Field North of Duriehill Farm Cottage, Edzell

Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Application Summary Application Number: 20/00422/FULM Address: Field North Of Duriehill Farm Cottage Edzell Proposal: Proposed Residential Development of 57 Dwellinghouses including Formation of Vehicular Access, Access Roads, Open Space, Landscaping, SUDS and Associated Infrastructure Case Officer: Ruari Kelly

Customer Details Name: Mr Charles Simpson Address: 10 North Esk Road Edzell Brechin DD9 7TW

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer made comments neither objecting to or supporting the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I have two main concerns about this development. I am concerned that the proposed development of 50 odd houses will change the characteristics of the village. Already we have a very busy High street with few available parking spaces during the day. The developments of new houses already in the village and in near by Edzell Woods certainly has increased the traffic flow through Edzell. My main concern, however, is the access route to the new development. Inveriscandye road is narrow and often parked cars along it's length make it even narrower. Also the entry to the High street from Ramsay street or Inveriscandye road is not good. The sight lines at these junctions make it difficult to see moving traffic on the High Street. Increasing the traffic flow will make accidents more likely. More work is required on traffic management and suggests that the best solution would be to create a new access road through the woods. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on a major proposed development in Edzell.

Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr David Pucci Address: 8 Castle Gardens Edzell Brechin DD9 7SY

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I live at Castle Gardens which is at the other side of the village, but I have friends who live near the area which Is to be developed and I fully understand their many concerns.

The main concern I wish to comment on, is safe accessibility, not only during the construction period, but also in the future when the new properties are occupied.

The Castle Gardens development was completed approximately 20 years ago. At that time, because access was not difficult and did not affect the very few nearby properties on Lethnot Road, traffic/pedestrian safety was not foreseen as a difficulty. However, our 50+ properties have created certain concerns which have had to be dealt with (an ongoing problem).

I am sure that the existing accesses to the new 57 property development will create many safety issues, mainly because they pass a very large number of existing properties on both sides of Inveriscandye Road and Ramsay Street.

Therefore, notwithstanding other concerns, such as School and Health Centre capacities, I am sure that many of the existing residents would be very relieved if a new permanent road was included in the overall plan. I would suggest that the entrance/exit should be positioned a safe distance from Edzell Arch along the Edzell to Brechin main road. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr Duncan Smedley Address: "Glenshee", Ramsay Street Edzell DD9 7TT

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I wish to add a comment to my letter of 15th July please and apologise for the lateness as information has only very recently been passed to me by the Council Planning Department.

The map submitted with the development proposal is flawed and inaccurate.

The existing layout of the south-eastern end of Inveriscandye Road is unsuitable for the additional traffic the further 57 dwelling houses (rising to 80+ with a potential second phase) will generate.

The "chicane" plus the need for some existing properties to park a vehicle on the roadside already makes passing difficult and is "accident prone". To widen the road to an acceptable level of safety with adequate pedestrian pavement is not possible in that area.

It has been confirmed (Planning Officer - 4-8-2020) that "there will be no other works carried out in Inveriscandye Road". Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Ms Eleanor Archer Address: 23 High Street Edzell DD9 7TE

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:The proposal as it stands includes a new access road being built from Inverscandye Road to the new development. There is no environmental impact assessment focusing on wildlife included in the consultation documents - I know these have been undertaken for other developments in and around Edzell.

The principle of building an additional road on a greenfield site which may well impact on the protected species (red squirrels, brown hares) which are known to breed in the area in and around the current field is irresponsible, and not in keeping with the requirements within the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981.

I hope the planning committee ensure the impact on rare wildlife is fully considered when making their decision, and seeks expert advice from organisations involved in wildlife heritage to ensure already vulnerable species are not adversely impacted by any development. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr Geoff Elliot Address: 10 Durie Place, Edzell, Brechin DD9 7TS

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:Why has the boundary of the village been moved allowing a road to be installed. Otherwise why bother with boundaries? The two roads that are already accessing the 90 houses in this area have only lite traffic - these further houses would hardly change the situation.

Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr George Robertson Address: ramsay street edzell Brechin DD9 7TT

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I the above do not in principle object to the said planning application, in fact I think on the whole it would be beneficial for the village and the local economy and would also support the building trade and suppliers especially at this difficult time. My major concern would be the access used to facilitate the building and support of this development over a considerable period of time ie heavy traffic etc. An alternative avenue I would suggest would be to put a temporary access road through the wood somewhere before the Edzell Arch which would in effect mean virtually no traffic coming through the village! As this application is in effect a joint development with the developer/builder and land owner who is also the current proprietor of the said wood . I would hope the concerned parties would agree to this sensible proposal which in effect would I believe have the support of the the majority of the residents of Edzell and surrounding district . I trust you wlll consider the aforesaid concerns. G.A. Robertson. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr Patrick Ford Address: West Cottage, Tigerton Menmuir Brechin DD9 7RL

Comment Details Commenter Type: Community Council Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:INVERESK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

- 20/00422/FULM - Field North Of Duriehill Farm Cottage Edzell - Proposed Residential Development of 57 Dwellinghouses including Formation of Vehicular Access, Access Roads, Open Space, Landscaping, SUDS and Associated Infrastructure

The Inveresk Community Council (ICC) objects to this application. In accordance with our fundamental role of expressing the views of the community we represent, we invited members of the public to let us know their views on the proposed development by email or post so we could reflect them in our response to the application as a statutory consultee. In the circumstances of the Covid-19 crisis this method of ascertaining views was preferred to a public meeting. The invitation to submit views was made by way of a notice made available in hard copy in a variety of retail outlets in Edzell and posted electronically on the Edzell Facebook page and on the ICC's own website. The notice made it clear that members of the public were entitled to make their views known direct to Angus Council as well as, or instead of, submitting them to the ICC. We received a total of nine submissions from members of the public, including one from a member of the ICC submitted in a personal capacity. All objected to one or more aspects of the proposed development.

We set out below a summary of the points made to us by those who submitted views, on the basis that they raise material considerations which tell against approval of the application as presented. We have structured our summary by reference to the relevant 'key issues' for determination of the application identified in Report No 97/20 to the Development Standards Committee (meeting 3 March 2020).

1. Acceptability of housing development on site allocated per ALDP Policy E1 The following considerations tell against approval of the application notwithstanding that the proposed site, apart from the proposed new vehicular access off Inveriscandye Road, lies within the development boundary of Edzell and is allocated for residential development in the Angus Local Development Plan (ALDP). - The application is for 57 dwellings, but the ALDP allocation is for only 50 (see ALDP, pp 9 and 278, as well as 146). - There is a strong case for reviewing even the 50-dwelling allocation in the light of prevailing social, economic and political circumstances which could not have been foreseen when the ALDP was adopted in 2016, namely those arising from (1) continuing uncertainty about the UK's future relations with the EU and other international trading blocks and (2) the impact of the Covid-19 crisis. Suggested factors for review are as follows: o Reduction in demand for new housing across the North Angus HMA as a result of economic downturn and changing immigration policies; o The limited demand for new housing in Edzell already evidenced by slow sales at the recent development at East Mains; o The desirability of meeting (reduced) demand across the HMA by prioritising residential development in Brechin and Montrose, both in need of town-centre regeneration, and on brownfield sites generally, ahead of a greenfield site in a quasi-rural location; o The desirability, with a view to minimising carbon emissions, of prioritising residential development in Brechin and Montrose over new housing in Edzell as both more accessible (including by public transport) to major centres of employment; o The concern that a further significant residential development at Edzell, after those at Castle Gardens and East Mains, would undermine the social cohesion of the existing community and prejudice Edzell's long-established character as, in essence, a Victorian/Georgian 'village' providing gateway visitor access to Glen Esk and the Cairngorms National Park and (via Fettercairn) to the Cairn o'Mount and Deeside (i.e., its character as a 'place'); o The fact that Edzell is already a self-sustaining Rural Service Centre, serving the Edzell Woods development in Aberdeenshire as well as neighbouring settlements in Angus, including Inchbare, and has no need of residential expansion to help support its services and facilities; o Possible changes in agricultural policy following the UK's full departure from the EU which may put agricultural land at a premium.

