Insert Issue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABERDEENSHIRE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINALISED RESPONSE TO PROPOSED PLAN CONSULTATION FORMARTINE – ABERDEEN HOUSING MARKET AREA Issue 67 Settlement - Oldmeldrum Section 6, Proposals Map, (p21) Reporter: Schedule 1, Table 4, (p27) Development plan Schedule 2, Table 4, (p31) reference: Volume 3f, Supplementary Guidance, Settlement Statements, (p25-26) Body or person(s) submitting a representation raising the issue (including reference number): 112 Mr Kenny Monk 145 Mrs Wendy Probert 347 John Pirie on behalf of AC Watson 405 William Lippe Architects Ltd on behalf of I Douglas 400, 406, 409 William Lippe Architects Ltd on behalf of Ian Douglas 693, 694 Knight Frank LLP on behalf of Lesley Paterson 1180, 1182 DDP LLP (Planning Consultants) on behalf of Church of Scotland General Treasurer 1253 Meldrum & Bourtie Community Council 1254 Irene Dunbar 1420, 1423 Halliday Fraser Munro on behalf of Mr Graeme Webster 1599, 1937 Archial Planning on behalf of Stewart Milne Homes 1712, 1809 Paull & Williamsons LLP on behalf of Scotia Homes Ltd 1918, 1919 Ryden LLP on behalf of Baker Street Properties 1979 Scottish Environment Protection Agency 2151, 2152 Ryden LLP on behalf of Baker Street Properties 2384 Member of Meldrum Bourtie and Daviot Community Council Provision of the development plan to Land Allocations at M1, H1 & H2. which the issue relates: Planning Authority’s summary of the representation(s): Strategy 693, 694: It is contended that the strategy for growth of Oldmeldrum is flawed and objection is made to the scale of allocations for Oldmeldrum (see issue 66 Strategy – Local Needs). 400, 406, 409: Objection to small allocation of housing units to Oldmeldrum, which does not meet the key planning objectives for the settlement (see issue 66 Settlement Strategy -local needs). It is contended that Oldmeldrum is a sustainable location, with good facilities (including public transport), and capacity in education facilities to accommodate a higher allocation. Oldmeldrum should be allocated additional housing units in both plan periods, including units relocated from Newmachar (see issue 81 Newmachar). H1 Oldmeldrum Conditional support for allocation 347: Support for development at site H1 on the condition that development does not extend across the Meadows Burn. Original bid for development 2384: One respondent requested that the original bid for 500 houses be reconsidered. It would facilitate a new southern relief road to the north and west which would link with the existing relief road and relieve the current and increasing traffic congestion in the town centre. Capacity of facilities 1253: The respondent requests no further development in the settlement due to capacity constraints of the Academy and medical care facilities, and road congestion. Page 1 Constraints and impact on landscape 145, 693, 694, 1253, 1599, 1918, 1919, 1937, 2151, 2152: Objection to allocation at site H1. It is contended that the continued allocation of the site will be detrimental to Oldmeldrum (1918, 1919, 2151, 2152) and will have an adverse impact on the landscape setting of the town (693, 694). Concern is raised that the site is one of the few open grass areas left in the settlement which is used for recreational purposes (145). It is contended that there will be difficulty in providing the major infrastructure required todeliver the site, including the proposed link road, and that the site is no more accessible to the town centre and schools than sites to the north of Oldmeldrum (693, 694). Impact on local road network 145: It is contended that development of the site will result in an increase in road traffic, which poses road safety concerns. Flood risk 693, 694, 1918, 1919, 2151, 2152: Flood risk constrains the site. Concern is raised that the site has been allocated without being demonstrated as deliverable; and its allocation is inconsistent since other sites demonstrated as at risk from flooding have not been allocated (1918, 1919, 2151, 2152). The site’s allocation is contrary to Scottish Planning Policy (paragraph 38), which states that development should be avoided in areas which are at significant risk of flooding (1918, 1919, 2151, 2152). It is contended that the site should not be developed, as it would increase the risk of flooding, reduce the area for water run-off and increase the likelihood of flooding. Doubt is raised as to how much of the site can be developed due to its proximity to an area subject to flooding. 1979: Scottish Environment Protection Agency have welcomed the mention of flood risk within the settlement statement for Oldmeldrum and as such have not objected to the proposed allocation. Additional text has been requested for insertion within the supplementary guidance. Public opinion 693, 694, 1599, 1937: Development on the site is not supported by the local community. Previous local plan designation 1918, 1919, 2151, 2152: H1 was protected in the extant local plan and Gordon District Local Plan and the protected status should remain. H2 Oldmeldrum Support for allocation 347: Support for development of site H2. 