbirlot by Arbroath: Omission

Objector Reference

J G Fairlie & Partners 829/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.429 The site concerned is within the Arbroath HMA. The objectors are seeking to have the objection site allocated for housing and for it, together with the existing houses at Grahamstown to be included within a defined development boundary. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.430 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the objection site, a strip of land extending to approximately 200m along a minor road at Grahamston should be allocated for housing, including affordable housing, encouraging the retention and support of local services inincluding the school at Arbirlot. The land would provide more than six houses and therefore a housing site allocation would be appropriate, in the objectors’ view. It is also argued that Grahamston, including the proposed site, should be included within a settlement/development boundary. It is contended that this proposal would round off the existing group of houses at Grahamstown, making it similar in size and character to other settlements defined in village boundary maps within the finalised local plan.

The council’s response

3.431 The council contends that the proposed housing allocation on the objection site would not accord with the local plan in that:

* there is no requirement to allocate any further land in the Arbroath Housing Market Area to meet Dundee and Angus Structure Plan allowances, * the site is greenfield with no conversion or reuse, and

113 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

* it is contrary to the Policy SC5 : Countryside housing in the Finalised Angus Local Plan and Policy H7 : Countryside Housing – Category 1 of the Adopted Angus local Plan in that it comprises more that 1 house, creates ribbon development and is unlikely to meet the road frontage criterion.

3.432 Based on these considerations the council argues that there is no justification for this objection site being allocated for housing or for it to be included in a development boundary.

Conclusions

3.433 I note that the objectors have not sought to challenge the council’s contention that there is no requirement to allocate any further land in the Arbroath Housing Market Area to meet Dundee and Angus Structure Plan allowances for that HMA. I endorse the council’s analysis and conclusions in that regard. Accordingly, I now turn to consider whether the proposal should be accepted on an exceptional basis, taking account of local considerations. The main arguments put forward by the objectors in support of their proposal is that the proposed housing allocation would form a natural rounding off of the existing group of houses at Grahamstown - and would reflect the traditional pattern of development in the area, as well as supporting local services. I am not persuaded that these arguments, individually or in combination, are sufficient to justify an exceptional housing land allocation of the type being sought. In particular, I note that the site concerned, whilst situated opposite a row of existing rural residential properties, is located in open countryside. Furthermore, I consider that it would set an unfortunate precedent if such an allocation was made principally to support local services, such as a school in the area. I note that there are numerous examples of isolated groups of traditional houses in countryside locations within Angus, often for historic reasons. The council has reached the view that it is not necessary or appropriate for these building groups, such as the one at Grahamstown, to be extended to form larger settlements with a defined development boundary of the type put forward by the objectors. I endorse the council in this analysis and conclude that the justification put forward by the objectors is not persuasive in this case

3.434 Based on all of the above considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant the housing land allocation or the development boundary being sought in this particular case.

Recommendation

3.435 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

114 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Inveraldie and Tealing - Omission

Objector Reference

James Keillor Estates Ltd 553/2/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.436 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The objection concerns the case for allocating new housing land to the north of Inveraldie that has not been included in the finalised local plan review.

Basis of the objection

3.437 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that 17ha of land situated immediately to the north of the Development Boundary of Inveraldie and west of the A90(T) road should be allocated for mixed housing development and associated uses. Whilst the objector accepts that the local plan has to comply with the structure plan approved in 2003, it is noted that very little housing land is allocated for the South Angus Housing Market Area. It is understood that this is because the structure plan advocates most of the housing land release for the Dundee and South Angus HMA to areas within the Dundee City boundary and for the vast majority of this to be within the Western Villages strategy. It is argued that there is no immediate prospect of that particular development gaining planning permission and there are serious constraints to development of that Dundee Western Gateway initiative proceeding. Accordingly, it is argued on behalf of the objector that there are serous doubts as to whether that allocation will make any meaningful contribution to the housing land supply, in which case the structure plan strategy is not being delivered despite being in the firth year of the structure plan period. In the context of the knock-on effect of this on other land holdings in the HMA, and the requirement of the local plan to conform to the structure plan, it is stated that the ability to allocated land where it can be delivered is compromised and housing land supply is not keeping pace with demand. On this basis it is contended that the structure plan is fatally flawed and alternative housing land releases requires to be made to address the land supply issues.

115 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.438 The site now being proposed by the objector was formerly included in Angus Local Plan. There was a previous planning permission for a petrol filling station, restaurant and travel lodge type hotel to provide roadside services alongside the A90 Trunk Road. The landowner is prepared to consider other new developments alongside these roadside services if it would provide a service and employment in the area. The proposal now is for a mixed housing development, including mainstream and affordable housing, along with appropriate complementary uses, without competing with existing local services in Inveraldie village. It is pointed out that there is developer and housing association interest in the proposed site. Furthermore the proposals could incorporate a new road link onto the Tealing –Auchterhouse Road to enable local people, particularly schoolchildren to make the journey to school at Kirkton of Tealing without having to negotiate the A90(T) road.

The council’s response

3.439 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.440 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the

116 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.441 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.442 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.443 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.444 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.445 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.446 Turning to the particular site being promoted by the objector in this case, the council points out that the site concerned is located in open countryside, unrelated to any settlement and in an area not served by public drainage. In addition it is situated adjacent to the A90(T) which could give rise to issues relating to increased vehicular usage of the

117 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

current at-grade junction onto the trunk road. It is pointed out that paragraph 2.101 of the finalised local plan review was drafted to take account of representations made by the Scottish Executive Trunk Roads Division, regarding at grade junctions on the A90(T) concerning Scottish Ministers policy of seeking closure of central reservation gaps on safety grounds. This now presumes against development which would result in the increased use of a central reserve gap or if it would prevent or inhibit closure of such a gap on the trunk road network. The council points out that there are also other objections to the local plan in the same general area as Inveraldie/Tealing – such as Newbigging Farm - that seek the inclusion of housing sites adjacent to the A90(T).

3.447 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification, in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area, that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

Conclusions

3.448 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.449 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.450 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

118 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.451 In this context I now turn to consider whether a new housing land allocation immediately to the north of Inveraldie and west of the A90(T) road, as proposed by the objectors, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the area put forward by the objectors for housing development, includes a site where there is a planning permission for roadside services associated with the trunk road. Apart from stating that this site has planning permission and noting that it formed part of an earlier local plan draft, the case made for its inclusion as a new housing land allocation appears to be based largely on meeting a strategic need not being addressed satisfactorily at Dundee Western Gateway, in the objector’s view. These strategic housing land issues have already been dealt with above. I consider that the possibility of providing a new link to enable movements to school that would no longer require access to the A90(T) road, whilst welcome in principle, is not sufficient reason to make a land allocation of 17ha for new housing and associated uses in open countryside as would be the case here. Furthermore, this would not resolve the wider road safety concerns of the Scottish Ministers and the council regarding the nearby trunk road access which I consider are important. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there is insufficient justification to warrant allocation of the land at Inveraldie for housing development within the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.452 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

119 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Inveraldie and Tealing: Omissions – Tealing House & Walled Garden

Objector Reference

G B Thomson 666/1/1 & 666/1/2

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.453 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The objections concern the case for allocating land for residential development firstly, to the east of Tealing House and, secondly, in the walled garden to the east of Tealing House. These sites have not been included in the finalised local plan review.

Basis of the objection

3.454 It is noted by the objector that an earlier Masterplan for Inveraldie – Balmuir – Mill of Tealing produced by Dundee City Council allowed for major redevelopment and sewage system enhancement around Inveraldie – Tealing. That included proposals for 5 large residential units and associated tree planting on the 3.6ha lodge site (Proposal HS67) east of Tealing House. It is pointed out that this project has remained in abeyance until the other two planned developments by the objector had been completed. The original Dundee City Council Masterplan also included Proposal HS68 for restoration of Tealing House and 4 new houses in its walled garden, for which outline consent was granted in 1991. This was renewed with the architect and the authorities in 1996 and as Tealing House was still under restoration it was agreed that not to renew the planning permission until the work on the main building was completed in April 1998. The objector has spent over £600,000 on restoration of Tealing Mansion House and other listed buildings in the Tealing House complex, including the Home Farm and the courtyard area, and planned to move to a smaller house in the Walled Garden. Work on establishing an entrance to Tealing House and Walled Garden was scheduled to commence in April 2005.

120 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.455 The sites concerned are situated to the south and east of the Development Boundary of Tealing as shown in the finalised local plan review. Although the land east of Tealing House and the walled garden within its policies were originally included in the Angus Local Plan Consultative Draft (January 1998), these and other sites at Inveraldie/Tealing were deleted from the finalised Angus Local Plan (March 1999) and there was no objection to the deletion of these sites when the Angus Local Plan was adopted with modifications following a public local inquiry in November 2000. The council points out that this position was continued in the finalised local plan review. With reference to the site history, the council points out that the walled garden site was granted planning permission for 4 houses by Dundee District Council in 1991 and incorporated into the local plan for the area in 1994, but that permission has long since lapsed. It also notes that the alternative access to Tealing House granted planning permission by Angus council in November 2002, whilst adjacent to the walled garden, did not include access to the walled garden site.

3.456 The council notes that Tealing is a small village with no facilities and services and there have been a number of houses built in Tealing in recent years which has consolidated the previously loose group of buildings at Tealing. In the council’s view the walled garden, which is located between Tealing House to the west and another residential property to the east and to the south by a public road, is no longer purposefully used and in its present form has no sustainable future. In reappraising the Development Boundary of Tealing, it accepts that inclusion of this walled garden within the Development Boundary would round off the southern boundary of the settlement and conclude development in this part of the village, as well as safeguarding the structure of the walled garden for the future. Accordingly in its Proposed First Round Modifications the council considered it appropriate to redefine the Tealing Development Boundary to include the Listed Walled Garden. On that basis the objector agreed to conditionally withdraw the objection relating to the walled garden (666/1/2). Nevertheless, the council is concerned that additional housing further to the east of Tealing House would extend the (proposed modified) Development Boundary of Tealing into countryside and that such development would compromise the generally rural character of the area.

3.457 In assessing the many objections by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area, prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the

121 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.458 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebuilding industry and Communities Scotland.

3.459 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.460 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.461 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.462 Turning to the site-specific details of Objection 666/1/1, the council points out that the site is situated in open countryside and not served by public drainage. It is also adjacent to the A90(T) road which, the council contends, could give rise to issues relating to increased vehicular usage of the current at-grade junctions onto the trunk road. It is pointed out that paragraph 2.101 of the finalised local plan review was drafted to take account of representations made by the Scottish Executive Trunk Roads Division, regarding at grade

122 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

junctions on the A90(T) concerning Scottish Ministers policy of seeking closure of central reservation gaps on safety grounds. This now presumes against development which would result in the increased use of a central reserve gap or if it would prevent or inhibit closure of such a gap on the trunk road network. The council points out that there are also other objections to the local plan in the same general area as Inveraldie/Tealing – such as Newbigging Farm - that seek the inclusion of housing sites adjacent to the A90(T).

3.463 In summary, the council is content to modify the Development Boundary of Tealing to incorporate the Walled Garden of Tealing House to address the Objection 666/1/2. It contends, however, that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of the land further to the east of the Tealing House complex for greenfield housing development and so no change is proposed in response to Objection 666/1/1.

Conclusions

3.464 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.465 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.466 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.467 In this context I now turn to consider whether an amendment to accommodate the Walled Garden of Tealing Housing and for a new housing land allocation immediately to the east of that, as proposed by the objector, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I am

123 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review persuaded by the arguments put forward by the council that rationalisation of the Tealing Development boundary to incorporate the listed Walled Garden of Tealing House is merited as it would round off the settlement and assist the future security of the listed structure, which is to be welcomed. The strategic housing land issues concerning the case for further greenfield housing further to the east of Tealing House, nearer to the A90(T) road junction, have already been dealt with above. I agree with the council that there are strategic road safety, as well as planning policy, concerns about such a proposal and the fact that there was a different approach taken by the former council fifteen years ago is not sufficient to overcome these current concerns in my view. In particular I note the road safety concerns of the Scottish Ministers regarding the nearby trunk road access - reiterated by the council in evidence and in the finalised plan review - which I consider are important. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there is insufficient justification to warrant allocation of the land referred to in Objection 666/1/1 to the east of Tealing House for housing development within the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.468 I recommend that the local plan review is modified solely to amend the Development Boundary of Tealing in order to incorporate the Walled Garden of Tealing House within that boundary, as agreed by the council in its Proposed Modifications.

124 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Kellas: Omission

Objector Reference

Mr Ken Scott (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan) 897/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.469 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.470 The objector does not take issue with the strategic arguments concerning housing land supply or the statistics relating to that put forward by the council. Nevertheless, it is argued on behalf of the objector that the finalised local plan review should have extended the development boundary of Kellas to include agricultural land to the west of the Kellas Smithy which is currently used for breeding Shetland ponies. This would release the potential to develop around 10 houses on the site concerned with access from the north, with no linkages to the Smithy site. It was noted that planning permission was granted in December 2005 for demolition of the adjoining Kellas Smithy and re-development of that site to provide 6 new houses. Whilst it was acknowledged that the site now proposed for further housing to the west of Kellas Smithy could be regarded as backland, it was pointed out that there are existing examples of backland housing developments further south within Kellas and this is not a great concern. It is contended that the proposed site would create a good housing environment.

125 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.471 In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward. Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan.

3.472 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.473 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.474 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.475 Since publication of FALPR planning permission has been granted for 6 houses through brownfield re-development of the Kellas Smithy site, within the existing development boundary. That development together with the potential of the Glebe provides the opportunity for 10 additional houses in the village representing a 40% growth from the existing stock of around 25 houses in the village. In the council’s view this is more than adequate in terms of growth for a village of this size. The objection site,

126 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review which lies outwith the existing development boundary contains an existing landscape gardening business. In the context of the Kellas Smithy and Glebe development opportunities, if backland housing development was also implemented on the objection site, resulting in a further 10 houses, it would be uncharacteristic of the settlement in tems of its scale and position and there would be an effective doubling of the existing stock of houses in the village which has no shops or services. The nearest school is at Wellbank, where it is acknowledged there is not a capacity issue at present but with other commitments in the pipeline in the wider catchment there may be concerns about school capacity constraints. Based on all of the above considerations, the council concludes that there is no justification that would require the allocation of additional housing land at Kellas or for amending the development boundary for this purpose

Conclusions

3.476 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.477 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the potential for providing more affordable housing, including retirement housing, should additional land be released. As stated earlier in this report “whilst to some extent seductive in view of the large unidentified need for affordable housing in South Angus, we share the council’s opinion that the provision of affordable housing is a subservient requirement to the broader structure plan strategy.”

3.478 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

127 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.479 In this context I now turn to consider whether the development boundary extension and housing land allocation at Kellas proposed by the objector should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I endorse the council’s assessment that the scale and location of the housing land allocation being promoted by the objector is inappropriate. My conclusion in this regard takes into consideration the existing size and form of the settlement and the opportunities for development of 6 houses at the Kellas Smithy and the potential for 3-4 units at the Glebe, both of which are within the existing development boundary. Furthermore, I am concerned that the proposal put forward by the objector for 10 housing units would constitute backland development, which I consider would be undesirable and inappropriate. The arguments presented on behalf of the objector have not been persuasive in this regard. Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment in this particular case and conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant the proposed extension of the development boundary of Kellas to accommodate the proposed housing put forward by the objector.

Recommendation

3.780 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

128 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Kirkbuddo: Omission of a settlement boundary

Objector Reference

W Nicoll 924/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.481 Kirkbuddo lies in the countryside astride the B9127 to the south-east of Forfar. The road curves from a north-south direction to an east-west alignment. There is a rectangular wooded area in the angle of the curve within which Kirkbuddo House is centrally located with agricultural buildings and a house related to Mains of Kirkbuddo to the north-east. There is a further house a little way to the north and two houses to the west of the road, opposite Mains of Kirkbuddo. Generally open, rolling countryside surrounds the wooded area.

Basis of the objection

3.482 The housing land supply in the South Angus housing market area is very restricted and the structure plan strategy of directing the majority of housing land release to areas within the Dundee city boundary is proving to be unsuccessful. Alternative housing land requires to be identified to make good the shortfall.

3.483 Proposals by the objector to provide a modest housing development involving conversion of a disused farm steading and a single new house have previously been refused. Current local plan policies are now more flexible but SPP15, Rural Development, urges more flexibility and support in respect of farm diversification. Kirkbuddo is no longer a working farm and the house and cottage are owned by non-farming families with two redundant and disused steadings.

3.484 Some settlements or small clusters of buildings, many much smaller than Kirkbuddo, have been allocated settlement boundaries. The reasons for providing a settlement boundary in any particular instance have not been stated by the council but, as Kirkbuddo is a sizeable group of buildings, a formal boundary is justified and would allow the identification of any development opportunities. Indeed, Kirkbuddo functions as a settlement, particularly when compared with others where a formal boundary has been defined, some of which are adjacent to, or include, farm buildings or former farm buildings.

129 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.485 Although the council has expressed concern about the potential threat to mature woodland, adequate control of any detailed proposal, including the preparation of a development brief, would be possible.

The council’s response

3.486 Kirkbuddo lies within the Forfar, Kirriemuir and the Angus Glens housing market area (not the South Angus housing market area) where the structure plans directs the majority of housing development to Forfar and Kirriemuir.

3.487 Kirkbuddo is not a settlement but a farm with four houses which were once, if no longer, related to the farm and a house created through conversion. The required settlement boundary is undefined to the east but could lead to significant development and result in the unacceptable loss of mature trees. In effect, a boundary could lead to the approval of a development which has been refused planning permission because of an unacceptable mix of farming and residential activity.

Conclusions

3.488 Having considered objections to Policy SC1, Housing Land Supply, it was concluded that the local plan review makes adequate provision in terms of the structure plan requirements. The strategic document has been approved and is not the subject of critical examination under the auspices of the local plan inquiry. Accordingly, in noting that Kirkbuddo lies within the Forfar, Kirriemuir and the Angus Glens housing market area, I conclude that there is no strategic need to increase the supply of housing land.

3.489 In support of the requirement for a formal boundary, it has been claimed that Kirkbuddo functions as a settlement but this argument has not been substantiated. My impression of Kirkbuddo is that of a country house within substantial grounds along with an associated farm and steadings, albeit that the farm is no longer operational. Notwithstanding comparisons with other formally designated settlements, I do not consider that Kirkbuddo could reasonably be regarded for inclusion in the local plan review as a settlement. In any event, the map illustrating the suggested boundary has no eastern limit and it is therefore not possible to assess the extent of the settlement area that is required.

3.490 The council has expressed concern about the impact on mature trees and, although the objector believes that detailed proposals could be subject to adequate control. Notwithstanding the development control process, I believe that even limited development would be likely to have a significant impact on the trees which are in important component of the local landscape.

3.491 I have noted the recent planning history and also the reference to policy in respect of the conversion of disused and redundant steadings. It may be that this policy would provide some scope for development but that is not a matter for consideration here.

3.492 All-in-all, I conclude that a settlement boundary at Kirkbuddo is not justified.

130 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Recommendation

3.493 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

131 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Kirkton of Auchterhouse: Omission

Objector Reference

Mr M J Murray (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan) 8/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.494 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. In Kirkton of Auchterhouse there is a further consideration in respect of the drainage constraints affecting all development in this locality.

Basis of the objection

3.495 It is argued on behalf of the objector that the finalised local plan review should allocate a site at Parkside Quarry to the east of Kirkton of Auchterhouse for housing development. This south-facing hillside site adjoins the quarry situated at the top of the hill to the north which is no long used and unlikely to be re-activated. The quarry access would serve the proposed new housing development. Whilst it was acknowledged that there are no shops or other local services within Kirkton of Auchterhouse, apart from the primary school - the nearest shop being 2 miles away at Muirhead or Birkhill - it was pointed out that there are good local bus services nearby. The primary school at Kirkton of Auchterhouse has a school roll of 43 and a capacity for 50 pupils. It was argued that, as a result of works to the local sewage treatment plant (funded by the objector under a Section 75 agreement related to another development) in Kirkton of Auchterhouse, drainage capacity should be available to serve the Parkside quarry proposal. If, however, more capacity is required the objector would be willing to enter into another Section 75 agreement to meet the associated drainage upgrading costs.

The council’s response

3.496 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting,

132 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.497 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan.

3.498 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.499 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.500 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). In support of this position the council does not propose to allocate additional housing land at Kirkton of Auchterhouse.

133 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.501 Kirkton of Auchterhouse is a small village in two separate parts. The proposed site at Parkside Quarry lies to the east of the existing houses at Old Whisky Road and outwith the development boundary of Kirkton of Auchterhouse. It is prominent open hill land that is not well defined apart from a fence line marking the southern boundary. In this context, in the council’s view there is no merit in extending the development boundary of Kirkton of Auchterhouse further to include the site now being promoted by the objector at Parkside Qaurry. The village has no facilities apart from the primary school which serves a wider area and so whilst it has some limited spare capacity at present this is likely to be diminished by existing housing commitments in the surrounding area.

3.502 In any event, the council states that all development at Kirkton of Auchterhouse, even on the site known as the Brae allocated in FALPR for 16 housing units (inherited as a commitment from Dundee City Council) and with an existing planning permission, is currently constrained by drainage problems and cannot proceed until these overriding issues are resolved. The problems concern a lack of capacity at the local SWT plant and associated pipework capacity problems. Discussions with Scottish Water lead the council to the view that there appears to be no immediate prospect of those drainage constraints being resolved.