A review of these considerations might conclude (1) that the allocation of the site to residential development should be abandoned altogether, or (2) that approval of any application should be delayed at least into the Second Phase of the ALDP (and certainly until after completion of the current review of the ALDP), or (3) that approval should be granted only for a much smaller development. It might also conclude that any permitted development should be phased to mitigate the impact on Edzell as a community and 'place'. In any event, as things stand, approval of the present application would be premature.

Further, more specific, considerations telling against approval of the application are set out below.

2. Acceptability of development outwith Edzell boundary per ALDP Policy DS1 The proposed vehicular access via Inveriscandye Road would be outwith but adjacent to the development boundary. In such circumstances a development may be treated as acceptable only if it is in the public interest and social, economic, environmental or operational considerations confirm that there is a need for it that cannot be met within the development boundary. The following considerations weigh against acceptance: - At least two of the residents of Durie Place purchased their properties after adoption of the ALDP and relied on the indication in Policy E1 that access to the allocated site would be by Duriehill Road and Lindsay Place; it is against the public interest that such a change should be made without full public discussion; - In the view of those residents, the need for access could be met within the development boundary by reverting to the Duriehill Road/Lindsay Place option; - The proposed access off Inveriscandye Road would have an adverse impact on the residents of Durie Place generally (see 3 and 6 below) and an adverse impact on wildlife (see 3 and 5 below).

3. Impacts on residents of existing properties and neighbouring land uses The following should be weighed against the proposed development: - The impact of the proposed new access off Inveriscandye Road on the privacy, security and wellbeing of residents in Durie Place resulting from the noise, exhaust and light pollution generated by approximately 100 cars; - The impact of the proposed affordable housing units in Durie Place on the availability of parking spaces for residents, which would aggravate an existing problem; - The impact of the proposed development as a whole on the neighbouring woodland to the south (Edzell Wood) as a place of recreational walking for existing Edzell residents.

4. Built environment considerations The following considerations tell against approval of the application as it stands: - The provision for 57 houses on a site allocated for 50 means some cramping of internal design and skimping on garden ground; - The mix of housing - with 25 of the 57 houses unsuitable for couples with children - suggests that the development is aimed in significant part at retired couples, a constituency already over- represented in the population of Edzell; - Given comparatively limited employment options in the immediate area, the number of larger homes (32) suitable for families with children suggests that the development is otherwise aimed at commuters to Aberdeen or Dundee, and lends colour to concerns about social integration of new residents with the existing community; - There would be difficulty in containing the light pollution from a development of the size proposed; These considerations argue for a much smaller development (if any) aimed at young families.

5. Natural environment considerations The following considerations tell against approval of the application as it stands: - The proposed new access road off Inveriscandye Road would remove wildlife habitat at the edge of the field adjoining Durie Place to the southeast which is currently frequented by hedgehogs, red squirrels, brown hares, bats and a variety of birdlife; - Additional recreational footfall from the development, in particular in association with dog- walking, would inevitably impact on flora and wildlife in the neighbouring Edzell Wood, affecting notably red squirrels (already under pressure from colonisation by greys) and protected bats, as well as, potentially, the trees themselves; The application should not be approved until a formal assessment of such environmental impacts has been carried out.