1420, 1423: Support for allocation of up to 10 houses in the first phase of the plan. The site has no constraints on its deliverability: it is a brownfield site on the edge of the existing settlement with little infrastructure investment required to deliver it. It is contended that support from the community has been given. The development will not set a precedent for development west of the B9170 bypass, as it is a stand-alone example of a previously used brownfield site in the area. The site’s development has the potential to deliver enhancement of a path around the site as part of historic routes in the area. Capacity of facilities 1253: The respondent requests no further development in the settlement due to capacity Page 2 constraints of the Academy and medical care facilities, and road congestion. Constraints 693, 694, 1253, 1254, 1918, 1919, 2151, 2152: Objection to site H2. It is contended that no houses should be built across the Oldmeldrum bypass (1254), and that its development would set a precedent for development on the western side of the Oldmeldrum bypass (693, 694, 1918, 1919, 2151, 2152). The site is prominent in the landscape (693, 694). The site is situated away from the services and facilities of the settlement, which is unsustainable (1918, 1919, 2151, 2152). The location of the site poses safety issues for residents accessing facilities in the settlement (693, 694). The site is not supported by the community, and its continued allocation would be detrimental to Oldmeldrum (1918, 1919, 2151, 2152). The site is currently brownfield land and it is considered that a continuation of employment use would be more appropriate (693, 694). M1 Oldmeldrum Support for allocation 347, 1180, 1182: Support for M1, and its continued allocation for residential and associated community facilities 1182: The allocation of effective land complies with Scottish Planning Policy and will assist in ensuring a minimum 5 year housing land supply. There are no known constraints to the development of the site. The development of the site provides a logical natural extension to the established housing area within Oldmeldrum, would have well defined boundaries and is effectively infill development. The site is located within the existing settlement in close proximity to existing services and will enable provision of new facilities. The development will respect the character and scale of the surrounding area. The masterplanned approach will enable delivery of a sustainable and integrated development. 693, 694: The site is centrally located and considered well placed (alongside alternative sites at Newbarns (F113) and at Chapelpark (F134)) to offer an alternative location for an expansion to the north rather than the south. Objection to allocation 112, 693, 694: Objection to site M1. Phasing of development 1180, 1182: Objection is raised to the proposed phasing of the residential site, which is considered onerous and restrictive to the provision of the community facilities and particularly the new Church. Whilst it is contended that the allocation should be retained, it is requested that the site is brought forward in its entirety within the first phase of the plan, to enable the associated Church and community facilities to be delivered early in the development. 693, 694: It is contended that provision of access to service the new housing may be difficult, due to the developer not owning the land. It is recommended that the first phase allocations are moved into the second phase of the plan. Capacity of facilities 1253: The respondent requests no further development in the settlement due to capacity constraints of the Academy and medical care facilities and road congestion. Impact on neighbouring property/lack of demand for facilities 112: It is contended that the development will have a negative impact on the respondent’s property in terms of views and privacy. It is also contended that the settlement does not Page 3 require a community centre, as despite recent development in the settlement the church attendee numbers have not increased and a modern community centre would not be the location of choice to attend for church. It is not clear how access to the site will be achieved. BUS2 Oldmeldrum 1979: <20% of the site is affected by 1 in 200 year flood risk and may reduce the area of the site which can be developed. Object to the site, unless the issue of flood risk is highlighted in the plan or supplementary guidance text as required by the Scottish Planning Policy and in a design statement to inform future design layout of the site, along with highlighting the possible need for a drainage assessment to inform the development area and layout. Alternative Sites Oldmeldrum Site BUS1 347: BUS1 site is more suited to accommodate future demand for houses on part of the area.