3.503 The objector has signed a Section 75 agreement in respect of the Brae development which will make a financial contribution to enable the necessary public sewer improvements to be carried out by Scottish Water. It is acknowledged that this may result in some additional drainage capacity in the area. Nevertheless, the more significant issues relating to structure plan strategy and the existing effective housing land supply in South Angus remain the determining factors in the council’s view.

Conclusions

3.504 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.505 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

134 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.506 I am satisfied that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.507 In this context I now turn to consider whether the housing land allocation at Parkside Quarry proposed by the objector should be accepted on an exceptional basis. The case put forward to justify a housing land allocation adjacent to the quarry in the finalised local plan has not been persuasive. The site concerned is a significant distance from the development boundary of Kirkton of Auchterhouse and is not well defined, forming part of an open hillside. I conclude that even if drainage constraints could be overcome the proposed development would appear as isolated, highly visible development in the countryside. In my view, this would be undesirable and unjustifiable in terms of the local plan and structure plan policies and current national planning guidance. Furthermore, there are no local shops or other services, apart from a rural bus service, to support new residents at this location. In addition, in the context of existing housing commitments in the wider catchment area, there are potential constraints on the capacities of both the local school and in respect of drainage infrastructure. Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment and conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant a housing land allocation at Parkside Quarry to promote the proposed development to the east of Kirkton of Auchterhouse being sought by the objector.

Recommendation

3.508 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

135 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Kirkton of Menmuir: Settlement Boundary

Objector Reference

Mr & Mrs A Spence 828/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.509 Kirkton of Menmuir lies on a minor road to the north-west of Brechin.

3.510 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement. The boundary is drawn tightly around existing development. Balfour Farm comprises a large complex of buildings, including the farm house and a second residential property, to the immediate west of the settlement boundary with agricultural fields beyond. The objection site extends to some 6.8 hectares. There is an intervening burn and trees, the farm buildings being at a slightly higher elevation than the settlement.

Basis of the objection

3.511 The settlement boundary should be extended to include the farm buildings and part of the adjacent field. The farm is shortly to become surplus to requirements and the boundary extension would facilitate redevelopment. The greenfield land would allow a comprehensive development opportunity.

3.512 Redevelopment would allow significant environmental benefits leading to an overall improvement to the landscape.

3.513 SPP15, Planning for Rural Development, and PAN72, Housing in the Countryside, provide relevant guidance and advice. SPP15 lends weight towards a more positive approach to the residential opportunities presented by Balfour Farm. PAN72 recognises the changing circumstances in rural Scotland. In terms of the advice, change can be positive and the extended boundary would set the scale of change that is acceptable, establish a clear policy framework which promotes opportunities to create sustainable and affordable homes and ensure that development enhances local character.

The council’s response

3.514 In accordance with the provisions of the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan, the local plan review identifies a range and choice of housing sites within the Brechin/Montrose

136 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

housing market area, within which the objection site lies. Brownfield and greenfield sites are allocated in Brechin and Montrose with a brownfield site at Edzell. Indeed, the 2005 housing land audit shows that the supply of housing land in the housing market area provides sufficient land for the period to 2011 along with indicative allowance for the period 2011- 2016. Further allocations are not required.

3.515 The intervening burn and woodland visually and physically separate the objection site from the settlement. The required amendment to the boundary would allow a significant extension to the village in a location with no facilities or services such as schools, shops and public transport. The potential number of houses would not be compatible with the scale and character of Kirkton of Menmuir and would be contrary to the local plan review development strategy and the creation of sustainable communities.

Conclusions

3.516 In considering objections to the overall level of housing land supply under Policy SC1 it was concluded that the local plan review does not require additional allocations to meet the terms of the structure plan. I therefore share the opinion of the council in this respect and conclude that there is no strategic justification for an additional housing land allocation at Kirkton of Menmuir.

3.517 Insofar as the local plan review is concerned, the majority of development is to be guided to locations within the Angus towns and villages to make use of existing and planned transport and other infrastructure in order to help build sustainable communities. In the light of this priority, particularly in respect of the relatively remote location of the village, and in terms of the local plan allocation of housing within the Brechin/Montrose housing market area, I conclude that there is no general justification for additional housing land at Kirkton of Menmuir.

3.518 Turning to the consideration of the objection site in a local context, I note that very few details have been provided. I can appreciate that at least some of the farm buildings could be converted for residential use if, as anticipated, they become surplus to requirements. However, there has been no elaboration of the significant environmental benefits that are claimed and it has not been explained how the inclusion of the greenfield section of the objection site would allow a comprehensive development opportunity. Overall, I believe the size of the required extension could lead to a scale of development which would overwhelm the settlement as defined in the local plan review. In this respect, therefore, I share the council’s opinion that there would be a detrimental impact on the character of Kirkton of Menmuir. I also accept the council’s contention that there is a physical and visual separation between the village and the objection site. This would be exacerbated, particularly in respect of the field in the western part of the site. Should development take place here it would have little relationship with the existing village.

3.519 On the basis of the foregoing conclusions, I further conclude that there little specific merit in the objection and that the wider policy considerations should be applied. In reaching this conclusion I have noted the guidance contained in SPP15. The SPP advances policy in

137 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

respect of small scale rural housing developments including clusters and groups in close proximity to settlements. The overall message is that there is considerable scope for allowing more housing developments of this nature and that this should be expressed in development plans.

3.520 The amount and location of housing in rural areas is determined by a number of factors. I note these factors include proximity to services and fit in the landscape. The lack of services at Kirkton of Menmuir and the relatively remote location of the village do not support an argument for additional residential development. I have previously concluded that the farm buildings may be suitable for residential conversion and, in turn, I conclude that any development in this section of the objection site could be designed in a manner that would fit in the landscape. However, I do not believe that the western part of the site, if developed for housing, would represent a small scale rural housing development in terms of SPP15 and would not fit in the landscape. All-in-all, I conclude that, in this case, rural housing development is not supported by SPP15.

3.521 Similarly, PAN72 does not offer support in terms of fit in the landscape. In any event, the PAN states that, insofar as location is concerned, the provision of new development should be sustainable. I believe this to be an overriding requirement and one which, for the reasons I have given, is not met by the objection site.

Recommendation

3.522 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

138 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Kirkton of Monikie: Omission

Objector Reference

Messrs D & I Fairlie (per McCrae & McCrae) 917/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.523 The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.524 It is argued on behalf of the objector that the finalised local plan should have provided a development boundary for the existing building group at Kirkton of Monikie, which comprises a church, a manse and 8 houses. It is contended that provision of a development boundary here would allow the replacement of a stone steading to the south of the B961 road with 5-6 houses, at the same time improving the road alignment and hence road safety on a dangerous bend, as well as providing scope for additional houses here in the future. The proposal would incorporate a small village green with the new houses set back from the road and offering an improved setting for the church as a focal point. The objector points to other examples of small Angus settlements, comparable in scale to Kirkton of Monikie, that have defined development boundaries.

The council’s response

3.525 The council considers the group of buildings at Kirkton of Monikie to be too small and limited in function to be regarded as a village. Accordingly, it is not considered appropriate to establish a development boundary at this location, particularly as this could set a precedent for other similar locations across Angus. In its view there are comparable examples in Angus - including numerous examples bigger than Kirkton of Monikie - of settlements that have no development boundary. The closest example of a small settlement with a develeopment boundary would be where there is a church, shop and Post Office in addtion to a small group of houses. In the council’s view, however, those buildlings form a cohesive group that merits a development boundary,

139 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

unlike Kirkton of Monikie. Where there is no development boundary, countryside policies apply. In such cases, where planning applications are being considered the council has adopted a positive approach to development in the countryside through its local plan and development control policies in the period prior to SPP15 and changes to SPP3.

3.526 In the South Angus area the local plan strategy seeks to direct additional housing to the main settlements which provide a range of services and facilities, giving priority to the re-use of and re-development of brownfield sites. The supply of sites in the South Angus HMA – both allocated sites and winddfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission contribute to meeting the full housing allowance for the area established by the approved structure plan for the period to 2011. The finalised local plan makes no new land allocations for the South Angus area. Development proposals for Kirkton of Monikie should be considered against the Countryside Housing Policies of the finalised local plan review.

3.527 Accordingly the council remains of the opinion that it is not appropriate to establish a development boundary for the scattered group of buildings at Kirkton of Monikie or to allocate land for housing there. It considers that the matters of concern to the objector could be more appropriately determined through the development control process, with reference to countryside housing policies of the local plan.

3.528 Since publication of FALPR new national policy on rural development has been published (SPP15). Based on consideration of this together with objections lodged in respect of the countryside policies of FALPR, the countryside section of FALPR has been modified – see the Proposed 3rd Round Modifications [and later proposed modifications put forward by the council that have been considered in a separate Countryside Housing section of this report].

3.529 The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of

140 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.530 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.531 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.532 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations

3.533 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.534 I now turn to consider whether there are any local reasons to allow the proposed amendments to the finalised local plan review on an exceptional basis. Firstly, I do not consider that the prospect of improving a road alignment and creation of a small village green at Kirkton of Monikie provides sufficient justification to merit the creation of a

141 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

development boundary for this small group of buildings and expansion of the housing there from 8 dwellings today to 13-14 units - and possibly more in the future.

3.535 Furthermore, the other evidence that has been presented on behalf of the objector that Kirkton of Monikie should have a development boundary and a housing land allocation - has not been persuasive. I endorse the council’s view that the proposals to replace the steading with housing development around a new village green and set back from a realignment of the main B961 road is a matter that would be more appropriately dealt with through a planning application. This would be considered in the context of local plan policies, which the council proposes to modify to take account of the most up to date national planning policy and guidance. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant the provision of either a development boundary or a new housing allocation at Kirkton of Monikie within the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.536 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

142 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Letham: L2 – Housing, Jubilee Park

Objector Reference

Mrs R Rizza 205/1/1 Ruth Elder 544/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Formal inquiry Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.537 There is concern about decisions relating to extensions to the Joseph Mitchell (Letham) Ltd (Mitchells of Letham) operations at Woodside Road on the south-west perimeter of Letham having adverse environmental effects - in particular relating to the housing land allocation L2: Jubilee Park, Letham which adjoins existing housing at Bractullo Gardens. The factory commenced operations at this location in 1952 and has expanded onto adjoining land in successive phases of development of its business in chicken production and related food processing. The factory land is covered by Policy L4: Safeguard of Development Land in the FALPR which protects existing employment areas of the village for employment uses in support of the economic base of the Letham.

Basis of the objection

3.538 The objectors, who are local residents in Letham, are concerned about the effects of the Michell’s factory, in particular the environmental nuisance caused by smells constantly emanating from those premises and the traffic impacts associated with the increasing numbers of large lorries visiting the factory site which is accessed via country lanes. The objectors contend that no consistency has been applied by the council with regard to Letham, pointing out that the smell nuisance from the factory is experienced by local residents at all times. In this context, in the objectors’ view, the local plan review’s Vision for Angus does not apply here as there is no ‘first class quality of life’ as stated in the plan document, noting that Letham was a pleasant village until the factory arrived.

3.539 The objectors are seeking assurances from the council that existing residents at Bractullo Gardens, as well as new owners in houses to be built adjoining Bractullo Gardens on the housing land allocated at L2, will experience no adverse effects from the factory’s new incinerator which has been given permission 50-100m away. They state that in the local plan review there is no definition of the boundary of the industrial area allocated for use by the chicken factory, which has has expanded rapidly in recent years. Furthermore, they are concernded that there have been no environment and traffic assessments undertaken to provide a baseline against which to assess the impacts of the factory expansion proposals.

143 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.540 The council notes that whilst the Mitchell factory has been operating here for a long time, Letham appears to be a popular location in which to live, with much new housebuilding having taken place there over the last 30 years or so. In the council’s view, the nub of the issue raised by the objectors relates to a decision in 2002 by Angus Council to grant planning permission for 3 extensions to the existing Mitchells of Letham factory at Woodside Road. The third of the extensions (located on the north side of the factory) will contain a thermal energy reclamation unit, referred to by objectors as an ‘incinerator’. This is intended to deal with organic waste from the Letham factory processes in an odourless/smokeless process.

3.541 The council points out that throughout the planning application process consultations were undertaken with both SEPA (Scottish Environment Protection Agency) and the Environmental & Consumer Protection department of Angus Council. The Thermal Energy Reclamation Unit will be regulated by SEPA under the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations (PPC). SEPA therefore did not object in principle and noted that a satisfactory regime is available through PPC regulation which sets standards designed to avoid unacceptable environmental impact. Under these regulations the factory owner is required to apply for a licence from SEPA before the extension to the factory can be progressed. SEPA is currently considering the licence application for this process and emissions and odour are assessed as part of the licencing procedure. The council points out that planning controls should not seek to duplicate these regulations. In terms of the Scottish Executive’s Environmental Regulations, there is no requirement for either an environmental statement or a transport assessment in this particular case. The council states that with the proposed thermal energy reclamation unit in operation there should be less effect on neighbouring residents than exists at present. It should also lead to a reduction in the number of heavy vehicles currently required to service the factory. In summary, the council contends that at this stage there is nothing to suggest that the factory extensions will not be compatible with surrounding land uses.

3.542 In this context, in the council’s view the situation at Mitchell’s factory is not of direct relevance to the allocation of land for housing at L2: Jubilee Gardens identified in the FALPR. It notes, firstly, that the L2 site is situated at least 103m from the factory, which is further away than existing housing built in the 1980’s and 1990’s, long after the factory started operating here. Secondly, it notes that people will be aware of the existence of the factory in making their choice to live there. It also points out that the local plan proposal includes the requirement for investigation as to whether the vehicular access that will be provided for the new housing development L2 could also be used by existing residents at Woodside Road. Their properties are currently accessed via a private lane that passes through the factory area, which is an issue of concern.

3.543 The council regards the L2 housing site as effective and it is not considered remote from local services, as it will be easily accessible to the village centre shops and other facilities by walking and cycling, as well as by car if necessary. The provision of new paths direct to the local school will have benefits for residents in the area to the west

144 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

of the village. Furthermore, the proposals include provision of a playing field for the school. It is noted that SEPA have not objected to the land allocation L2.

3.544 The council acknowledges that the Mitchell factory has recently expanded its operations onto an adjoining site at the southern extremity of Letham, across the private road serving residents of Woodside Road houses located immediately to the east of the factory. Whilst in general the factory premises are identified in the FALPR as land zoned L4, that particular factory extension is not labelled for employment use in the plan document. The council accepted that it would be beneficial if the areas already used by the factory and any others committed or planned for its extension, where agreed with the council, should be clearly delineated as employment land in the adopted local plan review.

Conclusions

3.545 Firstly, I note and can understand the concerns expressed by the objectors about the environmental issues relating to the operation of the Mitchell factory at Letham, in particular smells and traffic generation, in close proximity to existing and proposed new housing areas. I also note their anxiety that future expansion plans for the factory, that have been granted planning permission, will exacerbate these problems. I am persuaded, however, by the arguments put forward by the council that the issue of factory emissions and odours is being addressed by SEPA in its processing of a licence application for a proposed Thermal Energy Reclamation Unit which is required before the extension to the factory can be progressed. I note that these emissions will then be regulated by SEPA under the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations (PPC) which sets standards designed to avoid unacceptable environmental impact. In this context I am satisfied that there is no reason to amend or delete housing land allocation L2, which I note also has potential to improve access for the residents of Woodside Road.

3.546 The council has accepted the point raised by the objectors that there appears to be no effective boundary defined for the expansion of the Mitchell factory which is already in close proximity to existing and planned housing areas. Whilst I note that the original factory of 1952 pre-dated most of the houses in the area, I also note that it has experienced successive phases of expansion at Letham and is now the subject of planning permissions for 3 further extensions onto adjoining sites. I agree with the objectors’ concern that whilst there is a Policy L4 safeguarding employment land, this does not cover all of the existing or committed operational areas of the Mitchell factory complex and there appears to be no delineation of the area designated for existing and future employment land or industrial use in Letham. I conclude that the council should amend the FALPR to provide appropriate delineation to L4 to remedy this shortcoming and so give more certainty to residents about any plans for further industrial expansion at Letham.

145 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Recommendation

3.547 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the Proposals Map of the local plan review should be modified in respect of Policy L4 to delineate areas designated for existing and future industrial or employment use in Letham.

146 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Letham: L3 – Housing, East Hemming Street

Objector Reference

Guild Homes (Tayside) Ltd 875/2/1 (per Montagu Evans)

AB Roger & Young (Supporter) 251/4/1 Mr Brian Ogilvie (Supporter) 527/1/1 Graham Ogilivie (Supporter) 569/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.548 With the formal, unconditional withdrawal of the objection from Guild Homes (Tayside) Ltd in respect of Policy L3 at Letham, there is no requirement to consider the other representations listed above which are all in support of Policy L3 as put forward in the finalised local plan review.

147 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Letham Grange Development Strategy

Objector Reference

Letham Grange Developments 830/1/1 (per Muir Smith and Evans)

Mrs Gertrude Smith (Supporter) 1083/1/1 Letham Grange Houseowners Association 1084/1/1 (per Trevor James Powell) (Supporters)

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

The following written submission objection was also lodged in respect of Letham Grange:

Select Homes (per Montagu Evans) 871/3/2 ______

Background

3.549 The Letham Grange Estate lies to the north of Arbroath and has an established development boundary in the finalised local plan review. Planning permission was granted in the 1970’s and 1980’s for a hotel within the Category B listed Letham Grange House, together with golf course development and other leisure facilities, including an ice rink, as well as some new housing to be located in the landscaped grounds. Originally the residential component was to be limited to 110 units but subsequently permission was granted for this to expand to 140 houses in total, of which only 3 remain to be built. The finalised local plan review encourages the enhancement and expansion of the tourism and leisure potential of Letham Grange, so long as it is not detrimental to the estate’s unique environment and respects its heritage buildings. It also states, however, that housing development at Letham Grange would be limited to the 140 units previously agreed, which is already almost completed.

Basis of the objections

The Hearing Objection

3.550 The objectors, who are involved in operating and developing the Letham Grange Estate, are seeking flexibility within the finalised local plan review to enable site-specific proposals for mixed use developments that would safeguard important heritage buildings. They argue that this can only be achieved by cross-subsidising improvements to listed buildings within the estate through additional new house-building at Letham Grange, possibly involving the loss of some of the existing holes of one of the two golf courses.

148 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

This is because most other areas suitable for house-building within the landscaped grounds have already been used. It is also proposed that there would be new tourism facilities, such as time-share/clubshare and self-catering accommodation, as well as indoor and outdoor leisure facilities developed. The proposals would involve conversion of existing heritage buildings that are currently vacant and some new-build developments within an overall Masterplan for the estate. It is stated that all of the proposed components of the Masterplan are geared towards safeguarding the viability of the estate as a whole. It points out that the 2 golf courses have a total membership of 460 today whilst the golf club needs at least 1,400 members to break even operationally. The golf facilities, the roads and planted areas of the estate all need regular maintenance which is costly. It is, however, vital in retaining the environmental quality of the estate for the benefit of local residents and to encourage recreational visitors to come to the existing attractions, as well as to use the new facilities that are proposed. It is stated that whilst there is a need to subsidise the capital costs of restoration and conversion of the listed buildings to productive leisure and recreational uses or for providing hotel accommodation, the leisure and tourist facilities need to ‘stand on their own feet’, to operate without subsidy, once they are established. It is also stated that conversion of the vacant heritage out-buildings of the estate for mainstream housing or apartments should not require any subsidy. Whilst the objector was reluctant to estimate the number of new-build mainstream houses that might be required in addition to the 15-20 residential units that might be achieved through building conversions, it was suggested that it might be at least 50 new houses.

3.551 The objectors state that they support the council in seeking to promote a sustainable and certain future for Letham Grange for the benefit of the residents there, the landscaped environment of the estate and for its heritage buildings. They would support a revised wording for Policy LG1 with a view to achieving these aims.

The Supporters

3.552 Local residents in support of the council’s position, set out in the finalised local plan review, agree that it is of paramount importance that Letham Grange is further developed to become a major recreational resort. They point to the popularity of the 2 golf courses – as well as the curling rink and hotel before their closure following a change of ownership and management difficulties. It is stated that the 140 houses that have now almost been completed have not been accompanied by the range of promised leisure facilities that they were expected to finance at Letham Grange. They are mindful that previous promises have not been kept by the developers and operators of Letham Grange, who have contributed to the problems facing the estate in the objectors’ view. This has led to a lack of confidence in the plans now being put forward, their deliverability and long term viability. The residents believe that the resort development should be centred on the golf and curling elements, together with tourist and visitor accommodation utilising the main Letham Grange House and other vacant heritage buildings. They are not persuaded by the arguments put forward by the objectors that these components would not be viable and require subsidy from further new housing development within the estate. Whilst expressing support for conversion of existing

149 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

vacant and underutilised heritage buildings within the estate, for housing or leisure use, they argue that further new housing at Letham Grange should be resisted, particularly if it necessitated loss of some of golf course holes, pointing out that this is one of the key attractions of Letham Grange which should not be destroyed.

The Written Submission Objection

3.553 The objectors wish to see a particular site allocated for housing development at Letham Grange within the finalised local plan review

The council’s response

In respect of the Hearing objection

3.554 It is noted that the objectors wish to see their latest proposals assessed with reference to countryside housing policies. The council states that this is not appropriate as these policies do not apply to places like Letham Grange which has a defined development boundary. It points out that within development boundaries proposals should be considered in the context of Policy S1: Development Boundaries.

3.555 It is acknowledged that Letham Grange is a large estate that has been developed over recent decades to establish a mix of recreational and residential facilities within its mature grounds. The hotel and curling rink elements suffered from issues arising in the ownership and management structures which affected their viability and led to closures and it is understood that the golf club at Letham Grange is not operating viably. The council points out that it is not in the best position to judge what is viable for the estate. Nevertheless, in its view it would be desirable to retain as many features of the estate as possible, with minimum change to the residential environment enjoyed by the people living there.