6. Access arrangements It is to be weighed against the development that no access arrangement for vehicular traffic is fully satisfactory: - The proposed new access off Inveriscandye Road is unsatisfactory for the following reasons: o As noted, it would impact adversely on the privacy, security and wellbeing of residents in Durie Place; o The development traffic using this route would have a substantial impact on neighbouring streets and on the road system in Edzell generally, a concern based on a common-sense calculation that a development of the size envisaged would bring some 100 additional cars to Edzell; that concern is not displaced by the technical analysis of traffic flow in the applicant's Traffic Statement or the conclusion (para 9.5) that 'the surrounding road network would have sufficient capacity to accommodate development traffic'; these streets were laid out long before current levels of car use and are already reduced to single lane traffic for much of the time because of parked cars; o The development traffic would have a significant impact in particular on Inveriscandye Road, in terms of road safety, air pollution and parking for residents, with a similar if lesser impact on Ramsay Street; the junction of Inveriscandye Road and the High Street can be highlighted as already hazardous because of poor sightlines and liable to become significantly more hazardous; o The bottle-neck at the junction of Inveriscandye Road and Durie Place would be insufficiently addressed by the proposals for road-widening at that point; o For the residents of Durie Place, development traffic would present a significant additional hazard for vehicles emerging onto Inveriscandye Road at what is (here, too) already a hazardous junction with poor visibility; - The possible alternatives to the applicant's proposed access are also unsatisfactory: o Access via Duriehill Road/Lindsay Place, or alternatively via Durie Place, would be unsuitable for the reasons given in para 3.3 of the Transport Statement; o A suggested one-way system, using the proposed new access off Inveriscandye Road for inward traffic and Duriehill Road/Lindsay Place, or alternatively via Durie Place, for outward traffic (or vice versa), would encounter the same difficulties as identified above in relation to these routes, if in mitigated form; o A suggestion that access for construction traffic might be given by a new approach cutting through Edzell Wood eastwards off the B966 south of the Edzell Arch (with a variation that access might be given via the existing approach off the B966 to Struan Quarry) has the attraction of addressing the 'bottle-neck' problem on Inveriscandye Road (and also of shielding the Arch from damage by construction vehicles) but as a permanent solution for residential traffic is less attractive: it might 'ghetto-ize' the development by enabling access and egress without entry into Edzell 'proper' as well as, by allowing access to Edzell from the south other than by way of the long straight of the B966 culminating in the Arch, diluting one of the defining features of Edzell as a 'place'. - In relation to pedestrian access, it is understood that one reason for the decision to close the Inglis Court sheltered housing facility was its unacceptable distance from shops and other amenities. On this measure, the proposed development is too far for pedestrian access to the centre of Edzell by the elderly and infirm, and possibly also for access to the primary school by young children, with the result that vehicular access (with associated traffic movements) would become the default mode for these constituencies.

7. Impact on existing infrastructure The following anticipated impacts on existing infrastructure weigh against approval of the application as it stands: - The impact on the roads system generally, as noted above; - The impact on the provision of services (including medical services): as noted, Edzell is already running at capacity as a Rural Services Centre and there is concern that it would be unable to meet the needs of a community expanded to the extent envisaged by the application. - The impact on the educational estate: there is concern that a development of the size proposed might generate a substantial additional population of children of school age which would upset existing forecasts of the capacity of the primary school and lead to further educational disruption at a school which has already undergone significant disruption arising from protracted building works and the Covid-19 crisis;

8. Affordable housing The same considerations apply in principle to the demand for affordable housing as identified at 1 above in respect of new housing generally, and a similarly circumspect approach should be taken to approval of the affordable housing element of the application. Further local factors suggesting the need for a review of demand are as follows: - The 'windfall' provision of six units currently being constructed at Inchbare, provision which was unforeseen at the time the ALDP was adopted; - The proposal for substantial new provision (20 units) at Inglis Court, Edzell. The plans for Inglis Court are another reason why approval of this application would be premature. Consideration of this application should be held over until a planning application for the new provision at Inglis Court is submitted so that the two can be considered together.

Patrick Ford Planning Contact, Inveresk Community Council

13.08.20 Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr James McIntosh Address: Kinnaber Ramsay Street Edzell DD9 7TT

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I am concerned about the increase in traffic along Ramsay Street, which is not wide enough to take any such an increase in traffic, which this development will attract.

The road surface in Ramsay Street is already very poor, due to its use by agricultural vehicles and during the construction stage, which will be ongoing for some considerable time, the surface will deteriorate much more quickly,

Once all the houses have been sold the traffic flow along Ramsay Street will be increased for ever more, by possibly another 100 cars, on the basis of 2 cars per family - possibly by even more.

To prevent additional traffic entering Edzell, thought should be given to providing an access road, off the B966, through the woods before The Arch. After all it is the same landowner who is selling the building plot and owns the woods.

Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mrs Judith Gallacher Address: West Water Dunlappie Road Edzell DD9 7UB

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer made comments neither objecting to or supporting the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:Whilst I'm not wholly against some form of new housing 'behind' the Duriehill area, I do think there are problems with the volume of housing in a relatively small area which is badly served by access roads.

I strongly disagree that there is a great demand for new housing in the village at present especially with respect to sustaining services and facilities in a village that has a thriving self-sustaining community. It was noted that the East Mains site struggled to sell properties, especially the affordable housing. However, I do see the need for more affordable homes for young families to be able to remain in this area but not in the numbers that are being applied for. I think the development is cramming too many houses into too small an area. Of the 57 houses 25 are one or two bedroom and the cramped internal design does not appear to be "carefully designed" with a young family in mind, e.g. fitting a dining table into the kitchen and avoiding closeness to a cooker and two doors. A family could not have more than one child or have visitors to stay in these 25 homes and so they suggest to me that they are more aimed at retired people, which is not what the village needs. The three bedroom semi-detached affordable homes are of a better design for young families and should replace some of the two bedroom homes. With low employment choices in the immediate area the proposed designs of the 57 homes suggests they are aimed mainly at retirees or commuters to jobs in larger cities such as Dundee and Aberdeen.

The problem with vehicular access to this area is well documented and will cause considerable upheaval to residents of Durie Place and Inveriscandye Road in particular. In the ALDP Transport Appraisal 2014, Transport Scotland stated that there were "no significant transport impacts envisaged due to the scale and location of proposed development". Meanwhile the consultation to the ALDP by Ristol Consulting Ltd in April, 2015, specified the need for "an alternative vehicular access to site", however this was rejected by Angus Council, presumably based on Transport Scotland's advice. Now the alternative access is planned to be built on land that is outwith the boundary of the ALDP with no open discussion. This does seem to be the answer for construction traffic with a separate access through the woodland south of the arch as suggested by the developers and I would suggest that this access should be fully developed for residential use to solve all the problems of access in this area. However, access off the B966 would have to be a safe distance from the arch with good sightlines. The downside of this is that residents will just carry on south for all their shopping needs thus lessening integration within the community.

The timescale of the build with around 20 houses planned in 2021 and the remainder over a 3 year period is adding too many homes to the village in too short a time span and creating a separate unintegrated community. It was noted that part of the reason for the planned closure of the Inglis Court Sheltered Housing was its distance from shops and amenities. This planned development is more distant and will force residents, especially the elderly and the very young, to use their vehicles to access these amenities and then once in their vehicles they will drive further afield for their shopping needs thus creating less integration.

I would hope that in a rural setting such as this that street lighting will be carefully chosen to avoid any light pollution.

Finally, I have a problem with Guild Homes' Planning Statement, p17, paragraph 6.6, which states that "It is essential for the continued success of this local Angus based developer that the planning consents are achieved timeously, only in this way can Guild Homes continue to deliver high quality family homes while employing in total around 100 local staff/ subcontractors". Whilst I want Guild Homes to keep all their staff in employment, I don't think that this is the responsibility of Angus Council's Planning Dept. and should not lead to any rushed decisions especially in the absence of any public meeting for residents to confer together and share their views with Angus Council. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Miss Laura Ferguson Address: Woodlands Inveriscandye Rd Edzell DD9 7TN

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:We do not disagree in principle to the planned development. We are, indeed, in favour of developing Edzell and the surrounding area. As an employee of a successful local business that has served the community for 3 generations, we understand the benefits that this will bring. We find ourselves in the position, however, that we must object to the development due to the planned location of the single access to the new development. Our family has lived in the Edzell community for several generations and we were always aware that this area was earmarked for future development. Indeed, when the current houses on Duriehill Road and Durie Place were built the road was designed and left in such a way as to allow access to any future development. We can not understand and therefore must object to the new and inappropriate access point being planned. This would mean a potential for all cars (potentially in excess of 100) being routed past one section of Inveriscandye Road. It also means that the houses on Durie Place will be in affect "road locked" There is also a potential for the rest of this greenfield site to be further developed meaning even heavier traffic along one stretch of road. The original application had access via Duriehill Road and Lindsay Place and it would seem sensible for the access to be split and shared over these roads and/or also Durie Pl. Any further development could then be accessed via Inveriscandye Road. Traffic calming or bollards could be installed to prevent "rat runs" within the development. Routing all traffic along Inveriscandye Road introduces a very real an increased danger to, not only the local residents, but also to people using this road for recreational use. This is a very popular area for walkers and cyclists from the local community taking exercise and exercising their dogs. It also provides access to the woodland area which can be seen by the natural footpath leading into the woods directly opposite the planned single access rd. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mrs Laura Robertson Address: Glen House, High Street, Edzell, Brechin DD9 7TF

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I do not object to the development as a whole but have concerns around the increased traffic past our house during construction and on completion.

I have young children and have safety concerns around the increased volume of traffic and particularly construction vehicles passing the house. I also have concerns around the noise this will cause.

Another concern I have is regarding construction traffic passing through the historic Arch multiple times per day. The Arch has been damaged by lorries in the past and would be at risk from large construction vehicles, particularly those transporting large items such as the frames for the houses.

I would be in favour of the development if a suitable access route was found that bypassed the arch and high street. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Miss Lisa Macdonald Address: 29 durie place Edzell Dd9 7ts

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I am objecting to the development as I have concerns regarding overcrowding of the car park at Durie Place where four one bedroom houses will be getting built with access to these houses begin on Durie Place. The car park is already overcrowded with some cars parked behind one another just to get a space. At present 12 cars are parked. If these houses were to be built it would cause more overcrowding of the car park as some cars park in front of where the houses are to be built Just to get a space also it would affect manoeuvring to turn even more difficult than it already is which could affect emergency services and large vehicles gaining access. Exiting Durie Place will also become more difficult due to the extra flow in traffic during and after the development. Currently we have to edge forward just to get a good visual of what is coming from the left with more flow of traffic this could potentially come very dangerous. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Miss Lucy Archer Address: 12 Durie Place Edzell DD9 7TS

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:The proposed vehicular access has recently changed to involve a new road being built to the SE of Durie Place. This is presented as being in response to concerns raised during the consultation in March. This is disingenuous - during the development of the LDP, a submission from Ristol Consulting on 30/4/15 specifically requested a modification to the LDP to include a new road (section 2.6 of the 2015 submission). This proposal was rejected by Angus Council & with no material change in circumstances the agreed access should be retained.

Residents of Duriehill Rd & Lindsay Place have understandable concerns re additional traffic given the levels of residential parking. However that is also currently the case on Inverscandye Rd between Angus House & the junction with Durie Place - the route now being proposed by the developer. The photo of this piece of road in the Planning, Design and Access Statement shows no parked cars, which as residents of the area know is not the case for the majority of the day.

Vehicular access to the new houses via the proposed new road will create a dangerous junction at the top of Durie Place as this is currently a blind junction to the left when exiting right into Inverscandye Rd. With an additional c.100 cars using the road every day, the risk of an accident is significant as drivers coming out of Durie Place have to go beyond the junction markings to have any view of the road to the left. This proposal is therefore contrary to one of the themes of the Local Transport Policy around improving road safety.

I appreciate there is no easy solution to vehicular access to the site, but given the fact that Angus Council specifically rejected a new road and endorsed the Duriehill Rd / Lindsay Place option in the LDP (despite representations to build a new road from those wishing to develop the site) there has been no material change to warrant an unsafe alternative road being built at this time. Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mrs Moira Macknight Address: 31 DURIE PLACE EDZELL DD97TS