3.556 Although the need to provide for the long-term viability of the tourism and recreation facilities at Letham Grange is recognised by the council, the proposals now being put forward by the objectors are not sufficiently detailed to allow their inclusion in this local plan review in the council’s view. Accordingly, it is recommended that the Development Strategy and Policy LG1: Housing - Letham Grange are amended to provide the basis for considering proposals for additional housing during the life of this local plan review. It is pointed out that Policy LG2: Tourism and Recreation Development already indicates support for the enhancement or expansion of the tourism and recreational potential of Letham Grange and so does not require amendment in the council’s view.

3.557 From the council’s perspective, the acceptability of additional housing development at Letham Grange will depend upon the requirement for cross-subsidy of the tourism and recreational facilities, the quality of the tourism proposals and the compatibility of the overall package of measures with the amenity and environmental

150 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

quality of the area. Furthermore, it states that proposals will require to be supported by a viable long-term business plan.

3.558 In this context the council proposes the following amendments as Proposed Modifications:

Delete existing paragraph 2 and replace with the following:-

"2. In recent years the commercial viability of the golf courses and hotel has become an issue. There are emerging proposals aimed at addressing the future viability and further developing the tourism provision on the site. The proposals are at an early stage and are not sufficiently detailed to be included as proposals in this local plan. The indications are that a package of measures may be brought forward which include timeshare, housing and the restoration of listed buildings on the site including the Letham Grange Hotel building. These indicative proposals would result in the reduction of the second golf course from 18 to 9 holes.

3. It is considered appropriate to support proposals which would provide for the long-term viability of the tourism and recreation facilities. At the same time it is necessary to protect the amenity of the existing residential areas. The acceptability of additional housing development will depend upon the requirement for cross subsidy of the tourism and recreational facilities, the quality of the tourism proposals and the compatibility of the overall package of measures with the amenity and environmental quality of the area. Proposals will require to be supported by a viable long-term business plan."

Amend policy LG1 : Housing - Letham Grange to read:-

"LG1 : Housing - Letham Grange Proposals for further housing development outwith the existing residential areas will only be acceptable where a clear case has been demonstrated that: * it is required to cross-subsidise the development of tourism facilities within the complex; * it is compatible with the protection of the amenity of existing residential areas; * it supports the restoration of Listed Buildings and their setting; and * any reduction of the existing golf course provision is demonstrated to be necessary and that the remaining provision is viable."

In respect of the Written Submissions Objection (871/3/2)

3.559 The council points out that development at Letham Grange has taken place over a number of years to an agreed layout plan providing for 2 golf courses, hotel and dispersed groups of houses, to a maximum of 140 units. Although the scheme was amended to reflect changing circumstances during this time, the objection site was not identified for

151 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

housing purposes by the Angus Local Plan adopted in November 2000. A planning application for a single house on this objection site was dismissed at appeal in 1995 on the grounds that it would have an unacceptable impact on the tree belt (it is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order) and it would not be realistic to expect replacement planting to address this issue. In the council’s view, development of this site for more than one house could be expected to have a greater impact on this important landscape feature. It is also noted that a breach in the stone wall would also be detrimental to the character of the estate and to the local countryside. The council argues that there are no exceptional circumstances that would merit a change of view regarding the allocation of this site.

Conclusions

Written Submissions Objection (871/3/2)

3.560 Dealing firstly with the written submissions objection, which concerns a specific site within the Letham Grange development boundary, I note the history of the site concerned and the development context, as summarised by the council. I also note that the objection site in this case does not form part of the 140 houses allocated at Letham Grange and so would have to be considered on an exceptional basis. Given the mature landscaped setting provided by the trees of the Letham Grange Estate, I am persuaded by the arguments put forward by the council that there is no justification to allocate this particular site for housing development. In my view, the case put forward on behalf of the objector is not persuasive and does not outweigh the concerns to maintain the landscape and amenity of the overall Letham Grange Estate. I conclude that the objection should be rejected and the site concerned should not be allocated for housing.

The Hearing objection

3.561 More generally, I accept that the Letham Grange Estate represents a complex problem arising from the fact that the housing development there in the last 25 years has not achieved the desired effect of providing sufficient cross-funding to secure the long term future of the estate. In particular, I note that its heritage buildings, including Letham Grange House, which was converted into a hotel, is now vacant and the curling rink operating nearby has also closed, despite the apparent popularity of both of these facilities when they were under different ownership and management. In addition, there are other heritage outbuildings in the grounds which remain vacant and I understand that the estate’s only remaining visitor attractions, its 2 golf courses, are not operating viably. Furthermore, it is evident that for the security and future prosperity of the estate as a whole, its historic buildings, its landscaped grounds and its associated roads infrastructure – which in combination contribute to the amenity of the existing resident population – all need continual maintenance and investment. I understand that some parties lay part or all of the blame for the current predicament facing Letham Grange on issues associated with changes in ownership and management in recent years. This is not a matter that I am in a position to comment on, but I do consider that:

152 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• Whatever the history and causes of the problems outlined above they are evident today; • The problems summarised above will not be resolved without a coherent and viable Masterplan for the estate as a whole, based on sound market research and a cost-effective strategy setting out a structured programme of development and management for securing the operational viability and long term future for Letham Grange – such a Masterplan and strategy has not been evident to date; • the limited documentation put forward on behalf of the objectors in support of their case for additional housing to be allocated in the local plan review (to cross- subsidise the conservation and conversion/re-use of heritage buildings of the estate) appears to be: poorly conceived; lacking in any detail on any aspect except with regard to conversion of buildings; without any coherent leisure development strategy, let alone an overall estate development strategy; and devoid of any robust market research or economic rigour upon which such strategies need to be based in order to be viable and effective. In my view these are minimum requirements in order to provide an economic case to justify the allocation of further new houses in the estate as a means of cross-subsidising other components that the council and the residents wish to see developed and safeguarded for the long term benefit of Letham Grange.

3.562 Notwithstanding these strong reservations and concerns I have about the lack of substance of the case made to date on behalf of the objectors, I am in agreement with the council that, in principle, it is desirable to support a strategy that would provide for the long-term viability of tourism and recreation facilities at Letham Grange. Such a strategy would also need to retain as many features of the estate as possible and with minimum change to the residential environment enjoyed by the people living there. For the reasons outlined above, however, I am also in agreement with the council that the proposals now being put forward by the objectors are not sufficiently detailed or robust enough to allow their inclusion in this local plan review.

3.563 I am satisfied that Policy LG2: Tourism and Recreation Development already indicates support for the enhancement or expansion of the tourism and recreational potential of Letham Grange and so does not require amendment. Whilst taking into account the views and concerns of the local residents, I also endorse the council’s approach that the acceptability of additional housing development at Letham Grange should depend upon a proven requirement for cross-subsidy of the tourism and recreational facilities, the quality of the tourism proposals - as well as the compatibility of the overall package of measures with the amenity and environmental quality of the area. Furthermore, for the reasons outlined earlier, I suggest that the package of proposals would require to be supported by a viable long-term business plan before the council agrees to the release of any further sites for housing development. I am concerned that, in broad terms and without rigorous economic justification, the objectors are seeking to increase the existing amount of residential units at Letham Grange by approximately 50%, taking account of the scope for conversion of outbuildings and their notion that around 50 new–build houses may be required to cross-subsidise other elements. I regard that order of magnitude of new housing development as being excessive in the Letham

153 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Grange and wider Angus contexts. Furthermore, in my view it has not been justified in the case outlined by the objectors and is not commensurate with the aims of retaining the inherent qualities of the estate and its environment for the amenity of residents and leisure visitors.

3.564 Based on all of these considerations, whilst I am generally supportive of the council’s suggested amendments to the wording of Policy LG1, and the reasons behind it, I would recommend that the words “strictly limited” be inserted immediately prior to the “…further new housing …” in line one of the amendment, to read as below.

Recommendation

3.565 For the reasons given earlier, I recommend that the written submissions objection (871/3/2) should be rejected, but in response to Objection 830/1/1, I recommend that the finalised local plan be amended as follows:

Amend policy LG1 : Housing - Letham Grange to read:-

"LG1 : Housing - Letham Grange Proposals for strictly limited further housing development outwith the existing residential areas will only be acceptable where a clear case has been demonstrated that:

* it is required to cross-subsidise the development of tourism facilities within the complex; * it is compatible with the protection of the amenity of existing residential areas; * it supports the restoration of Listed Buildings and their setting; and * any reduction of the existing golf course provision is demonstrated to be necessary and that the remaining provision is viable."

154 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Liff: Omission of land at Woodside Road

Objector Reference

A & J Stephen Ltd 892/1/1 (per Montgomery Forgan Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

[The same objector has lodged objections 944/1/1 and 944/1/2 relating to omissions elsewhere in the vicinity of Liff (north of Liff Hospital) which are dealt with separately in this report]

______

Background

3.566 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The objection concerns the case for allocating new housing land to the north of Woodside Rd, Liff that has not been included in the finalised local plan review.

Basis of the objection

3.567 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the proposed 35 acre site on the north- eastern edge of Liff village should be considered as a suitable housing location meriting identification as a ‘strategic reserve’ site within the finalised local plan. The objectors consider that the site concerned has potential for a low density development of approximately 140 houses in discrete parcels in a footpath/woodland framework and centred around a village green fronting onto Woodside Rd. This is in the context of proven local market demand and meeting strategic housing needs for the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. It is argued that the site concerned is strategically well placed to serve the area west of Dundee and to deliver community benefits and an appropriate level of affordable housing within a re-established village core. It is stated that this would all be in accordance with structure plan and local plan aims and objectives with regard to housing land provision and in line with national planning policy (SPP3) and associated guidance in PAN 38. The objector argues that there is a severe shortage of housing supply in the South Angus landward area of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area, with drainage constraints in the north and east landward area that are unlikely to be resolved in the foreseeable future.

155 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.568 In this context it is contended that the proposed new ‘strategic reserve’ allocation at Montrose Road, Liff would help to ensure that there is a five year effective housing land supply in the Dundee and South Angus HMA to meet the structure plan allowances to 2011. It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the Liff site is one of only 3 sites (along with Birkhill/Muirhead and Piperdam) in this west landward area, where there are no infrastructure constraints and with scope for targeted growth. It is pointed out that the Liff site is set within an appropriate visual envelope with extensive woodland. It notes that the principle of identifying reserve sites being safeguarded for future development is already supported in the finalised Angus Local Plan, for example at Forfar, in line with national planning advice.

The council’s response

3.569 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.570 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

156 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.571 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.572 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.573 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.574 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.575 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review. The council does not present evident relating directly to the Liff site being promoted by the objector in this case, or in respect of the specific contention that it could be endorsed as a strategic reserve housing site.

157 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Conclusions

3.576 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.577 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.578 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.579 In this context, I now turn to consider whether making a housing land allocation in the form of a ‘strategic reserve’ site at Liff, as proposed by the objector, should be endorsed on an exceptional basis. I note that the area put forward by the objector for housing development is greenfield and set in open countryside with some mature woodlands but divorced from the settlement of Liff, except along its western boundary. The local case made for allocating this site as a strategic reserve has been based on the scope for developing parcels of housing and associated community facilities in a woodland setting around a new village green, with new community facilities at its centre. I not persuaded that this argument, even if valid, carries sufficient weight to overcome the lack of strategic justification for its allocation for housing in principle. In any event, I am concerned that the proposed village green and related community facilities would be isolated and remote from the established village of Liff and therefore not best placed to serve the existing community. Furthermore, if the proposed site was allocated for housing, even as a strategic reserve, this would be likely to result in additional pressure for further major housing development on the open land immediately to the south between the objection site and the remainder of Liff village, which would be undesirable in my view. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional

158 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

circumstances to warrant allocation of the land put forward by the objector at Liff for housing development within the local plan review, even as a strategic reserve site.

Recommendation

3.580 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

159 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Logie, by Montrose: Development boundary

Objector Reference

Mr P Salmon 116/1/1 (per J W Soutar)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.581 The issue of concern is the definition of the development boundary for Logie as shown in the finalised local plan review when compared with historical maps of the locality. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.582 It is argued on behalf of the objector that Angus Council in its assessment of the original request to reinstate a particular settlement boundary line for Logie did not appear to have benefitted from historical information or physically checking the site.

3.583 The assessment by the council that a permission at North Craigo would set a precedent if an arbitrary development boundary was set, is regarded by the objector as possible misinterpretation as the proposed site is governed by a house to the south and a track to the north.

The council’s response

3.584 It is stated by the council that, contrary to the assertion by the objector, a review of the historical maps and a site inspection was undertaken in dealing with the representation to the Consultative Draft Angus Local Plan 2003 and prior to publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review (FALPR). The fact that there may have been several properties in this area at one time is not disputed, but development on the ground today consists of 3 houses and a former United Free Church, which is in a state of disrepair. The council points out that there are numerous examples of small groupings in

160 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

the countryside such as Logie, which are too small, dispersed or limited in function to be regarded as a village.

3.585 Development boundaries have been defined around those settlements which are recognisable as such in terms of their size, physical character and/or function and facilities in order to protect their landscape setting and to prevent uncontrolled growth.

3.586 In the case of Logie, in the council’s view it is not appropriate to establish a development boundary at this location, particularly as this would set a precedent for numerous other locations throughout Angus. The council points out that the development boundary put forward by the objector is undefined to the east and would effectively break into a large agricultural field with no existing form of enclosure.

3.587 In relation to the comparison with North Craigo, a development boundary for this settlement was established by the Rural Angus Local Plan (1991). At that time North Craigo included significantly more residential properties than Logie, a primary school serving a rural catchment and a commercial garage. In order to support the existing primary school, in recognition of the general population decline in this part of Angus and given that North Craigo was one of the larger settlements in the locality, provision was made for a limited level of new development. This included the strip of land on the north side of the village referred to by the objector. In the council’s view, the situation at North Craigo is therefore entirely different to that at Logie. The development boundary as originally established in 1991 has been continued by the Adopted Angus Local Plan (2000) and the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.588 The council points out that outwith development boundaries the countryside housing policies of the local plan provide the framework for the assessment of development proposals. The absence of a development boundary does not necessarily obstruct new development. It points out that in the case of Logie, planning permission has been approved (subject to a S75 Agreement) for a small infill development (for 3 houses) between the existing cottage and the public road in accordance with Local Plan policies.

Conclusions

3.589 I note the arguments put forward by the objector with reference to historic maps of the area and the existence of local ruins. I am not persuaded, however, that these arguments in themselves would justify the provision of a development boundary for Logie, as proposed. After making a site inspection I endorse the arguments and concerns put forward by the council in response to the specific points in this objection. I am satisfied that the council has adopted a systematic and rigorous approach in dealing with the issue as to whether or not there should be a development boundary for Logie. I am persuaded by the evidence it has presented, including reference to historic maps and concerning the development history and particular characteristics of the area today. I conclude, therefore, that there is no justification for amending the finalised local plan review to address the concerns raised on behalf of the objector in this particular case.

161 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Recommendation

3.590 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

162 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Lundie: Development boundary

Objector Reference

Drivers Jonas 834/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.591 The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan. The development boundary for Lundie is shown on P245 of the finalised local plan review, together with the boundary of the Lundie conservation area. The objection seeks to extend the development boundary westwards as far as the western boundary of the conservation area and suggests that it could also extend southwards, again to be consistent with the conservation area boundary.

Basis of the objection

3.592 In the objectors’ view it would be logical to extend the development boundary of Lundie westwards to encompass the village hall, Smithy Cottage and Sawmill Cottage located at the western end of the village. This is based on the contention that these properties are within the local conservation area covering the village and clearly form part of the village area. It is suggested that the development boundary should also be extended southwards to include the whole conservation area. It is argued that this would allow limited but controlled development at Lundie and ease pressure on the surrounding area.

The council’s response

3.593 The council considers that Lundie is a small rural settlement with community facilities that are limited to a church and village hall. It points out that the development boundary for Lundie in FALPR was re-defined to reflect the main part of the built area of the village and to protect the qualities of the conservation area. Whilst acknowledging that the village hall, Smithy Cottage and Sawmill Cottage and the Old Manse are all within the conservation area and have links with the wider Lundie Village group of houses the council considers that it is not appropriate to amend the development

163 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

boundary to include the whole conservation area. It contends if the above listed properties were included in an extended development boundary this would also include intervening green spaces which are important to the character, setting and appearance of the village. The council is concerned that the objector’s proposal could lead to development pressures, primarily for housing, that would be detrimental to the setting and character of the village and the conservation area.

3.594 The council points out that the supply of 1216 houses identified for the South Angus HMA within the finalised local plan review already meets the full housing allowance of 1045 houses for this area set out in the approved structure plan for the period to 2011. It also notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites either under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. Finally, it points out that the above allocations do not include the potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites within existing settlements in South Angus, identified in the finalised plan review, or any other windfall sites that may come forward. On this basis it argues that there is no justification on housing supply grounds to include potential development sites within the development boundary of Lundie. It states that development proposals for sites lying outwith development boundaries would be considered against Policy S1 and the countryside housing policies of the finalised plan review.

3.595 The council concludes that no change in policy is justified in this case

Conclusions

3.596 The objector in this case seeks to change the Lundie village boundary to conform to the conservation area boundary, on the basis that this would be logical and would allow limited but controlled development and ease pressure on the surrounding countryside. There is no dispute that the village hall, Smithy Cottage and Sawmill Cottage along with The Manse are all part of Lundie village. Nevertheless, I endorse the concerns of the council that the inclusion of these properties within an extended development boundary, westwards and southwards, for the village would place development pressure on the intervening open areas of ground. I am persuaded by the council’s argument that these green spaces within the conservation area are important and need to be safeguarded to maintain the character, setting and appearance of the village. Based on the arguments put forward by the council, I am also satisfied that there is no justification on housing supply grounds to merit extending the development boundary of Lundie to allow limited growth, merely as a means of easing any pressure on the surrounding countryside. I note that there are policies in the finalised local plan that are specifically aimed at addressing proposals for countryside developments.

Recommendation

3.597 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

164 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Memus: Settlement boundary

Objector Reference

Kirriemuir Landward East Community Council 226/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.598 Memus lies to the north of Kirriemuir.

3.599 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement.

3.600 The objection site is adjacent to the Drovers Inn at the southern entrance to the village. There is a substantial car park adjacent to the road next to which there is a children’s play area and, in turn, a small paddock beyond which there is open countryside.

Basis of the objection

3.601 Land south of the Drovers Inn contravenes Policy SC5, Countryside Housing – Greenfield Sites (b) Category 2 RSUs. An adequate level of development is taking place in Memus but the objection site could lead to a large area of ribbon development which would have a major detrimental impact on character of the village. An unacceptable strain would be put on local services if houses were to be built. Development related to the Drovers Inn which would encourage tourism would be acceptable.

The council’s response

3.602 The paddock is distinct from the agricultural field beyond with a ditch, trees and shrubs along the boundary. Inclusion of the land within the settlement would allow the business development of the Drovers Inn.

3.603 Planning permission has been granted for the erection of a house and guest/staff accommodation in the paddock to the west of the Drovers Inn car park. The development proposed includes a building with 8 guest bedrooms, 2 staff bedrooms and ancillary accommodation and a house for the manager of the Drovers Inn. The planning permission is subject to an agreement in terms of section 75 of the 1997 Act to restrict the occupancy, resale or letting of the manager’s house to a person or persons employed as the manager(s) of the Drovers Inn and to limit the number of houses on the site to one.

165 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Conclusions

3.604 Events have overtaken the local plan review preparation process to the extent that planning permission has been granted on part of the objection site for development related to the Drovers Inn. The type of development proposed is acceptable to the community council and I agree that it is appropriate for the settlement boundary to incorporate the site for which planning permission has been granted.

3.605 Whilst there is no reason to believe that the required section 75 agreement will not be concluded to allow the approved development to take place, the implementation of any planning permission cannot be guaranteed. Indeed a further application for planning permission for a different type of development could be lodged. As I agree with the community council that housing on the objection site would be incongruous, I consider it would be prudent to highlight the area and with an annotation to the effect that the land is reserved for development related to the adjacent inn. This approach would reflect the principle of paragraph 1.28 of the local plan review which states that the presence of a boundary does not indicate that all areas of ground within that boundary have development potential. If this is thought to be inappropriate, a village statement should be included to explain the proposed land use on the objection site.

Recommendation

3.606 I recommend the settlement boundary should be retained as shown in the local plan review and the area for which planning permission has been granted highlighted with the annotation “Land reserved for development related to the Drovers Inn”.

3.607 Alternatively a village statement should be included explaining that the objection site is allocated for development related to the adjacent inn premises.

166 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Monikie: Omission

Objector Reference

Mrs M A Fyvie 206/1/1 (per I G MacDonald &Co)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.608 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.609 Following the upgrading of the existing sewage treatment works and construction of new attenuation pond for surface water drainage - all associated with the existing permissions to build 22 social rented houses and 37 private houses on the former granary site at Monikie - it is argued on behalf of the objector that there is surplus capacity to accommodate further housing in Monikie. In particular, it is proposed that such additional housing should be allocated on the land to the west of Panmure Road, at the rear of the former Fiddlers Public House premises. It is noted that in the conclusions section of the Report following the Public Inquiry relating to the adopted Angus Local Plan (2000), the Reporter at that time stated that the principle of housing on the site in question was not in dispute.