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer made comments neither objecting to or supporting the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:WHILE I AM NOT AGAINST SAID DEVELOPMENT I AM HOWEVER CONCERNED ABOUT THE ACCESS TO THE FOUR ONE BEDROOM TERRACE HOUSES BEING FROM DURIE PLACE. THE PARKING AT THE TOP OF DURIE PLACE IS ALREADY VERY RESTRICTED AND IF ANY OF THE RESIDENTS HAVE VISITORS THEY HAVE TO PARK IN FRONT OF WHERE THE ONE BEDROOM HOUSES ARE TO BE BUILD. CONSIDERATION HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THIS PROBLEM Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mrs Muriel Aitken Address: Heathcote Ramsay Street Edzell DD9 7TT

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:I wish to express my concern over the proposed development of the land east of Duriehill Road Edzell. During a lengthy period of building work there will be a large increase in traffic ...construction vehicles and vans etc. using this quite residential street.If permission is granted l have concerns of increased traffic, noise and pollution given there could be an increase of up to 100 cars based on 2 cars per household. The Dalhousie Arch is a well-known landmark and the increase of heavy construction vehicles could cause damage to the structure. The Geddes Group, who operate a quarry which is accessed via a road through the woods, do not allow their lorries to come towards Edzell and through the Arch. I hope that Angus Council will consider this issue and a temporary arrangement can be made for all site vehicles to use this road, should planning permission be granted.

Sincerely Muriel Aitken Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Ms muriel dyga Address: 8 Durie Place Edzell DD9 7TS

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:The proposed road is not within the Development Boundary as set out in the Angus Development Plan of September 2016. I took this into consideration when I bought my house in November 2016.

The proposed road would impact on the privacy, security and well being of nearby residents. It would create noise and car and light pollution from approx 100 cars to an otherwise quiet countryside location.

The road layout from Ramsay Street /Inveriscandye Road junction to new proposed road is very narrow and has all the traffic from Durie Place which is a cul de sac. The extra traffic would create a bottle neck and cause problems for cyclists, walkers and children.

Edzell is known because it is a small victorian village . New developments and roads could create a commuter village with increased congestion and pollution.

The proposed new road would also impact on the wildlife of the area. There are hedgehogs, red squirrels and birdlife along with hares and bats . Some frequent my garden regularly.

There would have to be sufficient improvements in place , concerning doctors, schools, buses and village facilities.

I hope Angus Council will take all my concerns seriously and respond with details if my objection is not considered valid.

Thankyou for letting me express my views on the Proposed Development and Proposed formation of vehicular Access. 20 July 2020

RHONNA SOUTER ARDLAW 1 THE GLEBE EDZELL DD9 7SZ

Planned Residential Development East of Duriehill Road Edzell

I am a resident of Edzell and therefore also E V I S. I wish to make my objections clear regarding the above Development.

The increase in traffic on Inveriscandie Road and Ramsay Street will be significant, with the potential for 100 plus new cars using this route daily. Bowling matches with visiting teams are held regularly with many cars parked on the roadsides of Ramsay Street. There will be Health and Safety implications including pollution as a result of the increased traffic.

Heavy contractor vehicles will also be using these streets and ‘the Arch’ which is of considerable Historical significance and has been damaged on previous occasions by Lorries. The recurring repair costs of the Arch have in the past cost The Edzell Village Improvement Society significant monies. All effort must be made to avoid heavy traffic using this Arch as it is part of the Villages identity.

There have been other new developments in Edzell over recent years which have greatly increased the number of residents in the Village.

This Development proposes an additional 57 houses of 2,3 and 4 bedrooms. Will such a development with the potential for another 100 children coming into the village lead to a strain on the Schools resources? I understand that no additional accommodation will be available in the school to match this increase. Does this mean that our Primary children are about to be put through more disruption after having lost so much time already at school as a result of the Virus? Can you assure me that the above concerns are being taken into consideration by the Planning Department, Education Department and Angus District Council?

Does the Edzell Surgery have the infrastructure to cope with the influx of over one hundred new patients?

Regards,

Rhonna Souter

Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Mr Samuel Doig Address: Woodvale, High Street, Edzell, Brechin DD9 7TF

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:FAO Ruari Kelly

Following my visitation to the public event held at Inglis Memorial Hall on 12th March, I now object to this application / proposal. The reasons are detailed below:

The increase in traffic on Edzell High Street as a result from construction vehicles and new residents. Traffic congestion is already a safety concern in Edzell; this development will exacerbate said concerns and lead to significant civil reinstatement and traffic management costs over an indefinite period of time.

A new access road (as suggested by other M.O.P) would destroy the local environment / agriculture and raise safety concerns at the suggested junction.

If new housing is required across the area, then Arbroath, Brechin, Forfar & Montrose's brownfield sites must be exhausted for development. Furthermore, a large number of properties that make up the new East Mains housing development remain unsold; I struggle to understand why Edzell requires significantly more new housing when there is such low demand.

Edzell is a small & thriving community. I am concerned that local amenities, such as the primary school and medical centre, will struggle to accommodate a significant increase in population.

Yours sincerely Sam Doig Comments for Planning Application 20/00422/FULM

Customer Details Name: Ms Ann Richardson Address: 8 Durie Place Edzell DD9 7TS

Comment Details Commenter Type: Member of Public Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment: There is non compliance with the Angus Local Development Plan dated September 2016, for Edzell, i.e .building of a new road outwith the development boundary.

The reason given in the Planning Design & Access Statement for this access to the site, is found in Proposal 6, No 6.2 and I quote " access to the site is from the improved and widened Inveriscandye Road. Consideration was given to alternative access options via Duriehill Road or Durie Place, however, both currently experience significant levels of on-street parking throughout the day which is likely to be even higher in the evening, this effectively reduces these routes to single lanes. It was considered that intensification of the use of these routes by introducing through development traffic would not be appropriate as it would likely impact unnecessarily on the amenity for the existing residents. As a result, access from an improved Inveriscandye Road was considered a better solution. Inveriscandye Road has significantly fewer homes fronting onto it and many of those that do have parking garages and/or driveways. This, in combination with its wider carriageway north of Ramsey Street, means that Inveriscandye Road does not experience the same on-street parking issues as Duriehill Road and Durie Place and would not be reduced to single lane traffic movements. As such the proposed access will be from Inveriscandye Road, with the road widened to accommodate the additional traffic. A new access road will be constructed parallel to Durie Place providing access to the new development. The proposed access solution has been discussed and agreed with Angus Council Roads Service. "

The Transportation Assessment Section 3, No 3.3 and No 3.4 agree with Planning Design and Access statement and specifically states that Inveriscandye Road does not experience the same on- street parking issues as Duriehill Road and Durie Place, and would not be reduced to single file traffic movements. I do not agree with the assessments , as at present, Inveriscandye Road is already reduced to single lane traffic, so presents the same problems. Widening one side of the road does not prevent the problem. At present, care has to be taken when turning right at Durie Place junction ,due to single lane traffic. If an additional 100 cars plus, were using the road , it would cause congestion at peak times. There would be more pedestrians using the one pavement [on Inveriscandye Road from Ramsay Street to the proposed new road]. Inveriscandye Road leads on to a country road, and is already used by many residents in Edzell, for walking , exercising their dogs and cycling.

Angus Council's Local Transport Strategy is to improve access to jobs, services, facilities, taking full account of the effects of transport movements on the environment and to reduce adverse environmental impacts. To reduce accident casualties associated with transport network, improve road safety and to assist safe travel throughout Angus/Edzell.

The proposed building of a new road , in a field next to woodland, lots of wildlife, 100 cars plus daily using said road and Inveriscandye Road, which is also currently used by many villagers socially, is not an improvement. A slight widening of the road might be perceived as a better solution but I would say it is a risk, with a negative impact on traffic movements, parking and in particular road safety.

I moved to Edzell in December 2016. The Angus Local Development Proposal was published in September 2016, the development boundary stops at the bottom of my garden, which I took to mean there would be no housing development or new roads built in the field outside my garden, for at least the term of the plan, 10 years. When I received my copy of the proposed Planning Application I was amazed and concerned. This would impact on noise levels, lighting for the road, the environment, my whole outlook.

The possibility of Construction traffic for 3 years (at least), NIGHTMARE!!!

Thank you for letting me express my opinions. Please let me know if and why my objections are or are not considered valid.