The council’s response

3.610 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule

167 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.611 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.612 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.613 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.614 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient

168 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.615 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.616 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.617 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.618 With specific reference to this objection, the council states the site to the rear of the Fiddlers public house premises lies outwith the development boundary of Monikie, established when the existing local plan was adopted in 2000. It notes that a similar objection for this area of land was considered at the public inquiry into objections to the finalised version of that plan in 2000 but the Reporter concluded then that given the priority attached to the redevelopment of the browndfield former granary site in Monikie the ground to the west of the Fiddlers Public House should not be allocated. The recently granted planning permissions for 22 social rent houses and 37 private houses on the former granary site are currently being implemented.

3.619 Based on all of these considerations, the council recommends no change to the finalised local plan review.

Conclusions

3.620 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the

169 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.621 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.622 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.623 In this context, I now turn to consider whether making a new housing land allocation on the ground to the rear (west) of the Fiddlers Public House premises in Monikie, as proposed by the objector, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the area put forward - whilst reasonably well defined by existing housing to the north and south and by the vacant Fiddlers Public House premises and houses along Panmure Road to the east - is essentially open agricultural land with no effective boundary to the west. I do not consider that the fact that there may be some spare capacity in the local sewage and drainage systems is sufficient justification for the site in question to be allocated for new housing. The implementation of the existing permissions for a total of 59 additional dwellings in Monikie will result in a substantial increase in the local housing stock and population of Monikie, which is a village of around 400 persons with a limited range of local services. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant allocation of the land to the west of the Fiddlers public house premises in Monikie for housing development within the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.624 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

170 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Muirdrum: Omission

Objector Reference

W & P Braid And Sons 888/1/1 (per Gary Sinclair Architecture)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.625 There is widespread development pressure in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.626 It is argued on behalf of the objectors that the land bounded by the Panlathy Burn and the old and new alignments of the A92 road, which is situated to the north-east of the Muirdrum village, should be included within the settlement boundary of Muirdrum. It is argued that the site, as a result of its size, shape and contouring, is completely unworkable for agriculture using modern methods. In the objectors’ view the inclusion of this landlocked site within the development boundary of Muirdrum would enhance the village by providing an opportunity for areas of open space and possible small-scale retail (village shop) development as well limited residential development, including affordable housing provision. It is contended that appropriate development of the site in question could provide a new entrance to the village from the north-east and create a logical termination for village development where the old and new A92 roadways converge. IN the objectors’ view this would represent an opportunity for real planning gain from the newly dualled A92 road by-passing the village.

The council’s response

3.627 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

171 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.628 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.629 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

172 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.630 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.631 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.632 In this strategic context, the council gives consideration to the site in question. It notes that the ground concerned has been annexed from larger land parcels by the construction of the Muirdrum By-Pass as part of the A92 upgrading project. It contends that as the objection site is situated in open countryside approximately 120m east of the development boundary of Muirdrum it is physically and visually separated from the village. It notes that Muirdrum is a small settlement with no services and facilities where a small number of houses have been built on brownfield sites in recent years thereby consolidating the village group. In the council’s view the objection site would extend the village in a linear manner, along the original route of the A92, into open countryside. In the council’s view this would not be appropriate.

Conclusions

3.633 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.634 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.635 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual

173 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.636 In this context, I now turn to consider whether an extension of the development boundary of Muirdrum eastwards to incorporate the objection site should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the area put forward by the objectors is a wedge of undulating open land situated between the old and new alignments of the A92 road and bounded to the south by Panlathy Burn. As such I consider that it is well defined and I also accept that it is a difficult piece of ground to operate as an agricultural unit. This, however, is not sufficient justification to allow the site to be incorporated into the development boundary of Muirdrum, particularly when the land concerned is physically remote from the existing village of Muirdrum. Its isolation from the village is emphasised by the intervening Panlathy Burn being in a deep valley. Furthermore, the arguments presented by the objectors - regarding the scope for the site in question to enhance Muirdrum village by providing retail and residential developments and to create a gateway feature with open space for the benefit of the village residents - are not persuasive. Indeed, the suggestion that this site could act as an eastern gateway to Muirdrum is not feasible, as there is no opportunity to leave the newly dualled A92 road from the direction of the objection site in order to enter the village via the redundant section of the old A92 road.

3.637 In this context, I am persuaded by the council’s argument that the proposed linear development of the village into open countryside would be undesirable. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant extension of the development boundary of Muirdrum to incorporate the objection site in this case.

Recommendation

3.638 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

174 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Newbigging by Carnoustie: Omission

Objector Reference

Newbigging South-East Tighmore & R Watson 351/1/1 (per GVA Grimley)

Newbigging South-West Linlathen Developments Ltd 918/1/1 (per D Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Formal inquiry Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.639 The two objections, which were the subject of a conjoined formal inquiry, concern proposed housing land allocations for two separate sites at Newbigging – one to the west and one to the south-east of the existing settlement. There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. Another issue of specific concern at Newbigging is the capacity of the local drainage system to serve new developments in the area. This settlement, with a resident population of approximately 500, has a primary school, shop/post office and a petrol station/garage which serve the village and the surrounding area.

Basis of the objections

Newbigging South-East (Tighmore & R Watson)

3.640 It is contended that the FALPR should include an allocation of land to the south- east of Newbigging for residential development and extend the settlement boundary of the village to encompass the site. The case in support of the objection makes reference to national planning policies, in particular SPP3 and SPP15, as well as policies of the approved structure plan and the finalised local plan review (FALPR). It is pointed out that current planning policy aims to:

• Sustain and support local facilities and services

175 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• Deliver sustainable communities and mixed communities; and • Promote selective modest growth for communities with a population of not more than 3,000 people.

3.641 It is noted that the last of the above aims is set out in SPP15 (Planning for Rural Development) which post-dates publication of the FALPR. It is also pointed out that the adopted Angus Local Plan (2000) sought to provide for limited growth of Newbigging by extending the settlement boundary and allocating land for 20 new houses at the northern end of the village. With local population declining and the school operating at 40% capacity, it is argued that there is a greater need now than in 2000 to make an allocation for new housing here and residential expansion in rural areas is supported by national planning policy in SPP15 (published in 2004). It is contended that failure to make provision for selective modest growth of Newbigging would undermine the planning policy objectives of sustaining and supporting local facilities and services and may contribute to the loss of local services in Newbigging. Furthermore, in the objectors’ view it would waste an opportunity to facilitate the provision of modern affordable housing and to utilise spare capacity in the upgraded local waste water treatment plant and the local primary school.

3.642 The objectors, in support of their proposed site, argue that it is suitable for residential use and has no flooding constraints. It is pointed out that in its 1998 consultation draft local plan the council identified the site for up to 40 housing units. It is noted that the new housing development approved by the council and currently under construction at the northern end of the village is extremely prominent when approaching from the north and does not benefit from any inherent three-dimensional landscape capacity such as tree belts or landform enclosure. It is argued that the Tighmore site can be developed in a sensitive manner which relates well to the village form, in a similar manner to the new development at the northern end of the village.

3.643 It is noted that the alternative site (to the west of Newbigging being put forward by other objectors) has no local plan pedigree and has not been the subject of a landscape appraisal by its promoters. It is pointed out that the boundaries on the south and west of the Tighmore site are more defensible than the boundaries (to the south and west) of the alternative site. It is also argued that, notwithstanding concerns expressed by the council’s countryside officer on landscape and visual matters, a professional appraisal of the Tighmore site has demonstrated its defensible boundaries and how the proposed development would integrate with the layout of the village, enhancing its southern entrance and its overall appearance. Furthermore, as well as offering affordable houses, the benefits of the Tighmore proposals include an informal village green, upgrading the children’s play area and improving the football pitch, as well as enhanced landscaping and footpaths and providing a pedestrian crossing. It is noted that no such benefits are proposed in respect of the alternative site proposed to the west of the village.

3.644 The Tighmore proposal envisages that the new housing being developed there would be served by a private foul drainage system. Whilst noting that SEPA maintains an objection in principle to such systems, based on its concerns regarding enforcement, it is

176 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

also noted that SEPA accepts that such systems are technically viable. It is suggested that SEPA’s concerns could be addressed by means of a suspensive condition that no house shall be occupied until connected to a public drainage system or by a bond being put in place for complete replacement of the foul drainage system.

3.645 The objectors take issue with the claim made on behalf of the other objectors (relating to the site to the west of Newbigging) to the effect that there is an agreement in place with Scottish Water whereby that objector provides and maintains an upgraded waste water treatment service for Newbigging and in return can dictate who can and who cannot connect to that system over a period of 5 years. It is contended that Scottish Water has a legal duty to provide sewerage facilities where they are available and cannot refuse connection by ‘reserving’ capacity for a particular person. It is noted that SNH and Scottish Water as well as Angus Council (as Roads and Health authorities) have no objections in principle to development of the Tighmore site. The objector takes issue with the council’s contention that there are a significant number of objections from local residents. It also points out that, in any event, what is relevant is whether the substance of any objections is well founded and, if so, whether they can be properly dealt with by means of a planning condition or planning agreement.

3.646 Finally, it is argued that there may be a strategic case for the council to redistribute housing land allowances in Angus to enable the land to the south-east of Newbigging to be allocated for residential use in the local plan. In the event that there is no such strategic requirement to redistribute the housing land allowances, it is contended that the proposal would still be justified to provide modest growth and a better range of housing choice for the rural community, whilst supporting local facilities and services.

Newbigging West (Linlathen Developments Ltd)

3.647 It is argued on behalf of Linlathen Developments that housing land supply is not delivering housing sites to meet the demand for mainstream and affordable houses, based on the requirements set out in the approved structure plan for Dundee and Angus. It is noted that monitoring of housing land supply is a statutory requirement and where it is not delivering it is incumbent on authorities to allocate alternative sites to meet the structure plan requirements. It is pointed out that the objector’s site to the west of Newbigging is available immediately to meet market demand for both mainstream and affordable houses and is unconstrained. As a result of considerable private investment by the objector drainage is available to serve the site concerned. There has been no evidence presented by the council to suggest that the site concerned is not effective and the sole concern of the council relates to the overall housing land supply.

3.648 It is stated that there is a commitment from a private housebuilder and from a housing association to form joint housing developers for the site concerned to provide both mainstream and affordable houses here - and the site is registered with Communities Scotland. An illustrative layout shows that the 5.5ha site has capacity for 46 new dwellings comprising 24 private houses and 22 affordable rented/shared ownership units.

177 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The same private housebuilder is currently constructing 20 new houses at the northern end of Newbigging and 19 of these had already been sold at the time of the local plan inquiry.

3.649 It is noted that the objectors promoting the Tighmore site to the south-east of the village have stated that they have no objection to the Linlathen Developments site to the west of Newbigging. Whilst Tighmore had held initial talks with a housing association to explore the possibilities for providing affordable housing their site was not registered with Communities Scotland. It is pointed out that, if developed, the Tighmore site would require children living there to cross the main road in order to access the local primary school, which would not be the case for the Linlathen Developments site. It is also noted that the Tighmore site is proposing a private drainage scheme that would not comply with the council’s policies for foul drainage. Furthermore, it is contended that the Tighmore site could not be regarded as ‘effective’ in terms of the criteria outlined in SPP3 and PAN38 as Scottish Water object to private drainage schemes in areas where there is a mains drainage system, even if there is no spare capacity.

3.650 It is argued that the objection site to the west of Newbigging could be developed satisfactorily in an appropriate landscape setting as the adjoining landowner is agreeable to a structured landscape treatment along the margins of the site. It is noted that the council’s observations on landscape impact matters were based on impressions not on any study. It is entirely predictable that any development that expanded the village of Newbigging would have an impact on its current setting, as is the case arising from the new housing being completed at the northern end of the settlement. It is pointed out that the council did not request an impact statement from the applicants upon submission of that particular application and none was carried out by the council before re-affirming the status of that site in the FALPR.

3.651 There is no disagreement that there is an acute problem facing the council regarding the provision of affordable housing. In this regard the council witness accepted that there was no prospect of achieving the target figure identified in the local housing strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA. It is suggested on behalf of the objector that positive initiatives taken by Linlathen Developments and their development partners will be the only means by which such housing can be delivered locally within the life of the local plan review. It is argued in this context that the Western Strategy cannot deliver to the degree or timetable outlined in the approved structure plan. Based on these considerations it is contended that additional allocations need to be made in areas that can deliver, not only to satisfy the market but also to bring forward the affordable housing identified by the council as being required.

The council’s response

The strategic context

3.652 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites

178 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.653 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.654 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.655 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. It points out that any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.656 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft

179 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.657 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.658 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

The Newbigging Context

3.659 In the above context the council considers firstly, that the allocation of either of the 2 objection sites put forward would potentially result in a structure plan conformity issue. Secondly, it agues that there is no logic to amending the current boundaries of Newbigging without a need for further housing when the current development boundary is logical and defensible. Furthermore, the council’s landscape officer has indicated that in his view development of either of the 2 objection sites would have a significant impact in landscape and visual terms. It is pointed out that the scale of development proposed by these objectors would be significant in the context of Newbigging, both individually and cumulatively. The 20 houses currently being constructed on the allocated site at the northern end of the village are increasing the housing stock of Newbigging by 20% and so any further development of the scale proposed by either of the objectors would impact on the character of the village. It is noted that there has been a significant level of community opposition to each of these proposals. The council disputes the contention made on behalf of the objectors that local facilities in the village are under significant threat. It argues therefore that the new housing proposed cannot be justified solely on the basis of supporting local services which are in need.

180 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

In respect of the Tighmore proposal specifically:

3.660 The council points out that this objection site lies outwith the development boundary established by the Angus Local Plan adopted in 2000. A similar objection for this area was considered at the Public Local Inquiry in 2000 into the Finalised Angus Local Plan. The Reporter concluded that land should be allocated on a site to the north of Newbigging in preference to the objection site. The Local Plan was subsequently adopted in 2000 including site Nb/H1 : Newbigging North which allocated 1.1ha of land for 20 houses and planning permission was subsequently granted for the development. Construction on the site has commenced and was almost completed by the time of the local plan inquiry.

3.661 This objection was considered by Angus Council on 8 September 2005 when it was decided not to modify the FALPR. The objector lodged an outline planning application for the development of 30 houses on the objection site on 29 September 2005 and this attracted a significant number of objections from local residents and a formal objection from Monikie and Newbigging Community Council. That application was refused planning permission by the council in March 2006.

In respect of the Linlathen Developments proposal specifically:

3.662 The council points out that this objection site also lies outwith the development boundary established by the Angus Local Plan adopted in 2000. In the context of the allocation made at the northern end of the village which is nearing completion – as detailed above –the Linlathen Developments objection was considered by Angus Council on 8 September 2005 when it was decided not to modify the FALPR. The objector lodged an outline planning application for the development of 46 mixed tenure houses on the objection site on 20 September 2005 and this attracted a significant number of objections from local residents and a formal objection from Monikie and Newbigging Community Council. That application was refused planning permission by the council in March 2006.

3.663 The council notes that the Community Council were consulted on the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review and made no objection to the strategy and land allocation for Newbigging village.

The written observations of Monikie and Newbigging Community Council on the two local plan objections

3.664 The local community council wrote to Angus Council on 2 November 2005 separately concerning each of the 2 sites raising the following points of concern in respect to both of the proposals:

• Potentially contrary to the local plan policies H7 and ENV4 • The sites are not allocated in the FALPR

181 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• Too many greenfield sites are used for other purposes and there is an excessive number of houses for the local area • Newbigging should remain a village and not be allowed to lose its identity by growing into a dormitory area for commuters • The local sewerage system is operatng at full capacity and the developer would have to finance any upgrading of the sewage works with disposal to be approved by Scottish Water and SEPA • Any development could cause severe traffic problems and pedestrian/vehicle conflicts on Pitairlie Road

3.665 In addition the only comment made by the community council which was exclusive to one of the objection sites only was to draw attention to the fact that the Tighmore proposal puts forward a drainage scheme that does not comply with local plan policy.

Personal Statement by Dr T E Isles

3.666 During the course of the hearing Dr Isles, a resident of Newbigging, made a request to issue a personal written statement and as there there no objection from any party this was accepted. In summary, his statement expressed strong opposition, on behalf of the large majority of local residents he said, to both the Tighmore and Linlathen Developments proposals for Newbigging which he regarded as being out of keeping with the nature and scale of the village. In particular, he was concerned that such developments would have a marked detrimental effect on the environment, water supply and drainage of Newbigging as well as on its resident community, both socially and in amenity terms. Based on all of these factors he urged that the objection sites should be firmly rejected. Details of the on-going discussions with Scottish Water concerning the upgrading of the local drainage facilities serving Newbigging to address local capacity constraints were also presented.

Conclusions

Strategic Issues

3.667 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.668 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here,

182 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.669 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.670 In this context, I now turn to consider below whether either or both of the objections should be accepted on an exceptional basis.

The Tighmore Site (to the south-east of Newbigging)

3.671 I note that the case put forward by these objectors includes reference to the site concerned being previously considered as a possible option, but rejected in favour of the site (Nb/H1) at the northern end of the village in the adopted local plan in 2000. In my view, the fact that site Nb/H1 is now almost completed is not sufficient reason to now proceed with the Tighmore site, particularly when there is currently no strategic housing land shortfall to address in the HMA, for the reasons outlined above. I am also not persuaded by the other arguments put forward by the objectors, relating to potential benefits of the Tighmore scheme in sustaining local facilities and services and improving the range of housing types in this rural area. Instead I endorse council’s view, supported by the community council and the representation made by a local resident, that the village is not in need of additional housing, particularly given the current addition of 20 new houses which represents a 20% boost to the stock, and will result in more than modest growth of this rural community. Furthermore the arguments based on the suggestion that the local services are under threat are not persuasive. Whilst the prospect of providing some affordable housing would be beneficial locally and in contributing to meeting the council’s overall targets in this regard, I do not consider that this in itself merits an allocation of 30 houses on the Tighmore site, when other criteria are not satisfied. Similarly the prospect of the Tighmore proposal incorporating a village green and an improved children’s play and pitch facilities, whilst potentially beneficial locally, are not in my view sufficient to outweigh the fact that there is no strategic or local justification for the proposed new housing.

3.672 I note that there has been mention by the other objectors and the community council of potential traffic problems and possible road safety conflicts arising from the Tighmore site, being on the opposite side of the main road from the primary school. I do not, however, regard these issues as critical, particularly when the proposal from Tighmore includes the provision of new pedestrian crossing. In terms of its location, I

183 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

am more concerned that in visual terms both the Tighmore site and the Linlathen Developments site would be highly visible, particularly when approaching Newbigging from the south. The fact that the site Nb/H1 is highly visible approaching from the north is not sufficient reason to say that future expansions of the village to the south-east or south-west should be accommodated without consideration of the landscape setting and the impact on the village, incrementally and cumulatively. These and related landscape appraisal details are matters that I would explore in more detail only if I had been persuaded that there was a case made satisfactorily in principle for an additional housing allocation in Newbigging.

3.673 I note the issues raised and associated correspondence presented concerning the proposal for a private drainage system to serve the Tighmore site unless spare capacity can be provided by the public water treatment works. This is in the context of the Linlathen Developments objectors having provided funds for an expansion of the water treatment (SWT) works serving Newbigging and contending that they have been given assurances by Scottish Water that the increased capacity would be in their control for a period of 5 years, thereby making it unavailable for use by the Tighmore promoters or others if they wished. I do not consider it appropriate or necessary for me to explore these local drainage issues in detail when, based on the strategic and other considerations outlined above, I am not persuaded that the principle of a new housing allocation on the Tighmore site is merited in the finalised local plan review at this time.

The Linlathen Developments Site (to the west of Newbigging)

3.674 Most of the strategic arguments regarding housing land supply put forward by these objectors have been addressed by me earlier. I note that the case put forward by the objectors includes reference to the fact that their proposal for 46 new dwellings would include 22 affordable/shared ownership units. As I stated in respect of the Tighmore objection, whilst the prospect of providing some affordable housing would be beneficial locally and in meeting the council’s overall targets in this regard, I do not consider that this, or the fact that the site is registered with Communities Scotland, is sufficient to merit a housing allocation of the scale proposed on the Linlathen Developments site when other criteria are not satisfied. Similarly, the objectors’ contention that the site concerned is ‘effective’ in terms of the criteria outlined in SPP3 and PAN38, including with regard to drainage provision, does not outweigh my other concerns, outlined above.

3.675 In terms of its location, as stated earlier, I am concerned that in visual terms the Linlathen Developments site would be highly visible when approaching Newbigging from the south. I would reiterate that the fact that the site Nb/H1 is highly visible approaching from the north is not sufficient reason to say that future expansions of the village to the south-east or south-west should be accommodated without consideration of the landscape setting and the impact on the village, incrementally and cumulatively. I regard the Linlathen Development site as being particularly difficult to screen adequately or to provide a suitable landscape setting for, because of its exposed situation. As stated earlier, these and related landscape appraisal details are matters that I would explore in

184 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

more detail only if I had been persuaded that a case had been made satisfactorily in principle for an additional housing allocation in Newbigging.

Summary of Conclusions

3.676 In the context of the strategic and local issues I have dealt with above, on balance I am persuaded by the arguments put forward by the council and the local representations, rather than by the objectors. Accordingly, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant either the Tighmore or Linlathen Development sites being allocated for housing or for the development boundary of Newbigging to be amended to encompass either of these sites at this time.

Recommendation

3.677 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

185 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Newbigging by Tealing: Omission

Objector Reference

Ian Reid 937/1/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.678 The issue of concern is the development boundary of Newbigging by Tealing.

Basis of the objection

3.679 The objector accepts that the local plan must comply with the approved structure plan. Nevertheless it is argued that there is very little housing land allocation in South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA with the vast majority of the allocation in that HMA being in Dundee at the Western Gateway where there are serious constraints impeding delivery of housing. Furthermore it is contended that alternative housing land releases require to be made as housing land supply is not keeping pace with housing demand in South Angus, which necessitates ad hoc releases of non-allocated land to fill the gap.

3.680 In this context, it is argued on behalf of the objector that the development boundary of Newbigging by Tealing shown in the finalised local plan review (P256) should be amended to include a site situated immediately to the east of the dwelling known as Colinian and to the north of the house known as End Rigg. The objector considers the land in question, which formerly had RAF buildings on it, to be a housing site. The site still has evidence of former buildings on it and cannot be used for agricultural purposes and so remains vacant. It is noted that despite planning officials of the council conceding that it constituted a brownfield site, a planning application for 3 houses on the site was refused permission in 2004 for being outwith the development boundary. It is argued that as the finalised local plan review was published prior to SPP15 it does not reflect current national planning policy urging planning authorities to be pro- active in relation to rural development and to be more flexible and supportive of farm diversification. Inclusion of the site within the development boundary would enable it to be considered for beneficial use as a housing site.

186 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.681 The council notes that the site concerned lies outwith the development boundary established by the adopted local plan in 2000. Prior to its adoption, a similar objection was considered at the local plan inquiry in 2000. The Reporter at that time concluded that whilst the objection site had the appearance of having been annexed from the larger remaining part of the arable field to the east and although the foundations of wartime structures were visible along the western edge of the site they were not extensive enough to classify the whole site as brownfield. In that context the Reporter recommended no change to the development boundary.

3.682 The council argues that there has been no material change in circumstances to warrant inclusion of the site within the development boundary and to do so would result in the loss of agricultural land and could create a precedent for further applications to extend the boundary into open countryside. It regards the site concerned as being in the countryside adjacent to a small settlement that has no services or facilities. It also notes that the village is served by a septic tank with no capacity in the nearby waste water treatment plant to accommodate additional housing. The council notes that since publication of the finalised local plan review, it has granted planning permission for 2 houses on separate sites within the existing development boundary of the village, with a further planning application for a single house pending a decision. It points out that these permissions have been granted in line with the existing local plan policy framework. Furthermore the council has also granted permission outwith but immediately to the east of the development boundary of Newbigging by Tealing for an essential worker’s house, to support an existing farm business, and for a farmer’s market/coffee shop and associated parking as part of a farm diversification project.

Conclusions

3.683 I note that in its consideration of the application for planning permission for 3 houses on the objection site in 2004 the council did not dispute the objector’s contention that there had been buildings previously occupying at least part of the site concerned, evidenced by the existence of two large concrete floors along with associated outhouses. Indeed the council committee report, in its planning considerations section, acknowledged that the site may be able to meet the definition of brownfield land. At that time the majority of representations concerning the application were in support of the application, including reference to it providing an opportunity to tidy-up an unsightly area. There is no evidence of the site in question being returned to productive agricultural use in the period since the last local plan inquiry leading to the adoption of the Angus Local Plan in 2000. I am uncertain as to the precise extent of the site concerned when a ‘similar’ area at this location was considered as an objection at the local plan inquiry in 2000. I note that the Reporter at that time concluded that whilst the objection site then had the appearance of having been annexed from the larger remaining part of the arable field to the east and although the foundations of wartime structures were visible along the western edge of the site, they were not extensive enough to classify the whole site as brownfield. Based on the submissions lodged with me I have no reason to differ from the

187 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

view of the Reporter to that inquiry, particularly concerning the evidence of wartime structures along the western edge of the site – although that unused and derelict area is now so overgrown and inaccessible that it is difficult for me to establish the precise extent of those structures. I consider that there is little if any prospect, in the period of the local plan at least, for the particular area strewn with derelict wartime structures becoming productive for agricultural purposes. I also agree that the corner of the objection site closest to Colinian and End Rigg has become overgrown and unsightly to the point that it detracts from the appearance of the village.

3.684 Whilst noting the drainage concerns and the lack of local facilities and services articulated by the council, I also note that this does not appear to have been an overriding consideration in other cases determined by the council at Newbigging by Tealing recently. In particular, it has not deterred the council from granting a number of recent planning permissions for individual houses and for a farmer’s market/coffee shop on sites in and adjoining the development boundary of the village.

3.685 Based on all of these considerations I am satisfied that the local situation and the development context has changed materially in the period since 2000. Furthermore, I am persuaded by the objector’s arguments concerning the relevance of new national planning policy set out in SPP15 which urges planning authorities to adopt a more flexible approach in rural areas where particular criteria are met satisfactorily. I would not seek to pre-judge any possible planning application for development of the objection site, where a number of planning and technical issues, such as access and drainage, would be required to be examined in some detail. Nevertheless, for the reasons outlined above, I conclude that there is sufficient justification for a marginal revision to the development boundary for Newbigging by Tealing, projecting the northern boundary of the plot shown as Colinian (in an easterly direction) as well as the eastern boundary of the property known as End Rigg (in a northerly direction). This would create an essentially rectangular plot of similar dimensions to that shown for Colinian on the Proposals Map and covering the most visible wartime structures. Given the drainage and access constraints of the site thereby incorporated within the development boundary, it may well only have capacity for a single dwelling house – as at Colinian. In any event, I am satisfied that this marginal extension to the development boundary would not set an unfortunate precedent for further applications for extensions of this particular boundary as the history of the site in question is exceptional in my view.

3.686 Accordingly, I conclude that a marginal extension of the development boundary, as detailed above, should be accepted on an exceptional basis.

Recommendation

3.687 I recommend that the local plan review is modified in this case to extend the development boundary of Newbigging by Tealing to incorporate a broadly rectangular area (as described in detail in my conclusions above) immediately to the east of the property known as Colinian and immediately to the north of the property shown as End Rigg on the Proposals Map (P256 of FALPR). I recommend that the northern edge of the

188 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

revised boundary should be a continuation eastwards of the development boundary above Colinian (and NOT as shown on the drawing accompanying the objection which has been annotated to show 3 dwellings on an overall plot that projects further northwards) with the eastern boundary following the same alignment as the eastern boundary of the plot known as End Rigg.

189 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Newbigging by Tealing: Omission - land at Leyshade Farm

Objector Reference

P & S Developments 930/1/2

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.688 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.689 The objector notes that there are relatively few housing sites allocated in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA with the vast majority of the allocation in that HMA being in Dundee at the Western Gateway where there are serious constraints impeding delivery of housing. It is contended that alternative housing land releases are required to be make up the shortfall in housing land supply at the end of the first five year period of the approved structure plan.

3.690 In this context, it is argued on behalf of the objector that there are alternative residential development sites in the Newbigging by Tealing area which could provide both mainstream and affordable housing. This includes the site at Leyshade Farm where 64 houses are proposed, along with modest local services associated with the development and for which layouts are being prepared. It is contended, therefore, that the finalised local plan review should be amended to include allocation of this particular site, to the north-east of Newbigging by Tealing.

190 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.691 The council points out that the wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.692 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.693 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.694 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.695 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA

191 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.696 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.697 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.698 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.699 At a more detailed level, the council points out that the objection site is located in the open countryside, unrelated to any settlement and is in an area not served by public drainage. In addition, as the site is close to the A90(T) road there may also be issues regarding increased vehicular use of the current at grade junction that would serve the proposed development. Following a representation to the Consultative Draft Local Plan by the Scottish Executive Trunk Roads Division (regarding at grade junctions on the A90(T) and the Scottish Ministers policy of seeking closure of central reserve gaps on road safety grounds), paragraph 2.101 of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review was amended to include the following statement:-

"In relation to the A90(T), Scottish Ministers have established a policy of closing central reserve gaps on road safety grounds when finance is available and/or the

192 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

opportunity arises. Consequently there will be a general presumption by the Scottish Executive against development proposals, which result in an increase in the use of a central reserve gap, or it would prevent or inhibit the closure of a central reserve gap. In addition the establishment of new junctions or new junctions incorporating a central reserve gap on the trunk road network will be resisted."

3.700 The council notes that there were no third party objections to the revised paragraph (2.101) set out in the Finalised Local Plan Review (P51). As far as Angus Council is aware this remains the position of the Scottish Executive in relation to development adjacent to the A90(T) road. However, a number of objections to the Finalised Local Plan, by developers and landowners, promote the inclusion of land for housing (including this site at Leyshade Farm) for housing on sites adjacent to the A90(T) Dundee - Aberdeen Road in the Inveraldie/Tealing area. In light of the Scottish Ministers policy detailed above, the Scottish Executive was consulted (in July 2005) over the potential impact, either individually or cumulatively, of traffic generated from additional housing sites on the existing at grade junctions on the A90(T). No response had been received by the time of the local plan inquiry [or by the time of drafting of this report].

Conclusions

3.701 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.702 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the potential for providing more affordable housing, including retirement housing, should additional land be released. As stated earlier in this report “whilst to some extent seductive in view of the large unidentified need for affordable housing in South Angus, we share the council’s opinion that the provision of affordable housing is a subservient requirement to the broader structure plan strategy.”

193 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.703 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.704 In this context I now turn to consider whether the site at Leyshade Farm should be allocated in the finalised local plan on an exceptional basis. I note that the 3.1ha site is split into two parcels on either side of a lane which serves Leyshade Farm adjoining the site. The site comprises agricultural fields which are isolated from Newbigging by Tealing and accessed via a lane leading eastwards from a nearby small, at-grade junction on the A90 Trunk Road. I am concerned that these access arrangements are not of an appropriate standard to serve the scale of development envisaged, with 62 houses being suggested for the site.

3.705 I am also concerned, not only by the scale of the proposed development, which is substantial in the context of South Angus, but also by the fact that this is a location which is in open countryside, altbeit adjoining farm buildings, and not well served by local facilities and services. I note that the site concerned is not served by public drainage systems. Housing development of the scale proposed would not be sustainable at this location in my view as it would be likely to attact predominantly car-based commuters who would be reliant on car usage for almost all journeys. Accordingly such development would not be in accordance with the principles of the local plan or the structure plan and would be contrary to national planning policy guidance. Furthermore the proposal at this particular location, with its heavy dependance on car usage, would result in additional pressure on the junction of the main trunk road that passes near to the site, which in my view would be undesirable and unnecessary given the strategic housing land allocations already made elsewhere, as outlined above.

3.706 Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to justify allocation of this particular site in the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.707 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

194 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Newbigging by Tealing: Omission - land at Newbigging Farm

Objector Reference

P & S Developments 930/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.708 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.709 The objector notes that there are relatively few housing sites allocated in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA with the vast majority of the allocation in that HMA being in Dundee at the Western Gateway where there are serious constraints impeding delivery of housing. It is contended that alternative housing land releases are required to be make up the shortfall in housing land supply at the end of the first five year period of the approved structure plan.

3.710 In this context, it is argued on behalf of the objector that there are alternative residential development sites in the Newbigging by Tealing area which could provide both mainstream and affordable housing. This includes the site at Newbigging Farm where 102 houses are proposed, along with modest local services associated with the development, and for which layouts are being prepared. It is contended, therefore, that the finalised local plan review (FALPR) should be amended to include allocation of this particular site, to the north and west of the development boundary for Newbigging by Tealing.

195 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.711 The council points out that the wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.712 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.713 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.714 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.715 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA

196 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.716 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.717 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.718 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005). In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review.

3.719 At a more detailed level, the council points out that the objection site is located in the open countryside, unrelated to any settlement and is in an area not served by public drainage. In addition, as the site is adjacent to the A90(T) there may also be issues regarding increased vehicular use of the current at grade junctions. Following a representation to the Consultative Draft Local Plan by the Scottish Executive Trunk Roads Division (regarding at grade junctions on the A90(T) and the Scottish Ministers policy of seeking closure of central reserve gaps on road safety grounds), paragraph 2.101 of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review was amended to include the following statement:-

"In relation to the A90(T), Scottish Ministers have established a policy of closing central reserve gaps on road safety grounds when finance is available and/or the

197 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

opportunity arises. Consequently there will be a general presumption by the Scottish Executive against development proposals, which result in an increase in the use of a central reserve gap, or it would prevent or inhibit the closure of a central reserve gap. In addition the establishment of new junctions or new junctions incorporating a central reserve gap on the trunk road network will be resisted."

3.720 The council notes that there were no third party objections to the revised paragraph (2.101) set out in the Finalised Local Plan Review (P51). As far as Angus Council is aware this remains the position of the Scottish Executive in relation to development adjacent to the A90(T) road. However, a number of objections to the Finalised Local Plan, by developers and landowners, promote the inclusion of land for housing (including this site at Newbigging Farm) for housing on sites adjacent to the A90(T) Dundee - Aberdeen Road in the Inveraldie/Tealing area. In light of the Scottish Ministers policy detailed above, the Scottish Executive was consulted (in July 2005) over the potential impact, either individually or cumulatively, of traffic generated from additional housing sites on the existing at grade junctions on the A90(T). No response had been received by the time of the local plan inquiry [or by the time of drafting of this report].

Conclusions

3.721 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.722 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the potential for providing more affordable housing, including retirement housing, should additional land be released. As stated earlier in this report “whilst to some extent seductive in view of the large unidentified need for affordable housing in South Angus, we share the council’s opinion that the provision of affordable housing is a subservient requirement to the broader structure plan strategy.”

198 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.723 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.724 In this context I now turn to consider whether the site at Newbigging Farm should be allocated in the finalised local plan on an exceptional basis. I note that the south- eastern corner of the objection site adjoins the development boundary of Newbigging by Tealing. I am concerned, however, that the broadly rectangular 4.8ha site adjoining Newbigging Farm is a very large piece of open agricultual land alongside the A90 Trunk Road, although there is a mature hedge which provides some screening along the western boundary running parallel with the main road. Neverthelss, I consider that its countryside location makes it obtrusive in the open landscape, including when viewed from sections of the trunk road by those driving past the site.

3.725 I am also concerned, not only by the scale of the proposed development, which is very substantial in the context of South Angus, but also by the fact that this is a countryside location which is isolated and not well served by local facilities and services. I also note that the site concerned is not served by public drainage systems. In my view, development of the type and scale proposed would not be sustainable at this location as it would be likely to attact predominantly car-based commuters who would be reliant on car usage for almost all journeys. Accordingly the development proposed would not be in accordance with the principles of the local plan or the structure plan and contrary to the national planning policy guidance. Furthermore, the proposal at this particular location, with its heavy dependance on car usage, would result in additional pressure on the junction of the main trunk road next to the site, which in my view would be undesirable and unnecessary given the strategic housing land allocations already made elsewhere, as outlined above.

3.726 Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to justify allocation of this particular site in the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.727 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

199 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Newtyle: Omission

Objector Reference

Maria Francke 834/1/2 (per Drivers Jonas)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.728 A site at Newtyle previously allocated for housing in the local plan is no longer included in the finalised local plan review which has an altered development boundary. This is the issue of concern for the objector.

Basis of the objection

3.729 It is argued on behalf of the objector that the site previously allocated for housing as N/H2 for 40 houses and within the development boundary of Newtyle should still be allocated. Furthermore, it is pointed out that the development boundary of the settlement has been moved westwards to exclude the site altogether. Whilst it is acknowledged that drainage constraints in the area have had an impact on housing land allocations in Newtyle, it is pointed out that representations have been made to the council regarding proposals for improving the drainage and thereby removing this constraint. Accordingly, the objector seeks reinstatement of site N/H2 and an amendment of the development boundary to include the site concerned.

The council’s response

3.730 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets

200 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.731 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.732 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.733 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

201 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.734 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.735 In this strategic context, the council gives consideration to the site in question at Newtyle. It notes that this site at Glamis Road North was previously identified as a housing opportunity site. The council states that the lack of capacity at the waste water treatment plant and the water quality of the receiving watercourse is currently constraining development at Newtyle. Based on recent consultations with Scottish Water it is understood that future development at Newtyle is dependent on significant private sector investment and that large scale housing developments would be required to generate the necessary capital. Based on all of these considerations, in the council’s view there is no justification for allocating the site in question within the finalised local plan review.

Conclusions

3.736 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.737 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.738 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

202 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.739 In this context, I now turn to consider whether reinstatement of the site N/H2 and an extension of the development boundary at Newtyle eastwards to incorporate the objection site, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. Whilst I note that the site in question was previously identified by the council as a housing opportunity site, I also note that it has given two main reasons to exclude the objection site. In particular, it points to the lack of strategic housing need for an additional housing land allocation, which I endorse for the reasons outlined above, and the local drainage constraints, to justify its deletion of the site formerly known as N/H2 and amendment of the development boundary accordingly. Whilst the objector has made reference to the possibility of addressing the drainage issue, I note that no specific drainage proposals have been put forward for my consideration to support the objector’s case or to address the specific problems of drainage highlighted by the council. Furthermore, the objector has not sought to challenge the strategic arguments put forward by the council regarding housing land allocations in the HMA which, as discussed above, indicate that there is no justification to allocate a further 40 housing units in Newtyle, even if the local drainage issues could be satisfactorily addressed.

3.740 In this context, I conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant reinstatement of the site N/H2 or to justify a corresponding extension of the development boundary of Newtyle eastwards to incorporate the objection site.

Recommendation

3.741 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

203 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

North Craigo: Settlement boundary

Objector Reference

Craigo Farms Ltd 935/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.742 North Craigo lies on a cross roads on the A937 to the north of Montrose and about 1½ miles south of the village of Marykirk.

3.743 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement. The boundary is drawn tightly around existing development.

Basis of the objection

3.744 Lack of any meaningful development has resulted in the village losing its Post Office and primary school. It is now essentially a dormitory settlement with no local services. Limited recent housing development demonstrated that there is a demand and created an interest in the provision of local facilities. However, further housing commensurate with the scale of the village is required to achieve this and prevent eventual social decline. A mixed development is proposed with housing, including an element of affordable housing, a shop or, perhaps, a medical centre, and small scale environmental improvements such as footpaths, amenity areas and landscaping. The shop or medical centre would be located to the north of the village to take advantage of the proximity of Marykirk with which North Craigo operates in tandem. Development would maintain the impetus already generated

3.745 Land is available for development on all sides of the village and any concern about the scale of development and the open nature of the landscape could be resolved in detailed discussions. Modest residential development in a landscaped setting could be absorbed within the framework of the village without detriment to character or amenity. Despite the council’s concern, the local plan review proposes a similar greenfield development at Auchmithie.

3.746 SPP15, Planning for Rural Development, advocates a more flexible approach to development in rural areas. Notwithstanding the continuing importance of SPP3, Planning for Housing, SPP15 states that there is considerable scope for allowing more housing developments of the type proposed. Such development should be within a planned

204 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

framework and so the local plan review offers an opportunity to respond to the terms of SPP15.

3.747 The proposal should also be considered in a strategic context and take account of the arguments on housing land supply, including the failure of the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan to deliver the required contributions to the supply.

The council’s response

3.748 North Craigo is within the Brechin/Montrose housing market area where the available housing land supply meets the full allowance identified in the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan. Indeed, the 2005 housing land audit shows that the supply of housing land in the housing market area provides sufficient land for the period to 2011 along with indicative allowance for the period 2011-2016. A range of brownfield and greenfield sites in Brechin and Montrose and a brownfield site in Edzell have been identified. Directing development to settlements which have infrastructure and access to services is consistent with SPP15

3.749 The local plan review supports new housing on appropriate sites within development boundaries of existing settlements in the rural area. However, the land at North Craigo suggested for development comprises large, open fields with no defined boundaries. The level of development is unspecified and is in a location without services. This is contrary the local plan review development strategy and the principle of sustainability. The need for leisure facilities has not been substantiated. Policy SC24 supports the provision of local shops within development boundaries but no justification for a land allocation has been provided as part of the objection.

3.750 The 12 new houses at North Craigo have been built within the settlement boundary identified in the adopted local plan and which is maintained in the local plan review. These houses almost double the size of the village. There is potential for additional development at the former Craigo Mill, a brownfield site some 300 metres to the east of North Craigo along with infill sites within the settlement boundary.

3.751 Overall, there is no justification for the allocation of additional greenfield land in a rural area.

Conclusions

3.752 In considering objections to the overall level of housing land supply under Policy SC1 it was concluded that the local plan review does not require additional allocations to meet the terms of the structure plan. I therefore share the opinion of the council in this respect and conclude that there is no strategic justification for an additional housing land allocation at North Craigo.

3.753 Insofar as the local plan review is concerned, the majority of development is to be guided to locations within the Angus towns and villages to make use of existing and planned transport and other infrastructure in order to help build sustainable communities. In the light

205 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

of this priority and in view of the review allocation of housing within the Brechin/Montrose housing market area, I conclude that there is no general local plan review justification for additional housing land at North Craigo.

3.754 Turning to the consideration of the objection in a local context, I note that very few details have been provided. It has simply been suggested that a mixed use development could be provided commensurate with the size of the village. As the council points out, the recent development virtually doubles the size of North Craigo. To be in scale, any further development would involve a very limited number of houses. Although no doubt welcome, any affordable housing content would therefore be negligible. It may even be that the threshold for affordable housing provision would not be reached. I also believe the scale of development would be unlikely to sustain a shop or a medical centre. The objector suggests that the proximity of Marykirk would be of assistance but, lacking any substantiation, I do not find this to be a credible consideration.

3.755 No specific site has been suggested as the objector could make land available on all sides of the village. It has been suggested that any new housing could be absorbed. However, without a clearer indication of what is proposed, I can appreciate the council’s concern about impact on the open landscape. North Craigo is a typical cross roads settlement with houses extending to a greater or lesser degree along the main road and the two minor roads. In my opinion, even limited new development is likely to have a significant impact on the generally rural landscape. Landscaping could eventually assist but not to the extent that would overcome my fears.

3.756 On the basis of the foregoing conclusions, I further conclude that there little specific merit in the objection and that the wider policy considerations should be applied. In reaching this conclusion I have noted the guidance contained in SPP15. The SPP advances policy in respect of small scale rural housing developments including clusters and groups in close proximity to settlements. The overall message is that there is considerable scope for allowing more housing developments of this nature and that this should be expressed in development plans. The amount and location of housing in rural areas is determined by a number of factors. I note these factors include proximity to services and fit in the landscape. I have previously considered these matters in terms of North Craigo and have concerns about both the lack of local services and impact on the landscape. SPP15 draws attention to the possibility of the residential conversion of disused sawmills, brickworks etc and the council has pointed out that the former Craigo Mill is a brownfield site close to the village. All-in-all, I conclude that, in this case, rural housing development as requested is not supported by SPP15.

Recommendation

3.757 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of this objection.

206 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

North Dronley: Omission

Objector Reference

Strathallan (Ardargie Mill) Ltd 951/1/1 (per MBM Planning and Development)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.758 The issue of concern is the development boundary of North Dronley, in particular the area of ground situated outwith but between the two discrete parcels of land that are contained within the village development boundary designations in the finalised local plan review. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.759 It is noted on behalf of the objector that the site concerned was originally included within the local plan and had been identified as a housing site for a number of years. It is acknowledged that it was understandable that the council decided to remove the site from the plan given the lack of apparent interest in developing it. The objector notes that whilst development boundaries generally provide a definition between built up areas and the countryside, the site in question is sandwiched between the existing residential properties of North Dronley to the north and south and so cannot be considered to be open countryside. The inclusion of the site in the draft local plan demonstrates that the council previously thought it was suitable for residential development. It is argued that the site should therefore be included within the development plan boundary, so that if a residential development proposal came forward in due course it would accord with the overall plan strategy to be considered as a windfall site within the development boundary under Policy SC3. It is pointed out that this would remove any concerns the council may have about its effectiveness and the contribution towards the housing land supply.

207 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.760 The council notes that the site concerned was identified as ND/H1:Eastfield, and allocated for up to 20 houses, in the adopted local plan of 2000 and had previously been allocated in earlier local plans prepared by Dundee District Council. The adopted Angus Local Plan 2000 identified the requirement for a new waste water treatment plant to serve this site and the remainder of the village. Despite being allocated for development there has been no progress in the site coming forward for development. Accordingly, particularly given the drainage constraint, the site was considered to be non-effective and so deleted from the finalised local plan review. It was in this context that the development plan boundary of North Dronley has been amended accordingly. Although the site is greenfield the council acknowledges that it is sandwiched between existing housing to the north and south and alongside the B954 to the west and a dismantled railway line to the east. Accordingly, the council concedes that it could be considered to lie within the village envelope rather than in open countryside. Nevertheless the council argues that there is a major drainage constraint to be resolved by private sector investment before development of the site could come forward. The site is identified in the Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2004 as part of the constrained supply and so does not form part of the effective housing land supply which counts towards meeting the structure plan housing allowance for the South Angus part of the HMA. If the site was included in the development plan boundary but not allocated for development, any future development proposal here would be assessed against the local plan strategy and policies prevailing at that time. The council states that this may allow the site to come forward for development at some time in the future with issues relating to drainage, road access, site layout etc to be dealt with through any planning application lodged. Given the particular circumstances of the site being considered to form part of the village envelope of North Dronley the council accepts that the development boundary should be amended to include the objection site, but given the non-effective nature of the site it is does not intend to allocate the site for development.

3.761 Based on the above considerations the council set out its proposals to amend the development boundary for North Dronley to include the objection site in the First Round Modifications (P118-119) published in September 2005. On this basis the objection has been conditionally withdrawn.

Conclusions

3.762 I endorse the basis of the objection and the arguments put forward by the council for amending the development boundary of North Dronley as shown in the Proposed Modification text and accompanying plan of September 2005. I also agree with the council that, given the drainage constraints of the area which still remain to be resolved, the site remains non-effective for the time being at least and should not therefore be allocated for housing development within the local plan review.

208 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.763 Based on all of these considerations I conclude that the extension of the development boundary to incorporate the objection site, as agreed by the council and the objector, should be accepted.

Recommendation

3.764 I recommend that the local plan review is modified in this case to extend the development boundary of North Dronley to incorporate the objection site, as set out in the Proposed Modifications put forward by the council in September 2005.

209 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Padanaram: Settlement boundary

Objector Reference

Albamuir Limited 261/2/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.765 Padanaram lies on the A926 to the west of Forfar and immediately beyond the grade separated junction with the A90.

3.766 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement. The boundary is drawn tightly around existing development.

3.767 The objection site extends to 2.4 hectares and is located beyond the open hammerhead of St Ninian’s Road, a residential cul-de-sac. There is built development on three sides of the objection site.

Basis of the objection

3.768 An allocation for residential development is required and this would involve an adjustment to the settlement boundary shown in the local plan review. The site is largely visually contained and should be considered as being infill in character.

3.769 Low cost affordable housing for purchase would be appropriate. Approximately 22 houses could be provided with a mix of detached and semi-detached properties. Access would be provided by extending St Ninian’s Road along with a pedestrian, cycle and emergency access northwards to the A926. There may be a need to upgrade bus stops in the vicinity of the development. It is understood that provision could be made for storm water and foul drainage. Other utilities are also thought to be available.

3.770 Development would be in accordance with national guidance in terms of housing, transport and planning. No material issues would be raised in respect of the strategic guidance in the Dundee and Angus Structure Plan. The local plan review supports the provision of affordable housing on windfall and opportunity sites and a local community group has expressed support for the proposal.

210 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.771 The local plan review directs the majority of development to larger settlements with a range of services and facilities. Padanaram is close to Forfar and relies on the town for all services and facilities. There is a regular bus service and the junction with the A90 allows easy access to Forfar. The proposal for affordable housing has merit and it is intended to modify the settlement boundary to include part of the objection site. This would represent a rounding-off and may allow residential development subject to suitable access and drainage.

3.772 As a consequence of the proposed modification the objection was conditionally withdrawn.

Conclusions

3.773 I believe the objector’s arguments in respect of the infill nature of the site and the potential for low cost affordable housing are convincing and I agree with the council’s assessment of the objection. On this basis, it is appropriate to adjust the settlement boundary. However, despite the conditional withdrawal of the objection, I note that the proposed new line of the settlement boundary would not include the entire objection site. In particular, although a short extension of St Ninian’s Road would be possible, it seems unlikely that a suitable access to the objection site could be provided. Certainly, it would not be possible to achieve the schematic layout submitted by the objector. Accordingly, I believe a more practical boundary line should be indicated from the south-west corner of the garden of the end house in St Ninian’s Road (number 51) in a north-west direction for some 120 metres (as scaled) to meet the south-east corner of existing development to the west.

3.774 The objector has signalled a clear intention to provide low cost affordable housing for sale. However, circumstances can change and I believe it would be appropriate to annotate the settlement plan to indicate that the site is reserved for affordable housing. Alternatively, a settlement statement should be prepared for Padanaram allocating the land for that purpose.

3.775 Consequential modifications should be made to the relevant housing land supply statistics.

Recommendation

3.776 I recommend the local plan is modified, as proposed by the council, subject to further modifications whereby the settlement boundary follows the line described in my conclusions, and the site is shown to be reserved for affordable housing. Alternatively, in this latter respect, a settlement statement should be prepared for Padanaram including reference to the affordable housing allocation.

3.777 Consequential modifications should be made to the relevant housing land statistics.

211 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Panmure Estate: Omission

Objector Reference

Lintlathen Developments 918/4/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.778 There is widespread development pressure in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.779 The objectors accept that the local plan must comply with the approved structure plan. Nevertheless it is argued that there is very little housing land allocation in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA with the vast majority of the allocation in that HMA being in Dundee at the Western Gateway where there are serious constraints impeding delivery of housing. Furthermore, it is contended that alternative housing land releases require to be made as housing land supply is not keeping pace with housing demand in South Angus, which necessitates ad hoc releases of non-allocated land to fill the gap.

3.780 In the above context, it is argued that the finalised local plan review should be amended to allow potential for future residential development within the mature structured landscape of the Panmure Estate policies - for example at the former sawmill and stable block - located to the north of the A92 and west of Muirdrum. It is argued that the Panmure Estate also offers potential for additional leisure and recreational facilities, including chalet accommodation, to supplement the existing provision in the Carnoustie area.

The council’s response

3.781 Firstly, the council gives brief consideration to the specific local issues raised on behalf of the objectors in respect of the Panmure Estate and its potential for housing and leisure developments. The council points out that the local plan strategy seeks to direct

212 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

additional housing to the main settlements which provide a range of services and facilities, giving priority to the re-use and redvelopment of brownfield sites. It does not propose to identify isolated pockets of land for residential development in open countryside, such as the extensive policies of Panmure Estate. Furthermore, it points out that there are specific policies within the finalised local plan to assess proposals fo leisure facilities and chalet accommodation of the type proposed.

3.782 At the strategic level, the wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review.

3.783 Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.784 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.785 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-

213 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.786 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan. Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.787 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.788 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.789 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set

214 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.790 In this context, I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for the finalised local plan review to endorse or promote new residential, leisure and recreational developments within the Panmure Estate. I note that the only local case made on behalf of the objectors, is that the available sites, including the former sawmill and stable block, are all within mature structured landscape and the proposals would supplement existing provision of leisure facilities in Carnoustie. I share the concerns expressed by the council that these estate policies are set within open countryside and woodland and it would not be appropriate to have pockets of housing and related development in such a location when the local plan strategy is to direct additional housing to the main settlements which can provide a range of community services and facilities.

3.791 I am also concerned about the open-ended nature of the objectors’ proposals, particularly since there has been no indication given of the final number of houses to be developed, through conversion of existing redundant buildings and on greenfield sites, within an overall development strategy for the Panmure Estate. In my view, this gives rise to other issues relating to the potential impact of incremental and unplanned growth of housing and related developments here both locally, in terms of the landscape setting, and in respect of its contribution to the strategic housing land supply of the South Angus HMA. In summary, I conclude that the arguments put forward in support of the objection are not persuasive when set against the reasonable concerns expressed by the council in the local and strategic contexts.

Recommendation

3.792 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

215 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Piperdam: Paragraph 4 and Pd1 - Residential Development

Objector Reference

Piperdam Golf and Country Club 546/1/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.793 There is widespread development pressure in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.794 The objector accepts that the local plan must comply with the approved structure plan. Nevertheless it is argued that there is very little housing land allocation in South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA with the vast majority of the allocation in that HMA being in Dundee at the Western Gateway where there are serious constraints impeding delivery of housing. Furthermore it is contended that alternative housing land releases require to be made as housing land supply is not keeping pace with housing demand in South Angus, which necessitates ad hoc releases of non-allocated land to fill the gap.

3.795 It is argued on behalf of the objectors, specifically in respect of the policy relating to Piperdam, that the wording of Paragraph 4 and Pd1: Residential Development on P263 of the finalised local plan should be amended to allow potential for future residential development at Piperdam. This is justified on the basis that it is necessary to support additional investment in leisure and tourist facilities at Piperdam.

The council’s response

3.796 Firstly, the council gives consideration to the specific local issues raised in the Piperdam objection. It notes that the objection seeks scope for further, as yet unspecified, housing development in association with additional unspecified recreation and tourism facilities – noting that the objector acknowledges that the revenue from the existing recreation and tourism facilities is “barely enough to maintain the current level of

216 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

provision”. It notes the objector’s contention that there would be no prospect of any new investment in new facilities without the cash injection from new residential development. The council states that since development at Piperdam started a total of 123 houses have been approved in 3 phases to 2004 which have been justified as necessary to support development of recreation and tourist based facilities. It points out that to date there has been no indication of the final number of houses to be developed as part of the overall development strategy for the Piperdam area. In the council’s view this raises significant concerns over the incremental and unplanned growth of the housing element of this development, its contribution to the housing land supply of the South Angus HMA and its impact on the unique qualities and landscape setting of Piperdam. It is considered appropriate, therefore, for the council to consider the potential for futre residential development at Piperdam in the context of the development strategies for South Angus within the approved structure plan.

3.797 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.798 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

217 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.799 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.800 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.801 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.802 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.803 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived

218 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.804 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.805 In this context, I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for amending the wording of the finalised local plan review - in particular the statement paragraph 4 and Pd1 (both on P263 of the FALPR) - in order to enable the possibility of further growth in the residential development at Piperdam, beyond the third phase already approved. I note that the only local justification for this, made on behalf of the objector, is that it is necessary to support additional investment in leisure and tourist facilities at Piperdam. I also note that the revenue from existing recreation and tourism facilities is barely enough to maintain the current level of provision. In this context I share the concerns expressed by the council, firstly in respect of the open-ended nature of such a proposal, particularly since there has been no indication given of the final number of houses to be developed within an overall development strategy for the Piperdam area. I am also concerned about the impacts of incremental and unplanned growth of housing here - both locally, in terms of the impact on the landscape setting of Piperdam, and in respect of its contribution to the strategic housing land supply of the South Angus HMA. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that the fact that additional housing could help to subsidise improvements to the range of recreation and tourist facilities that would otherwise not be affordable, is not sufficient reason in itself to justify the detailed amendments to the local plan review proposed on behalf of the objectors. In summary, the arguments put forward in support of the objection are not persuasive when set against the reasonable concerns expressed by the council in the local and strategic contexts.

3.806 In this context, I conclude that the proposed amendments are not justified in this particular case.

Recommendation

3.807 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

219 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

South Kingennie: Omission of land at Broomfield Nurseries

Objector Reference

Messrs Turriff 557/1/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.808 The development boundary for South Kingennie excludes land to the west of the village, in particular part of a plant nursery which is situated immediately to the west of a dismantled former railway line. The objection concerns the scope for providing 6-8 low density housing units here. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.809 It is accepted on behalf of the objectors that the local plan review needs to conform to the approved structure plan in terms of strategic housing land allocations within the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA. There is concern, however that the housing land allocated in the Dundee cannot actually be delivered for this purpose and that the amount of land allocated for housing in South Angus is derisory and not keeping pace with housing demand. On this basis it is contended that the structure plan is fatally flawed and that alternative housing land releases require to be made to address the land supply issues in South Angus.

3.810 In the objectors’ view the Nursery land in question, to the west of South Kingennie, would be suitable for low density housing development, similar to that approved in the immediate vicinity. In particular, reference is made to a recent steading development, a single house and a series of ‘farmlets’. It is suggested that the objection site would be appropriate for 6-8 housing units, along the same lines as the farmlet principle but with areas of land attached to each house for stabling, grazing and exercising of horses. It is pointed out that the site concerned is sheltered from long public views. It is noted that since the finalised local plan review was published there has been new national policy on rural development (SPP 15) which urges local authorities to

220 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

be more pro-active and flexible in encouraging appropriate development in rural areas. It is argued that the objection site is a good example of where the council should take a positive approach to recognise this development opportunity by accepting the proposed allocation of land within the finalised plan for housing and related uses, as specified above.

The council’s response

3.811 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.812 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.813 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan

221 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.814 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.815 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.816 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.817 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

222 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.818 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.819 In this context, I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for allocating part of the Nursery site to the west of South Kingennie, beyond the dismantled railway line, to provide a development opportunity for 6-8 houses and associated horse grazing and stabling attached to each unit. I note that the only local justification for this, made on behalf of the objectors, is that there are recent examples of housing development in the vicinity, including a steading development and some ‘farmlets’. I note that, in the objectors’ view, these are broadly similar to the proposal in this case, except that the associated uses now envisaged would be horse-related. I am aware of the nearby steading development at South Kingennie which, I note, is within the development boundary of the village (P269 of the Proposals Map of the FALPR). No details were provided by the objectors about the location, format or other relevant information concerning the ‘farmlets’ referred to in support of the objection, or regarding the current status of the Nursery land concerned.

3.820 The council has made no reference to or comment on the local issues raised on behalf of the objectors in this case. Nevertheless, from my site inspection I am aware that the objection site, whilst not readily visible from the nearest adjoining road - as a result of being at a higher level and screened by trees and bushes – is clearly visible from the minor public road passing to the south of the site. In addition, it is situated a considerable distance from the western edge of the development boundary of the village of South Kingennie. In my view, the Nursery is therefore in open countryside and no evidence has been presented to suggest that it is incapable of beneficial agricultural or related countryside uses, for example as a Nursery. Accordingly, I consider that the fact that it may be capable of conversion to provide 6-8 residential dwellings with associated paddocks and stabling for horses, is not sufficient reason to allocate the site for houses in this open countryside location. I am concerned that this would create an unfortunate precedent, particularly given the pressures for developments of housing developments of various types on rural land in open countryside around villages across South Angus. In summary, based on the strategic housing considerations outlined above, as well as the limited local evidence available to me, I am not persuaded that a satisfactory case has been made to merit the proposed allocation of the Nursery land for housing and associated uses. I have reached this conclusion in the context of the new national planning policy and guidance set out in SPP15 and PAN72. Accordingly, I conclude that the proposed amendment to the finalised local plan is not justified in this particular case.

Recommendation 3.821 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

223 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

South Kingennie: Omission – single plot

Objector Reference

George Jarron 596/1/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.822 The development boundary for South Kingennie excludes the site of a single house plot to the west of the settlement which the objector would like to see included. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.823 In the objectors’ view the single house plot in question is a gap site between an existing house and the effective western boundary of the village. It is argued that the proposed boundary change would be logical and would not be detrimental to the rural feel of the area. Furthermore, in the objector’s view it would not compromise the need for the local plan to be compliant with the approved structure plan with regard to housing land allocations in the South Angus HMA, as elsewhere.

The council’s response

3.824 The council considers that South Kingennie is a small rural settlement with no facilities or services to support the community. It is located in a Category 1 RSU within the Dundee Urban Fringe where the development boundary has been tightly drawn round the developed area of the village. In the council’s view there is no reason to amend the development boundary to include the objection site which forms part of a larger field. It is concerned that if it was included it would extend the village into agricultural land and this could create a precedent for other similar situations in Angus. Any development proposals on the objection site would be considered against the Countryside Housing policies of the finalised local plan review, including Policy S1. These policies have been

224 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

reviewed in the light of the publication of national planning policy and guidance set out in SPP15 and PAN 72.

3.825 The council concludes that no change in the development boundary is justified in this case.

Conclusions

3.826 The fact that the site concerned is for a single house plot does not raise any strategic housing land issues, which relate to allocations of 5 house units or more. The objector in this case, whilst seeking to change the development boundary of South Kingennie, provides little evidence to support his view that the effective settlement boundary is to the west of the objection site. I presume that he regards the former railway line, now dismantled, as the logical boundary. I am not persuaded that the existence of a former rail line is sufficient justification to extend the development boundary in this case, particularly when the intervening land, between this and the nearest dwelling, is part of an agricultural field. In my view this makes the objection site part of the surrounding countryside. In this context I endorse the concerns expressed by the council about setting an unfortunate precedent if the site in question was allowed to be included in the development boundary. I note that there are policies in the finalised local plan which are specifically aimed at addressing proposals for countryside development. Based on all of these considerations, I conclude that there is no justification for amending the finalised local plan review in the manner sought by the objector in this case.

Recommendation

3.827 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

225 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

South Kingennie: Omission - land to the west

Objector Reference

Hugh Niven 938/1/1 (per D G Coutts Associates)

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.828 The development boundary for South Kingennie excludes land to the west of the settlement which incorporates a site that has been used for refuse tipping. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.829 It is accepted on behalf of the objector that the local plan needs to conform to the approved structure plan in terms of strategic housing land allocations within the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA. There is concern, however, that the housing land allocated in the Dundee cannot actually be delivered for this purpose and that the amount of land allocated for housing in South Angus is derisory and not keeping pace with housing demand. On this basis it is contended that the structure plan is fatally flawed and that alternative housing land releases require to be made to address the land supply issues,

3.830 In the objector’s view the 0.9ha site in question at South Kingennie is not capable of any beneficial agricultural use, having formerly been used as the farm tip. It is noted that the site is situated opposite a successful steading development granted planning permission by the council. It is pointed out that since the finalised local plan review was published there has been new national policy on rural development (SPP`15) which urges local authorities to be more pro-active and flexible in encouraging appropriate development in rural areas. It is argued that the objection site is a good example of where the council should take a positive approach to recognise this development opportunity by accepting the proposed boundary change.

226 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

The council’s response

3.831 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.832 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.833 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre- inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the

227 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.834 Of particular concern to the council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.835 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

Conclusions

3.836 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.837 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.838 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land

228 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.839 In this context, I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for amending the development boundary of South Kingennie westwards to incorporate the objection site for housing development, on an exceptional basis. I note that the only local justification for this, made on behalf of the objector, is that the land concerned, being a former tip, is not capable of any beneficial agricultural use and that it is situated immediately to the east of a recent steading-related housing development. The council has made no reference to or comment on the local issues raised on behalf of the objector in this case. Nevertheless, from the local plan review Proposals Map (P269) it is evident that at least part of the site has been used for refuse tipping and my site inspection demonstrated to me that there has been significant land fill on the west part of the site which has raised ground levels locally. There is insufficient evidence for me to conclude whether or not the site, in whole or part, is capable of beneficial agricultural use or indeed whether it would be appropriate for housing or other uses, as I do not know the nature or extent of the tipping activities in this case. The fact that the site concerned abuts a recent residential development within the development boundary of South Kingennie is also not sufficient reason to extend the boundary westwards to incorporate the objection site. Given that the arguments in support of this are not persuasive, I am concerned that the proposed development boundary extension at South Kingennie, if accepted, would create an unfortunate precedent, given the pressures for extensions of settlement boundaries of villages across South Angus.

3.840 In summary, based on the limited evidence available to me, I am not persuaded that a satisfactory case has been made to merit the proposed amendment to the settlement boundary, even in the context of the new national planning policy and guidance set out in SPP15 and PAN72. Accordingly, I conclude that the proposed amendment is not justified in this particular case.

Recommendation

3.841 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

229 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Strathmartine Hospital: St1, Opportunity Site Strathmartine Hospital Estate

Objector Reference

Heathfield Ltd 814/1/1 (per John Duff Planning & Gary Bryce - Heathfield)

Procedure Reporter

Hearing Richard Bowden

Written submissions objections received on the same topic:

Strathmartine Community Council 182/1/1 Strathmartine Nature Action Group 241/1/1

______

Background

3.842 The former Strathmartine Hospital and its associated premises and grounds form an estate on the northern edge of Dundee. Whilst a small part, on the western side, is still used for healthcare services the majority of the 17.5ha estate has been declared surplus to operational requirements. The Strathmartine Hospital estate is identified in the finalised local plan review (Policy St1) as an Opportunity Site for re-use and redevelopment, inviting proposals for a range of uses within a comprehensive development strategy which retains the listed main hospital building. Policy St1 also states that housing development here will be limited to a maximum of 40 residential units, comprising “the conversion of the existing listed building and any limited new housing development.” There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objections

The Hearing objection

3.843 It is noted that the site concerned operated as a hospital over a period of 100 years and, when fully operational, Strathmartine accommodated nearly 2000 people per day, comprising patients, staff and visitors. The now largely vacant estate has been subject to repeated acts of vandalism and fire over the period since the summer of 2005, despite security measures in place, and so requires a permanent solution. Whilst welcoming the council’s willingness to allocate 40 residential units here, as expressed in the FALPR

230 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Policy St1, it is argued that this would not produce the optimal development - either from the viewpoint of the local community or in terms of making a real contribution to the housing needs in the Dundee and South Angus HMA, as set out in the approved structure plan. Furthermore, it is contended that 40 units would not secure the major environmental improvement that is required for this large brownfield site. Concern is expressed that priority is being given to the greenfield Dundee Western Gateway (DWG) to provide for the majority of housing land requirements in this HMA despite the council being aware that the DWG site has not delivered any housing in the last five years and has continuing constraints - whilst the Strathmartine Hospital site represents a large brownfield site option that is available.

3.844 The objectors consider that the hospital site offers an excellent opportunity to provide at least 250 houses, which would result in a resident population of around 700, representing around a third of the numbers on the site previously. The objectors have informed the council of their willingness to phase development of the 44 acre hospital site over two local plan periods. In the first phase this would provide general needs housing, as well as delivering 20 affordable housing and a Residential Nursing Home. This would involve re-use of some buildings and a major upgrading of the derelict estate, taking advantage of the mature trees and landscaped grounds. The objectors consider that a minimum of 140 housing units would make a viable development at this location. Whilst they are willing to undertake a market review to explore the scope to incorporate commercial uses for parts of the site, the objectors point out that the council has not come forward with a development or planning brief for the estate.

3.845 The objectors state that their housing proposals would utilise existing public infrastructure, including water supply and drainage, and boost the utilisation of bus services which have always served the site. It is noted that whilst there is sufficient spare capacity at secondary school level, the local plan allocation of 40 housing units would require the council to fund an extension to the existing primary school at Strathmartine which is already operating at capacity. The objectors have offered to make a contribution to the school extension, if their proposals are accepted on the basis of 140 housing units. In summary, the objectors consider that the hospital estate offers an excellent opportunity to provide a sustainable development package which would deliver major benefits and the objectors are willing to work alongside the council to achieve this.

The written submissions objections

Objection 182/1/1

3.846 This objection seeks an amendment to the text of Policy St1 in the finalised local plan to clarify the phrase ‘a range of uses’ in respect of the policy for the hospital site.

Objection 241/1/1

3.847 The objectors seek amendments to the wording of the Strathmartine Hospital statement to:

231 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

* clarify the statement "business uses"; and * take account of important hedgerows on the site.

The council’s response

3.848 The council notes that the Strathmartine Hospital Estate lies to the north-west of Dundee within the South Angus Housing Market Area. Although a small part of the estate has been retained in health care use, around 17.5 ha of surplus buildings (including an important Category B Listed Building) and landscaped grounds offer an opportunity for re-use and re-development for a range of compatible uses in the context of the strategy for the South Angus Housing Market Area. This may include limited residential development, business uses, non-mainstream housing (nursing home, sheltered housing, etc), leisure and recreational uses. Whilst there is no brief yet published for the site, the council has held discussion with the hearing objectors, who are the site owners, to explore the potential of the site and the scope for renovation or conversion of certain former hospital buildings.

3.849 The strategic context for housing land release in South Angus is provided by Housing Policy 2: Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which indicates that " In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area, additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie and contribute to a range and choice of sites throughout the wider housing market area." In this context Angus Council considers that the Strathmartine site is not well located for large-scale residential development. It argues that housing here should total no more than 40 units, comprising a limited amount of new-build units together with conversion of the important Category B Listed main hospital building. It acknowledges that even this limited scale of housing development would be likely to necessitate some alterations to the local primary school, which has an overall capacity of 50 and an existing roll of 42 pupils. The council states that it has no resources for capital projects like major school extensions.

3.850 The council envisages the housing component at the Strathmartine estate being developed alongside a mix of other compatible uses wthin an overall Masterplan. Whilst accepting that the hospital site has brownfield elements, the council notes that the estate also has green (open space) elements and is remote from local shops or other services. It was conceded, however, by the council at the hearing that the estate as a whole does meet the necessary criteria to be considered as a brownfield site. Nevertheless, taking into account the position of the site, close to the periphery of the city of Dundee, the council remains concerned about the housing proposals of the hearing objector, based on the isolated location and the very large scale of the Strathmartine site, which has capacity for perhaps 200-300 houses. For example, the isolated location of the site concerned, remote from community services and shops, raises sustainability issues relating to likely car usage.

3.851 According to the council, prior to detailed consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility for housing proposals, a key

232 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review position. The Dundee and Angus Structure Plan (approved by Scottish Ministers in October 2002) (DASP) establishes the guidance for local plans.

3.852 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.853 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.854 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.855 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to

233 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.856 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.857 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.858 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.859 In summary, in addition to the site-specific concerns outlined earlier, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review. Accordingly, it is far too early, in the council’s view, to consider possible alternatives in the event that the DWG was delayed or unable to deliver the housing allocations made there. Meanwhile, it contends that any further large-scale housing land releases of the type being sort by the objectors at Strathmartine hospital estate would undermine the delivery of the DWG. Finally, it is pointed out that there have been conflicting local views expressed concering the future of the hospital site, with issues being raised concerning large-scale housing development at this location.

3.860 In response to specific points raised in the writtten submissions objections the council put forward the following Proposed Modifications in September 2005:

234 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

• The term "business uses" is defined in Circular 1/1998 - The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 as:- "The business class includes: * offices (other than Class 2); * industry which is not in class 5; and * research and development of products and processes: Provided that they can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of the area due to noise, vibration, smell, etc." • Policy St1 in the Finalised Local Plan establishes the requirement for, and scope of, a development brief to be prepared for the site against which development proposals will be assessed. It is intended that the development brief will, when prepared, provide some clarification of the range of uses that may be acceptable on the site. • It accepted that the wording of the fourth bullet point of Policy St1: Opportunity Site - Strathmartine Hospital Estate should be amended to reflect the need to protect important hedgerows

3.861 Accordingly the council proposes to amend bullet point 4, Policy St1 by adding "and hedgerows" after "existing tree cover". The objection from Strathmartine Nature Action Group was conditionally withdrawn on basis of the Proposed First Round Modification reflecting the agreed position between it and the council.

Conclusions

3.862 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

3.863 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.864 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing

235 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.865 In this context, I now turn to consider whether making a further housing land allocation at Strathmartine Hospital, in addition to the 40 units set out in Policy St1 of the finalised local plan review, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. I note that the case put forward by the objectors includes reference to strategic and local factors, with the former being based largely on the perceived shortcomings of the Dundee Western Gateway allocation - and the fact that Strathmartine Estate is brownfield and hence should be given priority status, in accordance with the principles of the structure plan and local plan. In the context of the strategic issues I have already dealt with above, I am persuaded by the argument put forward by the council that it is premature and hence inappropriate at this time to consider possible alternatives to the DWG. In any event, if there was a failure to deliver in full or in part on that site, I endorse the council’s view that any resulting shortfall in the Dundee part of the HMA would need to be rectified in Dundee City’s administrative area, not in the South Angus part of the HMA. The fact that the Strathmartine Hospital site is brownfield in nature does not mean that it should automatically be considered as a priority housing site, particularly when it is of a scale that it could accommodate such a large amount of housing that would represent a major allocation in the context of South Angus as a whole - even if the housing development was phased, as proposed by the objectors. Nevertheless, if in due course it became clear that the structure plan’s housing land requirements were not being addressed in full in the South Angus HMA area, I would see merit in the council exploring the scope for the Strathmartine Hospital site to make a larger contribution than the 40 units currently set out in the FALPR.

3.866 I now turn to consider the other strategic argument put forward on behalf of the objectors, in particular with reference to the scope to deliver some 20 affordable housing units if there was an overall allocation of at least 140 units on the site as a whole. Whilst in principle this would make a welcome contribution to the overall provision of affordable housing in the area, I do not consider that this in itself is sufficient reason to justify a larger overall allocation on the hospital site than the 40 units currently set out in the FALPR. Similarly, I find that the locally based arguments put forward on behalf of the objectors - including reference to the scope for contributing to the costs of a primary school extension and boosting local bus usage, as well as utilising existing water and drainage services - do not individually or cumulatively justify the large-scale allocation of housing being sought for the site concerned.

3.867 Furthermore, in my view, the fact that the site could be environmentally enhanced, with the listed building conserved and the estate in general upgraded, if there was a large-scale housing development allocated on the hospital land is not sufficient reason to make such an allocation. I reach this conclusion even in the context of the disturbing increasing issues of vandalism and related problems evident at Strathmartine whilst its future remains uncertain. I am of the view that, in any event, there is an urgent

236 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

need for a development/planning brief for this brownfield site to be drawn up, ideally by the council working in close consultation with the objectors, as the owners, so that full advantage and cognisance can be taken of its scale, strategic location and its scope for a wide range of commercial and community uses, in addition to a housing component. I conclude that the overall package of land uses and developments on the estate, in the short and longer terms, needs to be conceived, planned, marketed and implemented in a co-ordinated manner, such that it is sustainable for the longer term and in line with national planning policy and guidance. I note that whilst this type of approach is already set out in Policy St1 it has not yet resulted in a comprehensive strategy or Masterplan being agreed to date. I consider that, in perpetuating the uncertainty over the future of the estate as a whole, this has probably exacerbated the problems associated with the disuse and dereliction of the property concerned. Nevertheless, based on all of these considerations, I conclude that are no exceptional circumstances to warrant a further allocation of housing at Strathmartine Hospital at present, beyond the 40 units set out in the finalised plan review.

3.868 Finally, I note the points of clarification provided by the council in response to the written submissions objections. I consider that these are helpful in making clear the council’s intentions with regard to Policy St1. I also endorse the minor amendment to the phrasing of Policy St1, to include reference to hedgerows, all as put forward by the council as Proposed Modifications to the finalised local plan review for the Strathmartine Estate. Accordingly, I conclude that, apart from the small amendments set out in the Proposed Modification of September 2005, there should be no further modifications to the finalised local plan review.

Recommendation

3.869 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case except as put forward by the council in its Proposed Modifications of September 2005 (page 122).

237 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Wellbank: Omissions – South, North and South-East

Objector Reference

Norman Jamieson 274/1/1 (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan)

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

Written submission objections related to other housing proposals at Wellbank

Mr and Mrs J Lascelles 889/1/1 (per RPS Planning, Transport and Environment) Linlathen Developments Ltd 918/1/2

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.870 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period. There are three separate objections lodged to the local plan in respect of housing sites on the fringe of Wellbank (immediately to the south, south-east and north of the village boundary, respectively), as well as a current planning application relating to a site to the east of the village, for which there is no local plan objection.

Basis of the objections:

South Wellbank

3.871 On behalf of Norman Jamieson it is stated that whilst the objector has no argument with the structure plan or local plan in respect of the housing supply figures for the area concerned, the Dundee Western Gateway (DWG) housing land allocation does not appear to be making any progress. It is argued that the settlement boundary to the south of Wellbank should re-aligned to become south of a former railway line which is dismantled. It is contended that this former railway line would represent a more

238 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review defensible boundary for Wellbank, noting that such an amendment to the boundary would place the objector’s 6.4ha site within the settlement and able to contribute to making up any shortfall in housing completions at DWG. On this basis it is argued that the site concerned should be allocated for housing as a logical extension to Wellbank.

3.872 It is stated that the site concerned, which has a capacity for 60-70 housing units, is bounded to the south by the former rail line, to the north-east by a burn and to the north- west by the B978 road, whilst it is undefined to the south-east. It is also noted that the southern boundary of the site marks the entrance to a waste transfer station. It is pointed out that expanding the village in this way would help to support local infrastructure, in particular the local school and shop in Wellbank, noting that the school has sufficient spare capacity to cater for pupils from the proposed development. It is noted that this is a popular residential village, which is highly accessible with good public transport links to Forfar, Dundee and Arbroath. If his site was allocated for housing, the objector would be willing to make a reasonable contribution to the upgrading of the local sewage treatment plant, either through a section 75 agreement or an appropriate suspensive condition attached to a planning permission for the site concerned. The objector would also be willing to meet the full requirement set out in the local plan review (FALPR) to ensure 40% of the houses to be built meet affordable housing needs of the area. Overall the proposal would improve the range and choice of housing available locally, noting that most housing built in the village in the last 30 years has been high density. Finally, it is argued that there may be scope to allow more than one site at Wellbank for housing expansion at this time, in which case this site could be considered along with one of the others being put forward.

North Wellbank

3.873 It is argued on behalf of Mr & Mrs Lascelles that the settlement boundary of Wellbank should be extended northwards to include all or part of their site. It is argued that there is a significant shortfall in housing land allocations made in the finalised local plan review for the Dundee and South Angus HMA when compared with the requirements set out in the approved structure plan. It is contended that allocation of the objection site at North Wellbank would improve the range and choice of housing available in the HMA, in terms of house type, size and tenure, including providing some affordable housing and sheltered housing units for the elderly. The objectors would also be willing to make a contribution towards education provision if this was required. Whilst the development concept for the North Wellbank site is still in preparation, it is stated that the intention would be to create a new square in the heart of Wellbank with community facilities adjacent, including craft and business facilities, thereby creating a sense of place to enhance the centre as part of a phased development.

South-East Wellbank

3.874 It is argued by Linlathen Developments Ltd that their 10.3ha site to the south- east of Wellbank should be allocated for mixed residential development in the finalised plan. Whilst it is acknowledged that the local plan is required to comply with the

239 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review approved structure plan, it is noted that there is very little housing land allocated in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus HMA - the vast majority being allocated in the DWG part of Dundee, where there are constraints and no immediate prospect of development. It is argued that this has a knock-on effect compromising delivery on other sites in South Angus that are available. On this basis it is argued that the structure plan is fatally flawed and alternative housing land releases are required to address the housing land supply issues. It is in this context that the land at south-east Wellbank is being promoted.

3.875 Following discussions with Scottish Water and SEPA - and associated tests undertaken by Scottish Water at the objector’s expense - it has been found that a drainage solution to serve the proposed development can be achieved to the satisfaction of all parties. Notwithstanding that, the objectors are pursuing the eventual running of a sewer from Wellbank to the Dighty Valley, through land in the objector’s clients’ ownerships. Given the investment required to resolve these drainage constraints, previous representations regarding this site have sought an increase in the housing development at the site in question. This remains the objector’s position but it is argued that there is now an even more important justification for the proposed scale of housing at this location given the non-delivery of the DWG and the identified need for 400 affordable houses in South Angus HMA. It is pointed out that at Wellbank there is a major Housing Association willing to construct a sizeable number of units with further phases to follow. An illustrative plan accompanying the objection shows a layout for 51 houses (comprising 29 private houses and 22 (40%) affordable rented and shared ownership dwellings) on 2.35ha of land on the north-western corner of their proposed overall area (of 10.3ha of land put forward for an allocation in the local plan objection). It is argued that if the land was allocated and released for mainstream housing as proposed, to reflect the major infrastructure investment required to address the drainage issue, this would lead to the provision of the affordable units and support the local services, in particular the shop the pub, restaurant hall and the school.

A petition

3.876 A petition was lodged on behalf of residents of Wellbank. Following house-to- house canvassing, this petition was apparently signed by 99.9% of the local households in the village of approximately 500 residents. In summary, the villagers are opposed to any proposals for major new housing development at Wellbank, and in particular they would strongly resist development to the south-east of the village. The basis of their concerns is the removal of greenfield sites and the fear that Wellbank is being turned into a town with inadequate infrastructure.

The council’s response

3.877 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting,

240 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.878 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. It is not permitted to adopt a local plan that does not conform with the approved structure plan. It notes that the range of allocated sites and the existing supply of windfall sites currently under construction or with planning permission are distributed across the HMA. In the Monifieth, Carnoustie and Sidlaw area additions to the effective housing land supply will be focused on the main settlements of Monifieth and Carnoustie. The performance of housing land is monitored through annual Housing Land Audits undertaken by Dundee City Council and Angus Council in conjunction with the housebulding industry and Communities Scotland. Analysis of the South Angus HMA in the 2004 audit indicates that for the 5 year period 2004 - 2009 the effective land supply exceeds the DASP allowance by 380. This provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance for the period to 2011 and for the first 2.4 years of the indicative allowance for the period 2011 - 2016 and so provides an effective housing land supply well beyond the local plan period.

3.879 Were it to be demonstrated that there is a shortfall in the five year effective land supply, alternative sites for development should be identified through additional local plan allocations rather than planning applications. However, at this stage identification of reserve land for future housing development in the South Angus HMA is unnecessary.

3.880 Angus Council does not accept the contention that the DASP strategy is flawed. Any alteration to the DASP strategy would require a review of the structure plan and subsequent endorsement of Scottish Ministers. At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that the housing allowances set out for the Dundee and South Angus HMA cannot be met from the existing planning permissions and land allocations established by the both the Angus Local Plan Review and the Dundee City Local Plan Review.

3.881 Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has

241 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.882 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.883 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.884 In summary, the council contends that there is no justification in terms of either the structure plan strategy for the Dundee and South Angus HMA or the effective housing land supply in the South Angus area that would require the allocation of further major greenfield housing land in addition to the land supply already provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review. The council does not present evident relating directly to the Birkhill/Muirhead site being promoted by the objector in this case, or in respect of the specific contention that it could be endorsed as a strategic reserve housing site.

3.885 The council has made the following observations in respect of Wellbank and the individual sites being put forward by objectors for consideration.

Wellbank in general

3.886 It is noted that there has been significant development in Wellbank in recent years, particularly to the east of the village, when Wellbank was part of the administrative area of Dundee City Council. Between 1991 and 2001 the village grew by 20% which it regards as significant. The council is of the view that in the light of the strategic considerations outlined above there is no reason to justify allocating housing land at Wellbank. It is also stated that there is limited spare capacity at the local primary school which has a school roll of 44 and a capacity of 75. Similarly there is only modest spare capacity available in the local drainage system, which represents a further constraint on development at Wellbank, despite some remedial works having taken place at the SWT

242 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

works. In general this is a village with lots of houses but with very few local facilities, comprising a pub, a village hall and a school.

South Wellbank

3.887 The council is concerned that development of this 6.5ha site for around 60-70 houses would represent a linear extension to the village onto open land and at exceptionally low densities (around 4 per acre whereas normally one would expect 8-10 housing units per acre). Furthermore, in the council’s view this proposal has not been justified, in particular with regard to developing to the south of the existing burn which forms a strong defensible boundary for the village. In comparison to the other sites being put forward, this particular one is of low priority for development, in the council’s view. It notes the views of the local people are generallly against such expansions of the village onto open greenfield land and the council contends that there are no exceptional circumstances to justify the proposed extension of the village southwards to the former railway line.

North Wellbank

3.888 The council does not make any specific reference to the relative merits or drawbacks of the site on the northern edge of Wellbank which is the subject of the objection by Mr and Mrs Lascelles. It relies instead on its strategic housing land assessment and its general concerns about Wellbank, as outlined above.

South-East Wellbank

3.889 The council does not make any specific reference to the relative merits or drawbacks of the site on the south-eastern edge of Wellbank which is the subject of the objection by Linlathen Developments. It relies instead on its strategic housing land assessment and its general concerns about Wellbank, as outlined above. It does note, however, that a planning application for a development of 51 mixed tenure housing units on the site was lodged on 30 September 2005. This attracted a significant number of objections from local residents and was refused planning permission in March 2006.

Conclusions

3.890 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those specified for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan review.

243 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.891 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.892 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocation of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceeds the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes in to account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.893 In this context, I now turn to consider whether there is a locally based case for allocating one or more of the three local plan objection sites for housing and for extending the development boundary of Wellbank to incorporate the site(s) concerned, on an exceptional basis. I consider each of the sites in turn in the context of the general comments about Wellbank raised at the hearing. In particular I am aware that Wellbank has experienced relatively high and rapid levels of population growth through expansion of its housing areas in recent years, without substantial improvements to the level of local services and facilities for the resident community. I am also aware of the limited spare capacity at the local school and the local drainage constraints that would need to be addressed by any significant new housing developments at Wellbank. Furthermore, I note the petition lodged by local villagers reveals strong opposition from existing residents to any form of village expansion, with their primary concerns relating to the loss of greenfield land and the limited infrastructure serving the village.

South Wellbank (274/1/1)

3.894 I note that one of the main justifications made for the proposed expansion southwards of the village is that the former railway line would make a more defensible southern boundary for Wellbank. I am not persuaded by this argument and agree with the council that the burn which forms the existing southern development boundary is a strong, natural and defensible edge for the village. From my site inspection I consider that the proposal put forward on behalf of Norman Jamieson would be isolated from the existing village, being across the burn from the rest of the settlement and would be on open agricultural ground in the countryside, despite being alongside both the B978 road and the small road leading to a local waste transfer station.

3.895 Furthermore, I am not persuaded that the case has been made adequately for the proposed low density private housing development at this location, even allowing for the fact that it would also provide a 40% contribution of affordable housing. The fact that

244 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

such a development would support local services and facilities and there may be sufficient places available at the local school and good public transport links serving the village are not sufficient reasons to justify development of this site for 60-70 houses, in my view. This also applies to the offer made on behalf of the objectors to make a reasonable contribution towards upgrading of the local sewage treatment plant. Accordingly, I agree with the council that even if a need for additional housing at Wellbank was demonstrated satisfactorily, this particular site would not be a high priority amongst the various options to expand the village. I conclude, therefore, that the proposed amendments to the finalised local plan review are not justified in this particular case.

North Wellbank (889/1/1)

3.896 I note that the only local justification for promoting this site, made on behalf of Mr and Mrs Lascelles, is that the proposed development would provide: the opportunity to widen the range of housing choice available in the area, including providing affordable and sheltered units; a contribution to education provision (if required); as well as offering scope for providing a new square with associated craft and business opportunities to enhance the centre of Wellbank.

3.897 The council has made no specific reference to or comment on the local issues raised on behalf of the objectors in this case. It is evident from the local plan development plan boundary and from my site inspection that, being situated beyond the extreme northern periphery of the village, this objection site is not best placed to provide a new community focus for Wellbank. Furthermore, I note that this generally flat site is agricultural land which appears to be productive, being part of an open arable field with no defensible boundaries along its northern and western margins. In my view, whilst it adjoins the northern development boundary of the village, it forms part of the open countryside and no evidence has been presented to suggest that it is incapable of continuing to provide beneficial agricultural use.

3.898 The fact that it may be readily developed with a range of house types - including some affordable and retirement units - with scope for other associated community uses to be incorporated within a phased development, is not sufficient reason to allocate the site to the north of Wellbank for houses in this countryside location. I am also concerned that if this site was allocated and developed it would create an unfortunate precedent given the pressures for developments of similar types on rural land in open countryside in the vicinity of villages across South Angus. In summary, based on the strategic housing considerations outlined above as well as the limited local evidence available to me, I am not persuaded that a satisfactory case has been made to merit the proposed allocation of this site for housing and associated community uses or for the proposed extension to the northern development boundary of Wellbank. Accordingly, I conclude that the proposed amendments to the finalised local plan review are not justified in this particular case.

245 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

South-East Wellbank (918/1/2)

3.899 The 10.3ha site put forward by Linlathen Developments extends south-eastwards from the existing built-up area. The drawing showing its boundaries indicates a division of the land concerned into two parcels, one of 4.45ha (11 acres) to the west adjoining another parcel of 5.87 ha (14.5 acres) to the east. An illustrative layout submitted by the objector shows a layout for 51 houses on 2.35ha, being the northern part of western parcel of land nearest to the village. This would utilise the higher ground before the steep slope southwards down to the burn. I assume that this reflects the proposal in the planning application lodged by Linlathen Developments Ltd with the council for 51 mixed housing units which has been referred to by the council.

3.900 Whilst the whole of the 10.3ha objection site is outwith the development boundary of Wellbank it has the benefit of being all located to the north of the burn, which I consider is a strong defensible boundary. Nevertheless the boundary to the north is less well defined by fence posts and a stone dyke. The illustrative plan submitted by the objector showing a 51 house development layout (on 2.35ha) including 22 units of affordable housing demonstrates how such a development. I am concerned, however, that even this development would be substantial in the context of Wellbank. Furthermore, it would utilise far less than half of the overall land, totaling 10.3ha, being sought for allocation for mixed housing by this objector. I consider that the 10.3ha of open countryside proposed for mixed housing development is excessive in the local context and if developed as proposed it would result in a totally unbalanced and unjustifiable extension south-eastwards of Wellbank in my view. Furthermore, such a large village extension south-eastwards, if allocated and developed with housing, even in phases, would be too obtrusive, particularly when viewed from the south-west approaching Wellbank. I am also concerned that this would also make it more difficult for the council to resist pressures for further housing development on the land immediately to the north of the Linlathen site. I note that there is a planning application for housing development already lodged on that land. In my view, the fact that Linlathen Developments has invested in investigations to establish the basis on which drainage constraints can be resolved - and has expressed a willingness to finance the necessary works in this regard – demonstrates a degree of local commitment, but is not sufficient to outweigh the above concerns.

3.901 Based on the above considerations, I am not persuaded that there are exceptional local circumstances to merit allocation of the 10.3ha of land for housing in the finalised plan, as proposed by the objector in this case. Nevertheless, setting aside for a moment the strategic housing land allocation issues outlined earlier, in the event that the council decided in due course that there was a need for some limited additional housing development at Wellbank, I would suggest that a strictly limited form of extension of the existing housing of Wellbank eastwards onto some of the western parcel of land shown on the illustrative layout accompanying the objection by Linlathen Developments, would be less obtrusive than the other local plan objection proposals put forward to the north and south of Wellbank. Nevertheless, in my view the strategic housing land allocation issues cannot be set aside at this time and, on balance, there are insufficient local reasons

246 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

to outweigh these strategic considerations. Accordingly, I conclude that this 10.3ha site should not be allocated for housing in the finalised local plan review.

3.902 Whilst I am aware of the local opposition voiced in the petition lodged, I note that there are no opportunities for growth at Wellbank without using some greenfield land and any developer would have to address the constraints on local infrastructure, concerning drainage issues for example. Nevertheless, based on all of the above considerations and for the reasons I have set out, in summary I conclude that none of the three objection sites should be allocated for housing in the local plan review.

Recommendation

3.903 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in response to any of the objections considered.

247 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Westhall Terrace: Omission

Objector Reference

Mr Hamish Cook 900/1/1 (per Ritchie Dagen and Allan)

Procedure Reporter

Informal hearing Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.904 There is widespread development pressure for housing sites in the South Angus part of the Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area (HMA) – as defined in the approved structure plan. A key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective housing land supply in the South Angus part of this HMA, sufficient to warrant the allocation of additional greenfield sites for housing development to meet the full structure plan requirement for the plan period.

Basis of the objection

3.905 Despite accepting both the structure plan housing land requirements and the local plan allocations to address the South Angus need, it is argued that the finalised local plan should allocate land on the west side of Westhall Terrace for housing development. In the objector’s view, this would be logical in providing a more integrated structure to the settlement, given the recent development on the east side of the road which has given the village an ‘L’ shaped form. An illustrative layout comprising 15 new dwellings, on agricultural land immediately to the west and north of East March, was submitted to accompany the objection, in order to show a possible solution which the objector considers would enhance the settlement form. It is pointed out that there used to be a shop/post office here but it closed through adverse market conditions. It is contended that there is strong market demand for additional housing in this locality and that the village would benefit from the increased population associated with the proposed development, which would help to sustain bus services and perhaps provide a critical mass to support other local amenities. The objector’s proposal could be developed as individual plots or in small groups rather than a ‘mass housing’ approach. It is envisaged that these would be all general needs housing as the scale of development would not be worthwhile for a housing association to provide affordable housing units at this location.

3.906 It is contended that the failure of Dundee Western Gateway to deliver its housing allocation from the structure plan is leading to a shortfall in the overall housing market area and so places increased market pressure on the South Angus part of the same HMA. The proposal at Westhall Terrace would be strategically well placed to make a

248 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

contribution in this regard, in the objector’s view. This would utilise a new drainage system adopted by Scottish Water which is capable of serving the old and proposed new housing at Westhall Terrace.

The council’s response

3.907 The wide range of objections to the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review by developers and/or landowners relating to the omission of greenfield and brownfield sites for housing in the South Angus area indicates there is considerable pressure for additional housing land release. Prior to consideration of factors such as location, landscape setting, infrastructure, and accessibility, a key consideration is whether there is a shortfall in the effective land supply that would require modification of the Finalised Local Plan Review. Dundee and Angus Structure Plan 2001-2016 (approved in October 2002) establishes guidance for local plans including defining 4 housing market areas (HMAs) for the structure plan area. In the Dundee and South Angus HMA, DASP Policy 1 and Schedule 1 set out a requirement of 1045 houses for the South Angus area in the period 2001 - 2011. In the council’s view the supply of 1216 houses in the South Angus part of the HMA identified in finalised local plan (comprising 401 completions June 2001 -2004, 552 on existing sites with planning permission and 263 on allocated sites) already meets the full housing allowance to 2011 for the area as set out in the structure plan and this does not include potential yield from brownfield opportunity sites or any other windfall sites that may come forward.

3.908 Accordingly, the council contends that there is no requirement to allocate any further greenfield housing land within the HMA at present, and to do so would bring the local plan into conflict with the approved structure plan. Since publication of the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review consideration of local plan objections and publication of pre-inquiry modifications, Angus Council and Dundee City Council (the Structure Plan authority) have jointly prepared and published the Draft Dundee and Angus Housing Land Audit 2005. The 2005 Audit indicates that the land supply for the South Angus (Monifieth, Carnoustie & Sidlaws) area has increased to 1325 (compared to the 1240 detailed in the Finalised Local Plan). The current figure comprises 605 completions in the period from June 2001 to June 2005, 635 existing sites with planning permission and 85 sites allocated in the Local Plan. This indicates that for the 5 year period 2005-2010 the effective housing land supply in the South Angus HMA exceeds the structure plan allowance by 383 and provides sufficient housing land to meet the full structure plan allowance of 1045 for the period to 2011 and also for the first 4 years of the indicative allowance (350) for the period 2011 – 2016. Angus Council therefore remains of the opinion that there is currently no justification that would require the allocation of additional land over and above that provided for by the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review, as modified.

3.909 Of particular concern to the Council is the potential impact that further housing land release in the South Angus area could have on the implementation of the approved structure plan strategy for housing land in the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing

249 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Market Area. Similar concerns have been expressed by Dundee City Council who jointly prepared the structure plan.

3.910 Based on all of these factors, Angus Council considers that the release of additional housing land in South Angus would undermine the recently approved Dundee and Angus Structure Plan strategy, which is to be implemented through the local plan reviews (the Dundee Local Plan Review was adopted in 2005).

3.911 In support of this position the council does not propose to allocate additional housing land at Westhall Terrace beyond that shown in the FALPR. The housing allocation to the east of the main road, shown as SA (h) on the finalised plan, is for up to 10 houses on a former quarry site. This is a commitment inherited from when Westhall Terrace formed part of Dundee City Council area in the period up to the mid 1990s and is now almost all completed. It is pointed out that the appproved structure plan now concentrates new housing development on the main settlements which are accessible and have a range of services and the local plan responds accordingly. In South Angus this means focussing new development in Monifieth and Carnoustie, rather than in small villages like Westhall Terrace and there are a range of housing opportunities already identified for South Angus in the finalised local plan. It is pointed out that the smaller settlements do not have a wide range of facilities and services – Westhall Terrace has only Primary School, which has recently increased its capacity and serves a wider area, together with a village hall. It also benefits from a limited bus service (two buses in the morning and the same in the afternoon). Whilst there are two large transport distributor businesses at the north end of Westhall Terrace, which provide approximately 80 jobs in total, most of the employees live elsewhere and travel into the village for work. The objector’s proposal would increase the existing stock of 27 houses by approximately one third.

3.912 In this context, the council considers that even if there was scope for additional housing land allocations in South Angus, beyond what is already provided for in the finalised plan, Westhall Terrace would not be a preferred location for the growth now proposed. This takes account of the scale and greenfield nature of the objector’s proposal and the very limted size of the existing community, as well as the extreme shortage of local facilities and amenities at Westhall Terrace.

Conclusions

3.913 There is no dispute that the local plan, on adoption, must conform to the provisions of the structure plan. In particular, the adopted local plan must make appropriate housing land allocations for the period up to 2011 as set out in structure plan Schedule 1 requirements for each of the HMAs, including for the South Angus (Monifieth, Sidlaw and Carnoustie) area which has a specified requirement within the wider Dundee and South Angus HMA. For the reasons given earlier in this report (in the conclusions section relating to Policy SC1: Housing Land Supply) I conclude that the allowances set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan, including those for South Angus, should be reflected in the local plan.

250 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.914 Whilst South Angus is a popular area for housing, it forms part of the wider Dundee and South Angus Housing Market Area which also contains parts of Fife and Perth and Kinross. Despite pressures for the release of additional housing land here, South Angus should not be regarded as an automatic choice to make up any perceived shortfall within the wider HMA. This would be contrary to the structure plan strategy, having regard to the regeneration of Dundee, and would not be in accord with the guidance set out in PAN 38 regarding housing land allocations.

3.915 I conclude that in terms of structure plan Housing Policy 1, the allocations of land made in FALPR Table 2.1 relating to South Angus exceed the allowances for that area set out in Schedule 1 of the structure plan for the period up to 2011, and provide scope for development well beyond 2011. This takes into account the results of the annual housing land audits for 2004 and 2005 (provisional findings). Accordingly, I conclude that there is no need to modify the local plan to provide additional housing land allocations in South Angus in order to maintain a continuing minimum 5 year housing land supply in the HMA, in accordance with the requirements of both SPP3 and PAN38.

3.916 In this context I now turn to consider whether a new housing land allocation for approximately 15 general needs houses at Westhall Terrace, as proposed by the objector, should be accepted on an exceptional basis. The case put forward to justify this housing land allocation is based largely on a perceived need to balance development on either side of the spine road through the settlement and to provide a larger critical mass to support local services. The site in question is agricultural land which is prominent in the landscape. I conclude that there are no overriding reasons why symmetry in the form of balancing developments either side of the minor road should form the basis of a planning justification for a new housing land allocation here, particularly when there are numerous examples of asymmetric settlements which are not disadvantaged. In addition, in my view the fact that the proposed new houses would potentially assist in supporting local services is not sufficient reason to justify the proposed growth of the settlement by one third. I note that there are no local shops and few other facilities or services - only the primary school, a village hall and a rural bus service - to support new residents at this location. There is also no guarantee that, merely by adding to the local housing stock in the manner proposed, there would be a new shop or other improvements in local services. Indeed based on experience elsewhere in rural Angus, it may continue to be a commuter dormitory settlement, albeit an even larger one and still almost wholly dependent on car based journeys for work and most other purposes. This would be contrary to the principles of sustainable development promoted by national planning policy and supported by the structure plan and the finalised local plan.

3.917 Based on all of these considerations, I endorse the council’s assessment and conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant an additional housing land allocation of 15 general needs housing units on the west side of Westhall Terrace.

Recommendation

3.918 I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

251 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Westmuir: Settlement boundary

Objector Reference

Mr & Mrs Reid 860/1/1 William L Howcroft 876/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Dent

______

Background

3.919 Westmuir lies on the A926 to the west of Kirriemuir.

3.920 The village is shown as a settlement in the local plan review. There are no development allocations and there is no settlement statement. The boundary is drawn tightly around existing development.

3.921 The objection site fronts a narrow road, Broad Wood Road, to the immediate north of the village. This road leads to a minor road to the west and to the A926 via a sharp corner and a narrow residential road – Westbank - through the village. Four houses front Broad Wood Road to the west of the objection site with a further house, “Windrush” to the east. On the opposite side of the road there is a vehicle breaker’s yard to the west and the most northern part of the village to the east. The 30 mph extends to the west of the site. The site itself is in three sections, the western part is cropped, the central section under grass and there is a substantial temporary structure on the land to the east.

Basis of the objections

3.922 Mr & Mrs Reid and Mr Howcroft believe the settlement boundary should be extended to include land adjacent to Windrush and land to the west on the north side of Broad Wood Road. This would allow a row of houses between the existing houses and represent a natural rounding-off.

The council’s response

3.923 The houses in Broad Wood Road are separate from the village. The objection site is agricultural land and extends over 100 metres of frontage. Broad Wood Road has a rural character which is more reflected by the objection site by comparison with the land to the south of Broad Wood Road within the settlement boundary.

3.924 Both Broad Wood Road and Westbank are narrow and without footpaths. Both are unadopted and there have been problems with the maintenance and condition of the latter.

252 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Any increase in traffic cannot be supported. There is no available drainage in Westmuir due to constraints in the waste water treatment plant at Kirriemuir.

3.925 Notwithstanding these concerns, planning permission has been granted for a house on the land adjacent to Windrush (Mr & Mrs Reid’s objection site). It is a condition of that permission that an agreement is concluded in terms of section 75 of the 1997 Act to allow only one house on the site. Additionally, the minute of the council’s Development Control Committee notes that “the permission is personal only to the applicant until/if the development boundary was amended to include the site.”

3.926 Despite the planning permission, the council has decided to retain the settlement boundary as shown in the local plan review as the area relates more to the countryside than Westmuir itself.

Conclusions

3.927 The location of the settlement boundary at this location is, to some extent, a matter of perception. The objectors believe the objection land to be a gap site, the incorporation of which within the settlement would represent a natural rounding-off. On the other hand, despite the granting of planning permission for a single house in the eastern part of the site, the council is of the opinion that the land has a rural character.

3.928 I accept that the land has some characteristics of a gap site lying between the four houses to the west and Windrush to the east. The construction of a further house in terms of the planning permission that has been granted will narrow the undeveloped frontage and create a more clearly defined gap. The car breaking business is not an activity that has a rural character but overall I share the council’s opinion that Broad Wood Road forms a suitable settlement boundary as the land to the north has a more clearly defined rural character. The four houses to the west of the objection site do not have a dominant visual impact and therefore do not destroy the rural character. Windrush to the east and, if built, the new house have the potential to detract from the character but I believe the remaining open frontage will ensure that, on balance, the rural appearance is retained. This character would be lost through the completion of a row of houses which, in my opinion, would be unacceptable. I therefore conclude the settlement boundary should not be extended to the north of Broad Wood Road.

3.929 I have also taken into account the concerns about the standard of the local road network and, notwithstanding the recent planning permission for one house, I accept that development leading to further traffic generation should not be encouraged. Similarly, I note the council’s comments in respect of drainage. I am aware that there have been improvements to the waste water treatment works but even if drainage capacity were to be available, this would not lead me to set aside my conclusion on the appropriate line of the settlement boundary.

Recommendation

3.930 I recommend no change to the local plan review in respect of these objections.

253 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

Woodville: Wv1 - Development Approach

Objector Reference

D G Coutts Associates 923/1/1

Procedure Reporter

Written submissions Richard Bowden

______

Background

3.931 The issue concerns whether the development boundary for Woodville is being used to exclude development rather than contain development. The margin of page 21 of the finalised local plan review states that development boundaries generally provide “a definition between built-up areas and the countryside but may include peripheral areas of open space that are important to the setting of settlements”. Paragraph 2.12 of the same document states that the plan provides scope for unallocated and currently unidentified sites which may be suitable for residential development to come forward within development boundaries, where development is in accordance with the principles of the local plan.

Basis of the objection

3.932 It is argued on behalf of the objector that settlement boundaries are there to contain development, but at Woodville it is being used to exclude development. In the objector’s view, this places an unfair restriction on opporunities for development that comply with other development parameters, particularly relating to gap sites or infill development. If the Council has general rules for development in rural areas, the objector argues that these should be applied consistently and not on a selective basis, as at Woodville.

The council’s response

3.933 The council notes that in the Woodville area, to the north-west of Arbroath, urban uses are encroaching into the countryside and incrementally changing its character from countryside to suburban. It points out that the Woodville area is characterised by loose groupings of individual houses and a range of semi-rural activities including smallholdings, a hotel, caravan sites and a variety of business activities. The council contends that the character and pattern of development of this area is different from other parts of the countryside adjacent to or abutting the Angus towns. Consequently the Local Plan has established a development boundary for the Woodville area and introduced a development approach aimed at restricting urban sprawl and the increasing urbanisation of the area.

254 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

3.934 Given its proximity to Arbroath, the dispersed nature of existing development and changing economic activity in the area, Woodville is continuing to experience pressure for development of housing and other urban uses. The policy approach for Woodville contained in the Finalised Angus Local Plan Review recognises the area’s countryside character and seeks to limit the potential for development to proposals directly associated with agriculture or horticulture, including essential worker housing for established businesses.

3.935 In these circumstances the council does not consider it appropriate to remove the development boundary for Woodville or amend the policy approach provided by Wv1: Woodville Development Approach.

Conclusions

3.936 I can understand the concerns expressed by the objector about the apparent inconsistency he perceives between the policy approach adopted by the council at Woodville compared with in other localities with defined development boundaries. I note, however, that the council has provided a reasoned justification to explain why it considers that a different approach is required in the specific local circumstances relating to Woodville. I am persuaded by the arguments put forward by the council, based on the particular local context which I regard as exceptional and therefore justifying this particular development approach which does not apply elsewhere in Angus. Accordingly, I conclude that the policy approach for Woodville, as outlined in the finalised local plan review, is reasonable, notwithstanding the stated concerns about a perceived lack of consistency of approach outlined by the objector.

3.937 Accordingly, I conclude that there is no justification to amend the finalised local plan review in this particular case.

Recommendation

3.938 For the reasons stated in my conclusions, I recommend that the local plan review is not modified in this case.

255 Finalised Angus Local Plan Review

256